Post match thread -Liverpool

Yesterday was embarassing. Equally not for the first time of late Koeman's tactical switch to three at the back was an utter disaster that turned a disappointing defeat into a humiliating 6-1. Wasn't happy with the strategy of resting players in an important league game to priortise the league cup, being humiliated by Liverpool reserves just added more salt in that wound.

The loan signing of Caulker has long bemused me. Why parachute in this waste of space and force out academy players such as Stephens. Also if i was Yoshida i'd be extremely annoyed, constantly hung out in dry in a unnatural position and the instant that there was a gap in centre back he's overlooked in favour of the useless Caulker. Hopefully we can terminate his loan in January and recall stephens.

Personally don't think Koeman should be handed big money in January.

Lot of work for Koeman to pick up the team before a big game against Villa.

Anyone know THEVMANs username on the Liverpool forum? Interested to see if he does the same over there.

After the mistakes that Yoshida has made this season and the fact that Ron thought that Caulker did ok when he came on on Saturday I don't think it was unreasonable to play Caulker from the start. I think most of us would have looked at the team and been happy with it from the start and for the first 20 minutes. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Would have been concerned if he had played Yoshida over Caulker last night for 2 reasons (1) Caulker did very well on Saturday against Man City and (2) Caulker is back up for Fonte on the right side of centre, Yoshida is the left sided backup. It was the right call given Fonte was not available. No-one could or should have foreseen that Caulker would have a total shocker. Given the number of people who said they never wanted to see Yoshida in a saints shirt again after Saturday, somewhat ironic that now they are saying he should have played last night. Fact is Yoshida should never play RB, but is an excellent left sided CB and decent backup for VvD.

The biggest mistake last night was not just Ron going 3 at the back after half-time, but dropping Vic into the CB position when he should have brought Yoshida on as CB with Caulker and VvD allowing Vic to continue in his best position in MF. Vic did play at CB for a few minutes on Saturday after Fonte went off and before Caulker replaced him.

(2) Caulker is back up for Fonte on the right side of centre, Yoshida is the left sided backup. It was the right call given Fonte was not available. No-one could or should have foreseen that Caulker would have a total shocker.

What nonsense. Can play at RB but not on the right side of the central defence? Utter rubbish. He was played because presumably we anticipated Benteke playing and wanted the physicality of Caulker over Yoshida

What nonsense. Can play at RB but not on the right side of the central defence. Utter rubbish. He was played because presumably we anticipated Benteke playing and wanted the physicality of Caulker over Yoshida

Don't know where this idea that Maya is a left sided player comes from, he replaces which ever CB is missing. When Koeman put Toby into MF last season did Maya not replace him or was it the seemingly useless Gardos? I'm sure that Maya is a right footer and would be more comfortable on that side.

Don't know where this idea that Maya is a left sided player comes from, he replaces which ever CB is missing. When Koeman put Toby into MF last season did Maya not replace him or was it the seemingly useless Gardos? I'm sure that Maya is a right footer and would be more comfortable on that side.

Didn't Yoshida play left back in the second leg of the arnhem game?

All fair points IMO, apart from "giving up", I didn't see any of that and saw pretty much all of them haring about the place in the last 10 minutes - possibly more so than mid-half, which might have been part of the problem. For once I was stone cold sober at a match and won't be second-guessing anything until I see the footage again.

I agree their certainly wasn't any Lee Cattermole style giving up, but there were one or two opportunities to go for tackles that players decided (perhaps wisely) otherwise. Long certainly did, but maybe he would have pulled out anyway.

