Brendan Rodgers (Liverpool -> Celtic -> Leicester)

Sorry Skip, I see it different......be no different than if someone asked me which game I thought was the one that changed the outcome of the season for us. That game would be it. If we'd have won that game, likely we'd have won the title. Gerrard's slip was one play of many that happened that day and if any of several of those had gone the other way for us, we'd have won. I think you are looking for something that may or may not be there.

Yeah, with you on this one - think you can read too much into some comments. Personally don't think BR intends to blame Stevie - in fact, think he is always hugely complementary about SG (and ships his share of criticism for that, many think he favours him way too much).
We were in the driving seat before the Chavs game, and loosing it lost the initiative/tipped the balance in the title race. Sure there are 38 games in the season, but the pressure is really on in the run in and it can be won or lost at that point. In the Chavs game itself,  SG's slip gave Chavs the initiative, but as a team we failed to break them down and get even a point - the slip was unfortunate, and was a key moment, but we came up short as a side that day. sh*t happens. In the Palace game we got 3, and instead of being happy, went looking for 8, then shipped 3 -- we went balls out for the goal diff, it backfired.
Anyway, can pick holes in last season till the cows come home - but we came closer to the title than we have for a long lone time - it was a roller-coaster, brilliant season, came so close, I've still great memories of brilliant matches and moments of magic, and they won't leave me anytime soon.

If anything, Suarez for all his magic and work rate, didn't turn up at the crunch and deliver the goods. Big games; he works tirelessly yes but the goals disappear.

As far as I'm concerned Brendan did everything right in the Chelsea game last season,  we had a chance to basically win the title that day,  we had to go for it.

As far as I'm concerned Brendan did everything right in the Chelsea game last season,  we had a chance to basically win the title that day,  we had to go for it.

Really? A draw was enough and Chelsea didn't come to win, we gifted them the game when we pressed so high up the pitch and got hit on the break twice! Oh and 0-3 up against Palace and we kept at it too... A draw and an easy win the title was ours. BR has no experience in these positions and it showed, now we are seeing it in Europe. But he has his notepad which i'am sure will help??

You know, with Sturridge being injured for another six weeks, we're going to learn a lot about Brendan Rodgers. It's relatively easy to manage a team when they're playing great football and scaring the sh*t out of teams week-in, week-out but it's times like this when everything has gone to pot that a manager really has to earn his stripes. If he is unable to adapt the team to situation we're in and turn this around then his critics will be proven right. If he does the opposite and pulls us out of the mire by sheer tactical genius then his critics will be proven wrong once and for all. Was last season carried by Suarez? We'll know by January.

Really? A draw was enough and Chelsea didn't come to win, we gifted them the game when we pressed so high up the pitch and got hit on the break twice! Oh and 0-3 up against Palace and we kept at it too... A draw and an easy win the title was ours. BR has no experience in these positions and it showed, now we are seeing it in Europe. But he has his notepad which i'am sure will help??

This must stop, it's nothing but rubbish. They didn't break on us, they capitalised on a mistake. A mistake that had it happened deeper would simply have been an easier opportunity.

The moment Gerrard slipped there were 5! Liverpool players closer to our goal than any other Chelsea player, that doesn't include Mignolet. That isn't a break, it's 1 player not even pressing that capitalised on numerous errors from our players, not breaking at all.

When Gerrard slipped there wasn't even a player within 10 yards of him, there wasn't indeed even a player in our half until his slip began.

Sakho makes up 3 yards while Ba makes 10, Skrtel's reaction is a bloody embarrassment, the epitome of ball watching he gets about 1 yard when Ba does 20. Gerrard doesn't have the pace to go with Ba, which is to be expected after a slip and Mignolet does as expected and doesn't save it. 4 of our players that could have influenced the play before any other Chelsea player could have joined the attack and all 4 failed, after Gerrard's slip.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but distorting things this far to fit this growing belief that we were "gung-ho" and "over-committed" at that moment is complete and utter bollocks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBuOEI2Kk5o

Really? A draw was enough and Chelsea didn't come to win, we gifted them the game when we pressed so high up the pitch and got hit on the break twice! Oh and 0-3 up against Palace and we kept at it too... A draw and an easy win the title was ours. BR has no experience in these positions and it showed, now we are seeing it in Europe. But he has his notepad which i'am sure will help??

