If a player doesn't “Give 100%”...

We fans, to a man and woman, round on him for “not trying his best”. Yet we accept it when the boss picks an understrength team in cup competitions. Why?

After all; isn't fielding a weakened team just institutionalised “not trying”?

I want to make a few things clear before I expand the discussion:

* This is not about Brendan – we have been “prioritising”  games for a number of years now and under different managers.

* This is not about FSG – again we've been doing the same thing, under different owners, for at least eight seasons and...

* It's not a knee-jerk topic – for those very reasons.

* I'm not looking for rows, spamming or people getting defensive – just reasoned debate and maybe a bit of soul-searching.

So why do 'we' tolerate “not trying our best” as a club? Why do we appear to be so inconsistent? Think about it another way; should a player, any player , decide “You know what, it's only Northampton in the cup, I can't be arsed giving 100%; I'll save that for Sunday's league game against Newcastle.”... we'd go to F***ing town on him. Rightly so?

Ask yourself this too: what has happened to make it more acceptable, to you, that we “prioritise” by saving ourselves for the league? After all ”prioritising” hasn't exactly worked.

Not too sure whether it is acceptable mate.

Take Carroll last year. The minimum requirement is 100% for me and a lot of others and for most of last season Carroll wasn't giving that and some fans let him know it. As soon as he started putting it in the crowd was right behind him and the appreciation was evident and his form improved.

Unfortunately, the games where he gave 100% were scarce and he has now gone (for now at least). Expect Downing to be next out of the door which for me is the correct decision on the basis of effort put in.

100% effort normally gets you your just desserts whilst anything less on a regular basis should see you out of the door.

One of the reasons I adored and loved Dirk Kuyt.

This was one characteristic of his you could never fault. It's difficult to put a finger on it as I beleive there is a plethora of elements that come into play, in saying that though it shouldn't happen at a club like ours even more so players whose role's demand responsibillity and leadership.

At 0-0 on Sunday in the 93rd minute we had a corner Stevie was hunched at the edge of the 18 and nobody looked like they wanted to show any urgency in taking the corner, in the end Suarez had to collect the ball from behind the goals set it up and take the thing himself to no effect.

Clubs can no longer compete on 4 fronts in the game

The amount of games a player plays throughout the season could be close to nearly 70 games if picked for internationals, thats a stupid amount and no player can play in every single game without dropping his performance or being suspectable to an injury.

Because of the demands of modern football the competitions are priortised by each club dependant on their own situation.

Normally its League , then European Comp, then FA Cup then League Cup.

Clubs will manipulate their squad to ensure they are still competing in the league in April May ( either trying to win the title, CL spot, Europe Spot or avoiding relegation ). To do that they need to ensure that players stay as fresh as possible throughout the season - so in certain comps the important or essential players will get a rest.

Also the league Cup especially is a perfect opportunity for managers to give potential youngsters a go to see how they do in a higher level.

The manager will always play a team he thinks will win the game - they will never not put out a team and have given up already.

Its a squad game - we learnt that under Rafa and his rotating throughout the season to ensure the team is strong still at the end.

I would hope that every player we pick gives 100% effort - if they dont then i expect them to be out the door quickly.

Unless we have a squad the size and quality of City then i think its only right that we manage the squad carefully to ensure we get the best out of it.

Not too sure whether it is acceptable mate.

It seems to be wahs. We don't accept a player not giving 100% but readily make excuses for not putting out our best team; which is, in effect, not giving 100%. All I'm asking is why we accept one but not the other?

Like I said in my O.P.: I'm not looking for the reasons behind fielding a weakened team (I fully understand the concept behind "prioritising") - I'm asking why we, as fans have a different level of tolerance for what is essentially the same thing?

Like I said in my O.P.: I'm not looking for the reasons behind fielding a weakened team (I fully understand the concept behind "prioritising") - I'm asking why we, as fans have a different level of tolerance for what is essentially the same thing?