By and large defeats, even heavy ones are not down to lack of effort, its down to poor performances and a lack of quality. And there lies the problem. An erosion of quality in many positions. IMO this side is not a patch on the side of two years ago. Many on here point to a stronger squad, but I'm not sure about that either. The two long term injuries muddy the water a little, but interesting to compare (not that it makes any difference)

Boruc

Clyne Fonte Lovren Shaw

Morgan Wanyama

Lallana Davis Rodriguez

Lambert

Forster

Soares Fonte JVD Bertrand

Classie Wanyama

Mane Davis Tadic

Pelle

Davis

Chamberlain Yoshida Jos Fox

Cork JWP

Ramirez Guly Gallagher

Osvaldo

Stek

Martina Yoshida Caulker Gardos Targett

Romeu JWP

Juanmi Ramirez Rodriguez

Long

This is football it happens we move on to many wet tarts on here....... Liverpool on a role at the moment with new manager we will learn from this and press on #wemarchout

you seem to have forgotten the indoctrinated saints hashtag, so I've inserted that for ya.

Didn't Yoshida play left back in the second leg of the arnhem game?

Probably, he seems always pleased just to play, in fact didn't he complain of not playing enough last season? Before he renewed his contract that is. He'll play wherever he's asked and be content to do so, but he's not a left sided player in particular.

Naturally the players minds were on the match coming up against Villa. A match worth 3 premier points and far more at stake then the League Cup.

Naturally the players minds were on the match coming up against Villa. A match worth 3 premier points and far more at stake then the League Cup.

Pity we rested some of them against City then, City weren't great and out First XI (whatever that might be) might have given them a run for their money.

Resting players is vastly overated, most of them want to play until they drop.

What nonsense. Can play at RB but not on the right side of the central defence? Utter rubbish. He was played because presumably we anticipated Benteke playing and wanted the physicality of Caulker over Yoshida

Rubbish. Yoshida almost always plays left side. He can't play RB thats the whole point. Sometimes he does play RB, but he demonstrates time and again that he can't. We played Caulker last night because it is his natural position and because Koeman had already decided hr would play there based on his performance on Saturday. He actually said as much in his interviews. Sheesh.

Didn't Yoshida play left back in the second leg of the arnhem game?

He also has played LB for Japan on several occassions, but in the left or right he is not a full back. What he is is a managers dream, a player who will do whatever he is asked without complaint.

Personally I think all the goals bar the sixth was steks fault. How can a goalie be beaten from those angles and distance 5 times from 5 shots? The second went under him, it wasn't a great finish or shot. Anyone giving him more than 1 for that performance must be part of his family.

Personally I think all the goals bar the sixth was steks fault. How can a goalie be beaten from those angles and distance 5 times from 5 shots? The second went under him, it wasn't a great finish or shot. Anyone giving him more than 1 for that performance must be part of his family.

Nice try but 1 out of 10, and that just for effort.

I can guarantee you that if our players had made those same shots against their keeper the result would have been the same.

Nice try but 1 out of 10, and that just for effort.

 

I can guarantee you that if our players had made those same shots against their keeper the result would have been the same.

Do you really think so? The team was poor but from those angles and distance he should at least get a touch? The only thing he did all game was one save which he palmed out invitingly for any on rushing forward but fortunately for him no one was bothered by then. What would you give him marks for? For his long punts upfield? From memory I can't think of any other their part he played in the game other than picking the ball out of the net. Not saying he's a bad keeper just that last night he didn't do anything and I am sure that if their keeper was in our goal he would have saved at least one of them!

Stek did not cover himself in glory.

Do you really think so? The team was poor but from those angles and distance he should at least get a touch? The only thing he did all game was one save which he palmed out invitingly for any on rushing forward but fortunately for him no one was bothered by then. What would you give him marks for? For his long punts upfield? From memory I can't think of any other their part he played in the game other than picking the ball out of the net. Not saying he's a bad keeper just that last night he didn't do anything and I am sure that if their keeper was in our goal he would have saved at least one of them!

I'm not sure what you mean by 'those angles and distance'. Sturridge was virtually in top of him for his two, Origi deflected the third, not by much but enough. Origi's second was lashed past from from well inside the area and in the corner right under the bar. Ibe's shot was probably the most difficult to do anything about, very fast and low and right inside the foot of the post. I don't know of any goalkeeper who would have stopped that. As for Origi's header, he was so unmarked he must have thought that all our players had packed up and were already in the showers. The low shots were of the pace and accuracy that you very rarely see from any of our players, Long excepted.usually our shots are at a height that gives the goalkeeper a reasonable chance of stopping them.