What makes everyone so sure Chelsea didn't come to win?  I think Chelsea came with the intention of trying to snatch one on the counter and Win the game.   One thing I've learned from football,  playing for a draw with a defence as bad as ours is/was asking for  trouble,  you never think,  "oh sure we'll draw this one, the next 2 are bankers", because it doesn't work that way. Look at Chelsea v Atletico last season,  Chelsea played for a draw away with the intention of winning at home,  it didn't work out that way.
You should be trying to win every game,  especially at home.

In my opinion anyway.

What makes everyone so sure Chelsea didn't come to win?  I think Chelsea came with the intention of trying to snatch one on the counter and Win the game.   One thing I've learned from football,  playing for a draw with a defence as bad as ours is/was asking for  trouble,  you never think,  "oh sure we'll draw this one, the next 2 are bankers", because it doesn't work that way. Look at Chelsea v Atletico last season,  Chelsea played for a draw away with the intention of winning at home,  it didn't work out that way.
You should be trying to win every game,  especially at home.

In my opinion anyway.

Every team thinks they can nick a win And  Chelsea played typical Maureen shithouse tactics hoping for a mistake or a set piece to grab a goal.
They never intended to play football and our tactics were spot on keep them pegged in their half and don't give them ops for the free kick or a corner they were looking for.
Alas fate conspired against us.

This must stop, it's nothing but rubbish. They didn't break on us, they capitalised on a mistake. A mistake that had it happened deeper would simply have been an easier opportunity.

The moment Gerrard slipped there were 5! Liverpool players closer to our goal than any other Chelsea player, that doesn't include Mignolet. That isn't a break, it's 1 player not even pressing that capitalised on numerous errors from our players, not breaking at all.

When Gerrard slipped there wasn't even a player within 10 yards of him, there wasn't indeed even a player in our half until his slip began.

Sakho makes up 3 yards while Ba makes 10, Skrtel's reaction is a bloody embarrassment, the epitome of ball watching he gets about 1 yard when Ba does 20. Gerrard doesn't have the pace to go with Ba, which is to be expected after a slip and Mignolet does as expected and doesn't save it. 4 of our players that could have influenced the play before any other Chelsea player could have joined the attack and all 4 failed, after Gerrard's slip.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but distorting things this far to fit this growing belief that we were "gung-ho" and "over-committed" at that moment is complete and utter bollocks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBuOEI2Kk5o

Still feels like a knife through the heart watching that!  My 11 year old nearly cried at the time!

I can't believe you would actually post a video link to the goal then brazenly write such a revisionist post when the evidence is there in front of everyone's eyes. Incredible.

Every team thinks they can nick a win And  Chelsea played typical Maureen shithouse tactics hoping for a mistake or a set piece to grab a goal.
They never intended to play football and our tactics were spot on keep them pegged in their half and don't give them ops for the free kick or a corner they were looking for.
Alas fate conspired against us.

They weren't even trying to win though.

Mourinho admits they were out of the race and the last thing he wanted to see was his arch rival Pellegrini lift the title.

This must stop, it's nothing but rubbish. They didn't break on us, they capitalised on a mistake. A mistake that had it happened deeper would simply have been an easier opportunity.

The moment Gerrard slipped there were 5! Liverpool players closer to our goal than any other Chelsea player, that doesn't include Mignolet. That isn't a break, it's 1 player not even pressing that capitalised on numerous errors from our players, not breaking at all.

When Gerrard slipped there wasn't even a player within 10 yards of him, there wasn't indeed even a player in our half until his slip began.