In effect the idea of games being prioritised by the manager can be directly compared to the importance or not that the supporters regard the ultimate trophy.
Would a supporter be more keyed up for a European cup draw or League cup game against inferior opposition and would the manager be economical with the quality?

In guessing the reason Why we tolerate playing a "weakened" ( don't like that word ) is because we as fans understand the reasoning behind it - we see that we have to at times prioritise and rest players.

I don't think IMO the two things can be compared as they two totally different situations - one is something happening to benefit the club - the other someone making a personal choice and possibly being a lazy tw*t.

It seems to be wahs. We don't accept a player not giving 100% but readily make excuses for not putting out our best team; which is, in effect, not giving 100%. All I'm asking is why we accept one but not the other?

Like I said in my O.P.: I'm not looking for the reasons behind fielding a weakened team (I fully understand the concept behind "prioritising") - I'm asking why we, as fans have a different level of tolerance for what is essentially the same thing?

We shouldn't accept either. What we should remember, is the next game is the most important one.

I treat all competitive games seriously, be they games at Chester or games at home to Chelsea. And if I was there and shelling out €50 a ticket, I would demand the coach takes it seriously too.

Our players are paid to play games in all competitions for us. Prioritising games and competitions has repeatedly failed at this club in the past 10 years, and a waste of time for everyone. Anyone who gives their all in every game has 4 times the chance of silverware, than putting all the eggs in one basket and failing in that too.

We shouldn't accept either. What we should remember, is the next game is the most important one.

I treat all competitive games seriously, be they games at Chester or games at home to Chelsea. And if I was there and shelling out €50 a ticket, I would demand the coach takes it seriously too.

Our players are paid to play games in all competitions for us. Prioritising games and competitions has repeatedly failed at this club in the past 10 years, and a waste of time for everyone. Anyone who gives their all in every game has 4 times the chance of silverware, than putting all the eggs in one basket and failing in that too.

2 instances for you that show the good points about prioritising and 1 that shows the problem of playing all your top players in every game

1. 2004/5 Season - Rafa could see that we were struggling in the league but had a chance in the CL - for games before CL games Rafa rested the top players ( Xabi, Sami, Carra and Gerrard ) - that allowed us to tackle the CL with a team full of fit ready players. It worked and we won the CL. That happened because Rafa prioritised the CL

2. 2005/6 - FA Cup season - once again Rafa saw that we could win the league and got knocked out of the CL early so he prioritised the FA Cup and put out strong teams in the FA Cup whilst resting them for the league - result - we won the FA Cup. He also prioritised the 07 CL and we got to the final and just fell short

3. Arsenal 3 seasons ago - Henry and Co had left so they had a small young team. Wenger decided to pretty much stick to the same 15 players in each CL game and League game throughout the early part of the season - they were riding high in the league and comfortably through in the CL by playing their strongest team 2 times a week - Feb/March happened and they started to fade away and suffer burnt out and injuries and in the end they got knocked out of the CL and fell to 3rd in the prem. Wenger himself admitted he should have rested players earlier in the season.

I think ye are thinking way too much about it lads. Its obvious, has been for nearly ten years. Top players in a team get rested more often these days. End of.

2 instances for you that show the good points about prioritising and 1 that shows the problem of playing all your top players in every game

Arsenal go out of the CL every year, while their rest on tap policy has won them nothing at all since 2005.

As for your 2 instances, Rafa's gamble ultimately failed in 2007 as nothing was won, and I can find many more instances where the gamble failed from GH all the way to BR. But if you still believe it is the right thing to do, there'll be plenty more disappointments you'll have to accept along the way.

Arsenal go out of the CL every year, while their rest on tap policy has won them nothing at all since 2005.

As for your 2 instances, Rafa's gamble ultimately failed in 2007 as nothing was won, and I can find many more instances where the gamble failed from GH all the way to BR. But if you still believe it is the right thing to do, there'll be plenty more disappointments you'll have to accept along the way.