The low shots were of the pace and accuracy that you very rarely see from any of our players, Long excepted.

Which one minute of one game did you see to come that conclusion?

Which one minute of one game did you see to come that conclusion?

Long? He has the capability to lash the ball with pace and accuracy, he just chooses not too most of the time

Long? He has the capability to lash the ball with pace and accuracy, he just chooses not too most of the time

probably because he to busy tripping over his own feet or falling over the ball.....

I'm not sure what you mean by 'those angles and distance'. Sturridge was virtually in top of him for his two, Origi deflected the third, not by much but enough. Origi's second was lashed past from from well inside the area and in the corner right under the bar. Ibe's shot was probably the most difficult to do anything about, very fast and low and right inside the foot of the post. I don't know of any goalkeeper who would have stopped that. As for Origi's header, he was so unmarked he must have thought that all our players had packed up and were already in the showers. The low shots were of the pace and accuracy that you very rarely see from any of our players, Long excepted.usually our shots are at a height that gives the goalkeeper a reasonable chance of stopping them.

It's all about opinions but the first was from wide on the left outside the six yard box, the goal from sturridges point of view must have been pretty small. It was a good shot granted but IMO he should never score from that position. Goal 2 was straight at him yes from close range. The third was from outside the area and he still he couldn't get down to it. It went under him, he wasn't unsighted and a deflection was irrelevant as he never got down quick enough. Four and five fair enough good strikes but even then IMO a decent shot stopper would have got a something on at least one of them. Six no chance.

However the first three were where the game was lost.

It's all about opinions but the first was from wide on the left outside the six yard box, the goal from sturridges point of view must have been pretty small. It was a good shot granted but IMO he should never score from that position. Goal 2 was straight at him yes from close range. The third was from outside the area and he still he couldn't get down to it. It went under him, he wasn't unsighted and a deflection was irrelevant as he never got down quick enough. Four and five fair enough good strikes but even then IMO a decent shot stopper would have got a something on at least one of them. Six no chance.

However the first three were where the game was lost.

Indeed, opinions is what we're all about, but you'll see Sturridge score from those positions all seasons long and against top goalkeepers, it's why he cost so much and gets paid so much.

Indeed, opinions is what we're all about, but you'll see Sturridge score from those positions all seasons long and against top goalkeepers, it's why he cost so much and gets paid so much.

You will also see goalkeepers make saves from Sturridge with those type of shots and from those positions all through the season too!

You will also see goalkeepers make saves from Sturridge with those type of shots and from those positions all through the season too!

If you put the chance of saving those types of shots at 20% (and that's generous) then it's still 64% probability that both shots are going to go in. I think your being too harsh on Stek, even the best goalkeeper in the world might only have got to one of the six, maybe two at most which still means we lose 4-1.

If Saints had hit those 6 shots against an average Premier League goalkeeper we would have scored maybe twice. Stekelenberg was terrible.

Well then perhaps you should. Liverpool had a rookie left back on the field last night,a 3rd choice midfielder and a 2nd choice keeper. Saint's fans in general are nowhere near demanding enough. The Don would probably have sacked Koeman this morning,well if he'd ever appointed him in the first place that is.

As you said we had our best available side out last night and we were totally humiliated by a substandard Liverpool side.

There is a good underlying thread to this post. As a club we do not have a winning mentality anymore. We need to 'man up' and have a high ambition. There are far too many fans who think losing is acceptable against certain opposition and in certain circumstances. The alarm bells were ringing for me going out of Europe with such a whimper...

We are taking part but do not have high enough expectations.

There is something missing in the psychology department at the club that is for definate... There is a 'pecking order' mentality which is not allowed or in any way acceptable at a club of our stature.