Sakho makes up 3 yards while Ba makes 10, Skrtel's reaction is a bloody embarrassment, the epitome of ball watching he gets about 1 yard when Ba does 20. Gerrard doesn't have the pace to go with Ba, which is to be expected after a slip and Mignolet does as expected and doesn't save it. 4 of our players that could have influenced the play before any other Chelsea player could have joined the attack and all 4 failed, after Gerrard's slip.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but distorting things this far to fit this growing belief that we were "gung-ho" and "over-committed" at that moment is complete and utter bollocks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBuOEI2Kk5o

Quite right. We were controlling the game at that point. Gerrard failed to control a simple sideway ball from Sakho and slipped in the attempt to recover. Skrtel was where he was supposed to be and Ba pounced on the loose ball. Simple as that.

I can't believe you would actually post a video link to the goal then brazenly write such a revisionist post when the evidence is there in front of everyone's eyes. Incredible.

Revisionist, I haven't changed my view of that incident since the moment I saw it, a cruel twist of fate. So yet again, you're wrong.

You can carry on with your crusade to hang Gerrard out to dry and paint him as this 'roy of the rovers', cavaliering player with no respect for the dangers around. I'll continue to state my opinion based on the facts rather than the illusion you're trying to paint.

He was the deepest player, split between our defenders as he had been the entire year, under instruction of Brendan. He hadn't suddenly lost the plot and gone barnstorming forward to desperately win the game, he slipped as our deep lying play maker. No matter had we played 20 yards deeper he would have still taken up that position and Ba would have had the opportunity of being even more clear of our defenders/Gerrard and Mignolet sat on his line, which as I state is an easier chance to convert. The distance out from goal gave our defenders a chance to recover, unfortunately they aren't quick enough in mind or body to do that and Gerrard getting up from a slip couldn't be expected to.

So carry on your little crusade in trying to sully the memory and hinge the blame on one momentary mistake and I'll continue to defend that which I feel is being attacked unfairly.

They weren't even trying to win though.

Mourinho admits they were out of the race and the last thing he wanted to see was his arch rival Pellegrini lift the title.

Yeah if Mourinho said it, it must be true! After all, he's not a compulsive liar are anything!   

Oh look,  here comes Hollywood Balls!

Really? A draw was enough and Chelsea didn't come to win, we gifted them the game when we pressed so high up the pitch and got hit on the break twice! Oh and 0-3 up against Palace and we kept at it too... A draw and an easy win the title was ours. BR has no experience in these positions and it showed, now we are seeing it in Europe. But he has his notepad which i'am sure will help??

Jesus, the amount of revisionists on here.

In the summer of 2013, Tottenham Hotspur accepted the desire of the Premier League's player of the year to move to Spain and set about reinvesting Gareth Bale's €100 million transfer fee in an aggressive overhaul of their squad.

Joe Lewis, Tottenham's absentee-landlord owner, set his coach, Andre Villas-Boas, a target of converting this unprecedented spend into an unprecedented Premier League title.

Repeatedly overruled by chairman Daniel Levy on recruitment strategy, by the season's third month Villas-Boas had decided it would be his last at the club. By December, with his rebuilt team eight points off the league leaders in seventh position, the Portuguese was gone anyway.

In the summer of 2014, Liverpool finally accepted the desire of the Premier League's player of the year to move to Spain and set about reinvesting his €81 million transfer fee in an aggressive overhaul of their squad. After finishing second with Luiz Suarez in his team, the talk was of Brendan Rodgers converting this unprecedented spend into an unprecedented Premier League title.



Unlike Villas-Boas, Rodgers was allowed to drive Liverpool's recruitment strategy.

By November his rebuilt team had been ejected from title contention, 15 points off the league leaders in an embarrassing 11th position.

In contrast to his unorthodox former Chelsea colleague, Rodgers certainly has not concluded that Anfield is the wrong place for him to be employed.
Yet the assumption that the Northern Irishman will survive his own summer of aspirant spending is a questionable one.