Ok - every single team rests player throughout the season

Utd have had both RvP and Rooney on the bench this season

City have had Silva , Aguero , Tevez etc on the bench

Even Barce has Messi on the bench for a cup game !!

Arsenal tried to play their strongest team in every single game and it didn't work because they faded away because their players were physically exhausted

We wouldn't have won both the CL or FA cup if we hasn't rested players

Every successful team has rested players throughout the season - that is an undeniable fact

You need to rest players throughout the season. That's the right thing to do for your club

We would all love to see the best players in every game but its not practical or realistic

Unless you can point me to a team that played its strongest team in every match ?

One of the reasons I adored and loved Dirk Kuyt.
This was one characteristic of his you could never fault.

Kuyt was the performance benchmark. 1001%

(Normally) Stevie is another.

Sammy Lee used to run himself into the ground.

Fielding an under-strength team does not mean the manager is picking a side he thinks is going to loose. No manager in the world would do that. He's picking the weakest side he thinks is still capable of winning the game. Due to the demands of the number of games played in the modern world, including international friendlies and disjointed international competitions, a manager has to prioritise what he feels brings the most value to his club by resting players to avoid over taxing his players otherwise he risks over stretching his squad and loosing everything.

Besides, are we fans any different? If the manager puts an under-strength team out and wins 1-0, do fans cry out in their dismay that we could have won 5-0 if he'd put his full strength team out? No, we're satisfied with the win and think no more about it. It's only when a manager fields an under-strength team and looses that we then get on our high horses and condemn him for doing so. The double standards are with our attitudes, not with the practice of resting players.

they still earn far too F***ing much, more than what most fans earn in a year for me to start crying about how tired they might be.

Not like they are working 9-5 is it?

I think I understand your point BBB, and it is interesting. A player looking after himself and not making gut busting runs for 90 mins so he can peak later in the season and avoid strains, pulls etc. is completely unacceptable. But a manager resting key players for certain games, reducing our chances of winning for the same reasons is perfectly ok?

**For the record I'm not condoning or condemning either action, just making sure I understand.**

I think the perception is one is seen as selfish the other is seen as cunning. Personally I think with the amount of data and feedback on players fitness that is now available that in terms of the player looking out for their fitness and interests there needs to be better use of substitutions. For example if Lucas were to start against Spurs on Wednesday and BR left him on for the full 90 mins, when he was exhausted and struggling in the latter stages could we percieve that as not giving 100%?

The point I am trying to make is that to avoid a player coming across as not giving 100% we should use the data and information we have available to see if they are capable of playing at the tempo we want and need for 90 mins. If not then sub them before energy levels run out, or use them as the impact sub. The example I'll use here is Gerrard. If he was subbed more, not due to performances but due to fitness, I think we'd have less questions about his commitment and arguably better performances. Even starting Shelvey and using Gerrard as the impact sub could be more beneficial than him playing 90 mins every week when I personally don't think he has that level of performance in him any more.

If we were to use our squad and subs like this then you could argue that key players could be available for more games, even if it is as a sub, surely it increase our chances while at the same time allowing us to use youth and develop players.

As George said Arsenal's attempt at playing their strongest team as much as possible backfired, and with our squad as slim as it is no doubt we would suffer the same faith. So if BR decides to rest players as he will, I think we see it as more acceptable as it's for the greater good of the squad. Getting knocked out of the League Cup was disappointing, just like failing to get European football was disappointing 2 seasons ago. However we can argue that by missing out on Europe allowed us a strong start last season, a sort of blessing in disguise, it was never intentional but there are benefits. And as has been said, fans and managers alike prioritise, if risking a cup game (with a team that still has the ability to win) means giving us a stronger chance in a more difficult league game then I think we will go along with that.

Very good topic Bad Boy and I'll try to answer from my/our (LFC) point of view.

For many, many years we had the strongest team in the country capable of beating anyone and everyone.  We were winning everything on a regular basis and losing wasn't part of the Liverpool vocabulary or mentality.

