Riise: Only a coward gives up

[Fagan]

JOHN ARNE RIISE last night claimed only a "coward" would give up on Liverpool's Premiership title aspirations.

The Norwegian made the remark only days after Anfield goalkeeper Pepe Reina had said Rafael Benitez's side were now playing for fourth place following their loss at Arsenal on Sunday.

The defeat left Liverpool down in ninth in the table, a massive 11 points adrift of champions Chelsea and a further three points behind Premiership leaders Manchester United.

But, contrary to Reina's opinion, the left-back is adamant Liverpool still harbour an outside chance of Premiership glory.

"We never give up," said Riise. "Cowards give up.

"Of course it will be hard to catch up with Manchester United, but at one point last season we were many points behind Chelsea, and in May we were only nine points behind."


Liverpool's season has been hamstrung by an appalling away record that has seen them win one point out of 18, lose the last five on their travels and score just one goal.


"I can not understand why we play so bad away from Anfield, I really can't," said Riise."Against Arsenal on Sunday, Rafa was calm in the dressing room after the match. He knew we knew that this was not good enough."


An unhappy Riise was involved in an altercation with Anfield captain Steven Gerrard after Arsenal's William Gallas had headed in his team's final goal at the Emirates Stadium at the weekend.


But the defender played down the incident, and said: "There was some frustration in the heat of the moment, but some discussion is good. It shows we care.


"It was neither mine nor Steven's fault that Gallas was unmarked. We saw the episode on TV afterwards, and it was not our responsibility."

[Reece]

"It was neither mine nor Steven's fault that Gallas was unmarked. We saw the episode on TV afterwards, and it was not our responsibility."

Bwa?

[Fagan]

If thats the case i blame zenden.

[Reece]

I guess it's down to the zonal marking, and the fact that Gallas moved into a different zone, which meant that he ceased being SG's or JAR's problem.

[tsb]

I guess I'm a coward then...

[Shaggy]

Get real Riise, you fool.

He’s trying to come across as the chest-beating braveheart but it’s making him look stupid.

“We only ended up nine points behind…”. Yeah. Great.

[Rich]

If you watch the replays, the ball ends up in Hyypia's zone.

But Hyypia has followed the movement of another attacker, leaving that huge hole in the centre of the zone.

[Neil Young]

If you watch the replays, the ball ends up in Hyypia's zone.

But Hyypia has followed the movement of another attacker, leaving that huge hole in the centre of the zone.

That's how I saw it too. Strangely, Andy Gray didn't.

[zimbo]

...And Hyypia was substituted about 2 minutes later too.

[Rich]

It's all too easy to listen to that muppet and believe it was Gerrards or Riises fault!

[friedk]

That's how I saw it too. Strangely, Andy Gray didn't.

Andy Gray, wrong

surely you jest

[Morph]

Something I don't get about Zonal marking, I know youre meant to attack the ball and not the man, but what if there are two men in your zone, it's surely going to make it much harder to get the job done isn't it?

[thesilverfoxlfc]

Alot of cowards in the world then

[dww]

Something I don't get about Zonal marking, I know youre meant to attack the ball and not the man, but what if there are two men in your zone, it's surely going to make it much harder to get the job done isn't it?

But the thing is you cancel that disadvantage by not having to track attackers deliberate ploys to move you around. The defence is in control in the sense that their job remains the same no matter what the attackers do - move to attack the ball. Only one player can effectively get the first touch on a ball in most instances, so the aim of the defender is always to be going for the ball, that way it is harder for whichever opposition player is going to get the critical touch.

Neither zonal or man marking systems are perfect but they have both been shown to be able to work well. It is harder to see who is at fault in zonal marking without knowing exactly whose zone is where.

It becomes harder as a fan to try and work it out as pundits tend to either a/ work on the basis that we should be man marking anyway and blame who they would do if we were or b/ just go well that will be down to zonal marking. I have said it before but I would like to see a top european coach used to the system do some punditry on British t.v. just to give some insight into the finer points of the system.

[Rich]

But the thing is you cancel that disadvantage by not having to track attackers deliberate ploys to move you around. The defence is in control in the sense that their job remains the same no matter what the attackers do - move to attack the ball. Only one player can effectively get the first touch on a ball in most instances, so the aim of the defender is always to be going for the ball, that way it is harder for whichever opposition player is going to get the critical touch.

Neither zonal or man marking systems are perfect but they have both been shown to be able to work well. It is harder to see who is at fault in zonal marking without knowing exactly whose zone is where.

It becomes harder as a fan to try and work it out as pundits tend to either a/ work on the basis that we should be man marking anyway and blame who they would do if we were or b/ just go well that will be down to zonal marking. I have said it before but I would like to see a top european coach used to the system do some punditry on British t.v. just to give some insight into the finer points of the system.

Great post.