While it proved easy to get carried away by Liverpool's achievements of taking Manchester City and Chelsea to the wire last May, the fashionable attribution of that success to Rodgers' management .. was ill-considered.
No Suarez, no goals.
No Luis, less energy, little leadership.
The analysis of a coach's effectiveness should always be more nuanced than his team's haul of points.



Lurking in the background is Rodgers' little-known history with his principal employer.
In the summer of 2012, when John W. Henry was considering the appointment of the second manager of Fenway Sports Group's (FSG) stewardship of Liverpool (Roy Hodgson having preceded the takeover), his preferred choice was Roberto Martinez.

That Rodgers changed the American's mind came down to a stellar presentation on how the coach wanted the club to be run.

While Rodgers interviewed phenomenally well, it is said that his actions once in situ were not as appealing to Henry.
Liverpool's new manager wanted three of his predecessor's headline signings—Andy Carroll, Stewart Downing and Jordan Henderson—out of his squad. The manner in which he pushed £35 million record signing Carroll toward a hugely expensive season loan switch to West Ham United went down particularly badly.

According to well-informed sources, Henry has had to be talked down from dismissing Rodgers on at least two occasions.

While chief executive Ian Ayre and FSG-shareholder chairman Tom Werner have stood behind him, the manager's hold on the position has at times been less secure than it appeared. Ultimately, FSG's lead decision maker will determine how it long lasts.


Rodgers' new contract should not be regarded as a guarantee of tenure at a club that demonstrated its attitude to written agreements in a brazen refusal to honour Suarez's release clause in 2013, as per Goal.

Speaking earlier this month, Rodgers recognised that the quality of his decision making will determine his future at the club, as per the Guardian:

 "   You have to be bold enough to make the decisions as a manager and that is why you are paid the money you are.
     If you make more wrong ones than right ones you will be out of work, it’s as simple as that."

When FSG purchased Liverpool their target was for the club to be qualified for the Champions League from the 2015/16 season onwards.
Though Rodgers was at the helm when that aim was met a year early, the implications of a failure to repeat are already writ large in his approach to this season's campaign.
Resting players at Real Madrid in preparation for a Premier League visit from Chelsea was an act of self-preservation.

"It's a different club and different vision we have here, at Liverpool there's a strategy behind what we are doing,” said Rodgers of his club's grand summer spend a few months back.

If that different club keeps dropping points regardless of Rodgers' teams, tactics and questionable signings : he can expect Liverpool's to deliver exactly the same denouement as at White Hart Lane.

 

Duncan Castles writes for The Sunday Times, Sports Illustrated, UEFA Champions magazine and others.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2273113-brendan-rodgers-position-at-liverpool-is-growing-increasingly-precarious?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=liverpool

Rodgers salary  Swansea :   £600,000  per annum  or  £   12,000 each week.

Rodgers salary Liverpool : £5,000,000 per annum   or  £ 100,000  each week.

Rodgers salary  Swansea :   £600,000  per annum  or  £   12,000 each week.

Rodgers salary Liverpool : £5,000,000 per annum   or  £ 100,000  each week.

I'm struggling to see the point you're trying to make Skip?

I'd fully expect the manager of Liverpool Football Club to  be paid a hell of a lot more than that of Swansea City.

In the summer of 2013, Tottenham Hotspur accepted the desire of the Premier League's player of the year to move to Spain and set about reinvesting Gareth Bale's €100 million transfer fee in an aggressive overhaul of their squad.

Joe Lewis, Tottenham's absentee-landlord owner, set his coach, Andre Villas-Boas, a target of converting this unprecedented spend into an unprecedented Premier League title.

Repeatedly overruled by chairman Daniel Levy on recruitment strategy, by the season's third month Villas-Boas had decided it would be his last at the club. By December, with his rebuilt team eight points off the league leaders in seventh position, the Portuguese was gone anyway.