I can rarely remember panicking if someone was injured long term because whoever came in understood it might be their one and only opportunity to prove they were good enough.  They had been drilled in the style of play by playing regularly in the reserves, sometimes for more than a season.  They knew what was expected and what they had to do.

When the game changed and by that I mean things like the European competitions becoming group games rather than knockouts and going from 1 substitution to 3 suddenly it was necessary to have more players.  Every single away game now we have 20+ players travelling.

Our problem has been that the difference in quality between our first 11 and the squad players has been bigger than our rivals so when we don't play our strongest 11 we are much "weaker" than they are. 

It's not acceptable that we don't have the quality throughout the squad to compete with our rivals but it's also unacceptable that when a player does get their chance they can't be arsed. 

I don't care if that player is a club legend, world class or a kid making his debut, they should work their socks off for the benefit of the team.  Until Brendan get's that mentality into the players we are on a hiding to nothing.

I cant remember who said it but he said something along the lines of how do you frighten or scare someone into playing better when they are in their mid twenties and multi millionaires.
We do seem to have our fare share of players who having signed for Liverpool breath a sigh of relief and think" I have made it" and thats the last we see of them.Joe Cole is one player in mind.

Every successful team has rested players throughout the season - that is an undeniable fact

Good for them. Those teams have world class players throughout their side. We have two, and simply can't function without them. That is also an undeniable fact.

You need to rest players throughout the season. That's the right thing to do for your club

One single trophy won and 3 coaches sacked in 6 years prove it isn't right for LFC.

And saying "well everyone else does it", is no cop out. If everyone in the world takes drugs, that doesn't mean you should. 

We would all love to see the best players in every game but its not practical

It is practical. If we fielded a proper team in Europe, we'd be through by now. Because we didn't, we have to next week, or it's another cup gone.

If players think that 3 hours of sport a week is tiring, maybe they should go and clear drains in the rain or something, to experience what serious tiredness and exhaustion is. Football is a physical, committed sport. Let us get on with our job and leave data analysis and pie charts to Opta boffins.

Good for them. Those teams have world class players throughout their side. We have two, and simply can't function without them. That is also an undeniable fact.

One single trophy won and 3 coaches sacked in 6 years prove it isn't right for LFC.

And saying "well everyone else does it", is no cop out. If everyone in the world takes drugs, that doesn't mean you should. 

It is practical. If we fielded a proper team in Europe, we'd be through by now. Because we didn't, we have to next week, or it's another cup gone.

If players think that 3 hours of sport a week is tiring, maybe they should go and clear drains in the rain or something, to experience what serious tiredness and exhaustion is. Football is a physical, committed sport. Let us get on with our job and leave data analysis and pie charts to Opta boffins.

The simple fact is you fail to see the reality of modern football

I can say with a lot of confidence if we played Suarez in every game he would be physically shattered by March ! Then he would be suspect to injuries

And when he did miss games through injuries because he wasn't 100% people like you would complain that we played him in every game


The facts are quite simple.

Us not doing well isn't down to players being rested throughout the season

Good for them. Those teams have world class players throughout their side. We have two, and simply can't function without them. That is also an undeniable fact.

One single trophy won and 3 coaches sacked in 6 years prove it isn't right for LFC.

And saying "well everyone else does it", is no cop out. If everyone in the world takes drugs, that doesn't mean you should. 

It is practical. If we fielded a proper team in Europe, we'd be through by now. Because we didn't, we have to next week, or it's another cup gone.

If players think that 3 hours of sport a week is tiring, maybe they should go and clear drains in the rain or something, to experience what serious tiredness and exhaustion is. Football is a physical, committed sport. Let us get on with our job and leave data analysis and pie charts to Opta boffins.

Don't really know where I start with this one..

So I'm just not gonna bother!