Yes we have some average players and yes the club need to show more ambition. If the club don't demonstrate ambition then why would the players?

If the Manager and coaches don't demand energy and fitness then why would the players?

There is for me a losing complacency around the club and has been for quite a while.

We need to man up, beef up and declare a war on managers, coaches, directors or players who demonstrate any language what so ever that isn't winning.

Certain Fans on here need to be far more demanding too...... The whimpish acceptance of mediocrity will never win you anything..... Not even a League Cup !

I see people saying on here 'IF we can beat Villa and draw against Palace !!!! WHAT !!! Come on, your mentality rubs off on the team.... Villa are absolutely DIRE and Palace are not great either, we should hammer both of them and then talk about how we are going to beat the next team and demand the same of the Club.

If Saints had hit those 6 shots against an average Premier League goalkeeper we would have scored maybe twice. Stekelenberg was terrible.

Sorry but the 1st goal was right in my eyeline and Stek had no chance...Caulker totally at fault. The only goal I thought he could have saved was the 3rd goal and even then he would have seen it very late.

It was just one game where every shot on target was virtually unstoppable...sign of players with high confidence.

If Saints had hit those 6 shots against an average Premier League goalkeeper we would have scored maybe twice. Stekelenberg was terrible.

We would have scored 5 or 6 and no he wasn't. They were not average shots. Please name another keeper who you think might have got a hand to one of them.

If you put the chance of saving those types of shots at 20% (and that's generous) then it's still 64% probability that both shots are going to go in. I think your being too harsh on Stek, even the best goalkeeper in the world might only have got to one of the six, maybe two at most which still means we lose 4-1.

If he had saved them all none of the saves would have been considered "worldies". I really can't see the reason the shots are considered good? No one on TV is saying these are goals of the season are they? Run of the mill shots that every professional keeper should think they have a shout of saving IMO.They were hit well and hard some on the ground but it's not from 5 foot away he had time to react and in every case he dived or stuck his hand out after the ball had passed. He didn't have to over. stretch they were all within his reach. I know you will say the pace beat him but Niemi made them saves against arsenal as he could react quickly. I think he would have saved at least one of those and got a hand to others.

There is no debate we allowed too much space but even penalties aren't scored with a 100 percent hit rate.

If he had saved them all none of the saves would have been considered "worldies". I really can't see the reason the shots are considered good? No one on TV is saying these are goals of the season are they? Run of the mill shots that every professional keeper should think they have a shout of saving IMO.They were hit well and hard some on the ground but it's not from 5 foot away he had time to react and in every case he dived or stuck his hand out after the ball had passed. He didn't have to over. stretch they were all within his reach. I know you will say the pace beat him but Niemi made them saves against arsenal as he could react quickly. I think he would have saved at least one of those and got a hand to others.

There is no debate we allowed too much space but even penalties aren't scored with a 100 percent hit rate.

They may not have been spectacular shots but they are certainly of the most effective type. Hard and low from 12 to 16 yards will beat any keeper. Human reaction time to a visual stimulus is 0.25s and dropping 3 feet takes over 0.4s so that's two thirds of a second to get down to a shot near your feet. In that time the ball moves 58 feet, about 19yds, which means any shot just outside the box. The goal is 24 feet wide a goalkeeper in the centre also has to move across 4 feet first and then dive at full stretch in a dive to reach the foot of the post. No penalty struck firmly and inside the foot of the post or in the top corner is ever saved. The only chance a keeper has is to take a gamble and hope that he goes the right way. Even then, most saves are made well above ground level.

I suppose but a lot of keepers have quicker reactions or we wouldn't see the saves we do. We will have to agree to disagree as I really can't see that he'd be happy conceding those. I am not saying he is a bad keeper but that he didn't contribute at all on the night. For a forward to win a game you expect that bit of magic if necessary, for a keeper you want that decent save to keep you in the game and stek just didn't even get close, even to the one hit straight at him. If kelv had been in goal I bet he would be slaughtered right now. Funny thing goalkeeping, you only notice a keeper is good when he makes those saves that win you games. I don't recall stek making any of those yet?