In the summer of 2014, Liverpool finally accepted the desire of the Premier League's player of the year to move to Spain and set about reinvesting his €81 million transfer fee in an aggressive overhaul of their squad. After finishing second with Luiz Suarez in his team, the talk was of Brendan Rodgers converting this unprecedented spend into an unprecedented Premier League title.



Unlike Villas-Boas, Rodgers was allowed to drive Liverpool's recruitment strategy.

By November his rebuilt team had been ejected from title contention, 15 points off the league leaders in an embarrassing 11th position.

In contrast to his unorthodox former Chelsea colleague, Rodgers certainly has not concluded that Anfield is the wrong place for him to be employed.
Yet the assumption that the Northern Irishman will survive his own summer of aspirant spending is a questionable one.

While it proved easy to get carried away by Liverpool's achievements of taking Manchester City and Chelsea to the wire last May, the fashionable attribution of that success to Rodgers' management .. was ill-considered.
No Suarez, no goals.
No Luis, less energy, little leadership.
The analysis of a coach's effectiveness should always be more nuanced than his team's haul of points.



Lurking in the background is Rodgers' little-known history with his principal employer.
In the summer of 2012, when John W. Henry was considering the appointment of the second manager of Fenway Sports Group's (FSG) stewardship of Liverpool (Roy Hodgson having preceded the takeover), his preferred choice was Roberto Martinez.

That Rodgers changed the American's mind came down to a stellar presentation on how the coach wanted the club to be run.

While Rodgers interviewed phenomenally well, it is said that his actions once in situ were not as appealing to Henry.
Liverpool's new manager wanted three of his predecessor's headline signings—Andy Carroll, Stewart Downing and Jordan Henderson—out of his squad. The manner in which he pushed £35 million record signing Carroll toward a hugely expensive season loan switch to West Ham United went down particularly badly.

According to well-informed sources, Henry has had to be talked down from dismissing Rodgers on at least two occasions.

While chief executive Ian Ayre and FSG-shareholder chairman Tom Werner have stood behind him, the manager's hold on the position has at times been less secure than it appeared. Ultimately, FSG's lead decision maker will determine how it long lasts.


Rodgers' new contract should not be regarded as a guarantee of tenure at a club that demonstrated its attitude to written agreements in a brazen refusal to honour Suarez's release clause in 2013, as per Goal.

Speaking earlier this month, Rodgers recognised that the quality of his decision making will determine his future at the club, as per the Guardian:

 "   You have to be bold enough to make the decisions as a manager and that is why you are paid the money you are.
     If you make more wrong ones than right ones you will be out of work, it’s as simple as that."

When FSG purchased Liverpool their target was for the club to be qualified for the Champions League from the 2015/16 season onwards.
Though Rodgers was at the helm when that aim was met a year early, the implications of a failure to repeat are already writ large in his approach to this season's campaign.
Resting players at Real Madrid in preparation for a Premier League visit from Chelsea was an act of self-preservation.

"It's a different club and different vision we have here, at Liverpool there's a strategy behind what we are doing,” said Rodgers of his club's grand summer spend a few months back.

If that different club keeps dropping points regardless of Rodgers' teams, tactics and questionable signings : he can expect Liverpool's to deliver exactly the same denouement as at White Hart Lane.

 

Duncan Castles writes for The Sunday Times, Sports Illustrated, UEFA Champions magazine and others.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2273113-brendan-rodgers-position-at-liverpool-is-growing-increasingly-precarious?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=liverpool

Rodgers salary  Swansea :   £600,000  per annum  or  £   12,000 each week.

Rodgers salary Liverpool : £5,000,000 per annum   or  £ 100,000  each week.

That's some story.

According to well-informed sources, Henry has had to be talked down from dismissing Rodgers on at least two occasions. While chief executive Ian Ayre and FSG-shareholder chairman Tom Werner have stood behind him, the manager's hold on the position has at times been less secure than it appeared. Ultimately, FSG's lead decision maker will determine how it long lasts.