But may I add if cleaning out drains is causing extreme tiredness might be a good shout to play football a couple of times a week improve the fitness

I can say with a lot of confidence if we played Suarez in every game he would be physically shattered by March ! Then he would be suspect to injuries

And when he did miss games through injuries because he wasn't 100% people like you would complain that we played him in every game

As it turns out, I wouldn't. I didn't complain when Lucas got injured in the League Cup last year, and I don't complain about what competition injuries occur, as I realise the timing of them is completely random.

Suarez is suspect to injuries now, let alone March. We still need him on the pitch though. But if he's "shattered" in March, such is life. Shattered or not, his season still ends in May.

As it turns out, I wouldn't. I didn't complain when Lucas got injured in the League Cup last year, and I don't complain about what competition injuries occur, as I realise the timing of them is completely random.

Suarez is suspect to injuries now, let alone March. We still need him on the pitch though. But if he's "shattered" in March, such is life. Shattered or not, his season still ends in May.

Such is life ?!?

Thank god you're not a football manager

You need a big dose of reality.

Lucky he wasn't a farmer back in the day before tractors, would of been a lot of dead mules.

We accept it from managers because they're planners for the rest of the team; it's their task to get maximum return from his resources - and if that means prioritizing, then so be it.

We don't accept it from players because they're supposed to do what their managers ask them do to - so if the manager thinks they should play against Northampton, irrespective of a said league game on Sunday, then they should trust their manager's decision and give their all (unless, of course, the manager tells them not to worry too much about a game - which I doubt they would do).

I think it's fairly obvious, to be honest... what is totally questionable is the idea of 'prioritizing', though - but if we accept that (even if just hypothetically), then the question "why we accept that from managers but not players" is a simple one IMO

Don't care about rotating players in the slightest its BR job to see in the week which players are fit enough to play.

What does annoy me are players not giving 100% and even worse is when players are picked on name alone (Stevie)

If I were BR I'd tell every player that if their performances dropped they would be playing in the reserves.

Players are only as good as their last performance

There's nothing i hate more then seeing a player wearing the red and not giving his all an example from the Swansea game....balls coming out of the air to Glen if he does not get to it before it bounces its going to bounce over him i can see this why does Glen not see it ? The answer is Glen does see it just his heart  is just not in it like me as an avid red is !

He misjudged the bounce ? That's all

For the all examples that could be used that seems a very strange one

There's nothing i hate more then seeing a player wearing the red and not giving his all an example from the Swansea game....balls coming out of the air to Glen if he does not get to it before it bounces its going to bounce over him i can see this why does Glen not see it ? The answer is Glen does see it just his heart  is just not in it like me as an avid red is !

Glen has been one of our better players this season with exceptional performances. Don't forget the angle you watch the game from is a lot better to judge the flight of a ball immediately than it is when you're playing and for the life of me I have no idea what passes you're referring to either.

Simple: It's a squad game, not a team one. If we were to only ever play our best XI, they'd be burned out quickly and we'd be trounced from every competition. You assume that every player in the squad is good enough to be here and wants to play. When they're selected, the least you expect is for them to give 100%. If fatigue were never an issue, I doubt managers would ever rotate. But as everyone is human, there are legitimate reasons for playing a "weakened" side.

I think my views on subjects such as this are well known, but if not I'll explain it here.

Play your best XI whenever possible. Get games won then if you want to "rest" (christ I hate that term) players then bring them off when the game is won or at least looking comfortably won. I don't see the point in making players travel here there and everywhere, train with the squad and put them on the bench in games if they're being "rested".

Winning breeds confidence and continuing to win can only bring better performances. This whole stop start bollocks is what costs us because we don't know what team is playing when. And I can almost feel for certain players when they get put in the "lesser" competition games. I can almost understand why Skrtel would not want to perform against Young Boys at Anfield (I know he did and done ok but I could almost understand why he wouldn't). He'd be sat there thinking, Agger, Johnson, Enrique, Gerrard, Sterling, Suarez get "rested" or on  the bench at least yet he has to start when Coates is sat there. That must be a kick in the bollocks for any player. The reason I can't fully understand it is because at the end of the day it's still a game for Liverpool Football Club and therefore it means a F***ing lot to a lot of people.

