Is it too premature (or crass) to say I told you so?
Zimmerman wrote: ↑28 Dec 2017, 15:31
I think it’s a bit of a misnomer that Liverpool wantingly pour forward or play gung ho football.
They play without an orthodox DM but they compensate for that with the two or three CMs and the pressing game.
Most of Liverpool’s frailties stem from ridiculously poor players/decision making. One less clown should alleviate some of those silly lapses.
Zimmerman wrote: ↑15 Jan 2018, 07:00
Obviously high and giddy from an eye catching win.
But yesterday’s game (as it fits my agenda) is a good game to highlight Liverpool’s game style.
The all conquering Man City were limited to just four attempts on target. That’s not symptomatic of a team bereft of a defensive game plan.
Liverpool continue to concede from individual errors.
Klopps general approach is not flawed, just some of the personnel are. Obviously it’s one game and the team ‘being up for it’ means the above has to be taken with a pinch of salt (but from watching all their games I feel it’s a good illustration).
Following the Watford game, just 5 goals conceded in 13 league games and an 8th clean sheet.
Has Klopp changed something tactically or is it largely down to personnel?
For me, this is the key point...
Zimmerman wrote: ↑28 Dec 2017, 15:31
Most of Liverpool’s frailties stem from ridiculously poor players/decision making. One less clown should alleviate some of those silly lapses.
Mignolet / Karius -> gone
Lovren -> largely gone
Moreno -> gone
Matip -> largely gone
Meanwhile, Alisson and Robertson have massively improved on their predecessors.
TAA and Gomez are maturing and improving all the time.
van Dijk -> a real presence, so not only does it reduce game time for Matip, Lovren or Klavan (has he left) but you get the gist, but he (VvD) is a rolls royce of a CB (despite some of the comments earlier in this thread).