I know a lot of people don't like Castles but he does get a lot right.  So if what he's saying is true, when exactly were the times Henry thought about sacking Rodgers?  I mean if their goal was CL by 15/16, then it couldn't have been in his first season, and last season we nearly won the league.  I wonder if there is some off-pitch stuff going on, they don't get along or something etc. 

According to well-informed sources, Henry has had to be talked down from dismissing Rodgers on at least two occasions. While chief executive Ian Ayre and FSG-shareholder chairman Tom Werner have stood behind him, the manager's hold on the position has at times been less secure than it appeared. Ultimately, FSG's lead decision maker will determine how it long lasts.

I know a lot of people don't like Castles but he does get a lot right.  So if what he's saying is true, when exactly were the times Henry thought about sacking Rodgers?  I mean if their goal was CL by 15/16, then it couldn't have been in his first season, and last season we nearly won the league.  I wonder if there is some off-pitch stuff going on, they don't get along or something etc.

There has been some signs of politics going on in the background of late. Both Gerrard and Rodgers have alluded to "the way FSG want to do business" on a couple of occasions.

According to well-informed sources, Henry has had to be talked down from dismissing Rodgers on at least two occasions. While chief executive Ian Ayre and FSG-shareholder chairman Tom Werner have stood behind him, the manager's hold on the position has at times been less secure than it appeared. Ultimately, FSG's lead decision maker will determine how it long lasts.

I know a lot of people don't like Castles but he does get a lot right.  So if what he's saying is true, when exactly were the times Henry thought about sacking Rodgers?  I mean if their goal was CL by 15/16, then it couldn't have been in his first season, and last season we nearly won the league.  I wonder if there is some off-pitch stuff going on, they don't get along or something etc. 

1/  When Brendan picked the team to play Madrid

2/ When Brendan picked the team to play Chelsea in the next game

Liverpool woes ABSOLUTELY the hardest job I've had in management admits Rodgers

Brendan Rodgers will not back away from what he describes as his biggest managerial challenge yet.

The Liverpool boss says he shares the pain of Kop fans, after a difficult start to the season has seen the 2013-14 Premier League runners-up slip to 11th in the table - just five points above the relegation zone.

The Northern Irishman accepts he must take full responsibility for an "adverse moment", despite injuries to key players and the problems of integrating nine new signings, and has vowed to find a solution that will get the Reds back to the top.

When asked if this was his biggest test so far, he replied: "Yes. Absolutely. There's no getting away from that.

"I don't like to whine or complain or make excuses. We've had the whole integration of a lot of new players and obviously it's not gone as well as we would have wanted, there's no doubt about that. But we have to embrace that challenge.

"We are in an adverse moment but that can make you stronger when you come out the other side. So now we have to regroup."

The manager will again be without England striker Daniel Sturridge for Sunday's visit to Crystal Palace - scene of last season's most painful moment, when the Reds threw away a three-goal lead, and with it their title hopes, in the penultimate game.

Rodgers though, has insisted he will not make any excuses, but instead roll his sleeves up and get stuck into the challenge.

"We now really have to refocus and that goes for myself. If there is any spotlight, any blame, then it comes onto me," he admitted. "I pick the team, I put the players in so if there are no results, then rightly it comes onto the manager.

"Of course no-one is happy at all and we feel for the fans. Where we were at last year and the journey we had, and you look where we are now after the first 11 games of the season, then it probably looks like night and day difference.

"I need to find the solutions and find them quickly for us to improve. As we stand at the minute we're in the quarter finals of the cup, we have other competitions we're still involved in and still the onus is on us.

"Whichever way it comes we need results, we need to win games, and show that desire to win. I believe in the players we have that we can do that."

Rodgers has injury doubts over striker Mario Balotelli as he looks to soften the blow of Sturridge's latest absence, but the Italian is likely to recover from a groin problem picked up on international duty and should start at Selhurst Park on Sunday

I know there are a few on here who like to paint the picture that Rodgers would rather hang his players out to dry than have the buck stop with him. I don't think he's under any illusion whatsoever.