To change tack rather dramatically, I'm watching Salford v Hartlepool now.

The quality makes me cringe, and perhaps we should recognise that, despite all the moans, we have a good Premier League team to watch.

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

All fair points IMO, apart from "giving up", I didn't see any of that and saw pretty much all of them haring about the place in the last 10 minutes - possibly more so than mid-half, which might have been part of the problem. For once I was stone cold sober at a match and won't be second-guessing anything until I see the footage again.

Having watched some of the highlights, I'm fairly sure Wanyama gave up in midfield before their 2nd, and was as responsible for it by not tracking back, as Clasie who was closing Can down and got done by a nice heel chop. So that explains all the space in the middle first half - and the weird formation explains the lack of pressure on the ball in the middle second half - no-one can tell me Bertrand knows what to do from a narrow midfield position with Tadic in the hole he'd usually attack, and all it did was provide space out wide for them to pin us back with outlet balls, or go through the middle where the players didn't seem to know who was meant to be closing the ball down once it got past Davis.

To change tack rather dramatically, I'm watching Salford v Hartlepool now.

 

The quality makes me cringe, and perhaps we should recognise that, despite all the moans, we have a good Premier League team to watch.

 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

Speak for yourself, I'm going to Barnet v Newport tomorrow (a decision made weeks before Wednesday's effort). Can't even get anyone to take the STs for the match despite a likely Saints win!

I suppose but a lot of keepers have quicker reactions or we wouldn't see the saves we do. We will have to agree to disagree as I really can't see that he'd be happy conceding those. I am not saying he is a bad keeper but that he didn't contribute at all on the night. For a forward to win a game you expect that bit of magic if necessary, for a keeper you want that decent save to keep you in the game and stek just didn't even get close, even to the one hit straight at him. If kelv had been in goal I bet he would be slaughtered right now. Funny thing goalkeeping, you only notice a keeper is good when he makes those saves that win you games. I don't recall stek making any of those yet?

I "only notice a keeper when he makes good saves" like I "only notice a striker scoring goals". You need to watch for all the other stuff. Especially with Saints, where our success last season was built on stopping stuff happening before it became a threat - Forster had to deal with far fewer of the kind of easy chances Stekelenburg has faced because we mostly only allowed shots from longer range last season. We need to get back to being effective defensively in midfield first, then there's an even playing field to judge the keepers.

You will also see goalkeepers make saves from Sturridge with those type of shots and from those positions all through the season too!

I really think you are being very harsh. Liverpool's finishing the other night was top quality. I really don't think you can blame him for any of those goals.

Futile, it's just opinion who'd have saved what but I'd have damn well hoped no premier league keeper would concede all 6 of those. You think he's fine with his performance? He was absolutely dire and he's been around long enough to know it.

 

Watch all the matches today, you'll see decent saves from countless shots like those. Just amazing how low people's keeping standards are on here. Too much time with Kelvin I imagine

You're right, these are all just opinions but I find it interested how polarised the opinions have been with none in the middle. I bet you won't see anybody save a shot like Ibe's today.

What's the opposite of a scapegoat?

A binky ?

**** me karma can really bite you on the backside

Can't it just.

:lol::lol::lol:

**** me karma can really bite you on the backside

Ha ha ha ha ha

Hahahahahaha

He is utter Shyte at Liverpool.

That is not being biased either

Which is a shame as he was excellent for us

I hope he saved his career, like he said he needed to do by leaving saints.

Can't it just.

 

:lol::lol::lol:

Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Lallana does have a far better chance of winning trophies now than he did with us. Southampton weren't in the League Cup final, Liverpool were.

Lallana does have a far better chance of winning trophies now than he did with us. Southampton weren't in the League Cup final, Liverpool were.

**** me karma can really bite you on the backside

...