And that's why I think we should have our best side out whenever possible. It's a game for Liverpool Football Club and I don't care if it's a do or die match in the League against Everton or third round of the League Cup against Torquay, I want Liverpool to win and if we don't then it F***ing crucifies me. I don't agree with putting emphasis on one game over another, especially from managers who say "one game at a time". I don't agree with players who only turn up for certain matches. Any game for Liverpool Football Club should be taken as seriously as possible.

And yes I'll do my token gesture of harking on about the good old days, days that in fact I didn't witness first hand. But in those days, the players were not super fit human beings but rather heavy smokers, drinkers and chippy diets. They weren't playing on carpet like pitches but rather mud baths that looked more like Stanley Park than a football field. They weren't trained in state of the art conditions but instead one wall with a few numbers on at Melwood. They weren't treated by the finest medical facilites around but instead they had Bob Paisley, a sponge and a bucket of water. They weren't pampered little fairies where a perfectly good challenge resulted in a red card but instead playing against some vicious cu*ts like Ron Harris and Billy Bremner who could kick them to kingdom come and still not get a free kick. They weren't playing with a feather like ball but instead a proper arl fashioned leather casey. They weren't travelling in first class jumbo jets that get them to their destination within hours but instead travelling on modes that sometimes took days to get them to and from European ties. And yet they still managed to play most of the games during a season without needing a "rest".

The problem today is the players are F***ing pampered little cu*ts who play two games within a week and all of a sudden need a rest because they know they'll be playing after their rest anyway. Something else which didn't happen in the good old days, when you were out back then you had to earn your place back which is why nobody wanted to be injured. The other problem is the money that ruins today's game. Because of the lack of prize money in the domestic cup competitions and the Europa League, the only thing clubs (and some sections of "big" clubs fan bases) are arsed about is getting into that top four and/or a decent Champions League run which is why you get these "rests" for players in certain matches.

And today's footballers and managers don't live in the real world. If Bill Shankly or Bob Paisley picked a "weakened" side for any game and we lost then they'd get berated by the fans who lived on the same street as them because they lived within the West Derby area. The players mixed with the common Scouse folk and were told to their face if they didn't put in the effort. The famous story of Elmyn Hughes taking a rolocking off a fan during a night out with his missus because we didn't win 4-0. If any manager or player of the past decade or so doesn't put in the effort, then they just swan off to their fancy homes in Formby or wherever in their latest car and don't have to mingle with the everyday common fan.

It's too easy for players and managers this day and age to not put the effort in. Even mickey mouse clubs are "resting" players for the League Cup in order to enhance their chances of staying in the League or in some cases win promotion from the Championship. When lower league sides are "resting" players you know you have got some serious F***ing problems with the sport.

Ultimately until the money that is currently ruining football is sorted out, the sport will continue to die. And no matter what anybody says to me, I will still be of the belief that "resting" players is F***ing about with this club. It's like saying a match for Liverpool Football Club isn't important enough. Well I'm sorry, but every game for Liverpool Football Club is important to me and I want to see it treated as so.

And that's very well put Billy, totally agree with every word of it  mate 

It is a great post and the sentiment is perfectly spot on and agree with the money and the pampered players etc

But the game has changed as much as we all hate it, it's a different animal compared to those days. I'm not saying its better now its just different and every club rest players to ensure they are fully fit and at the top if their game fitness wise. If you don't do it you will end up playing players who are at 80% fitness against players who are at 100% fitness.

The reason why players in past years played every game is because everyone was at the same level. Squads were smaller and less subs were made so less players by the clubs were used.

It's modern football and its run by money - because there is so high a price on success then teams will ensure they are at their best in every single game both ability wise and fitness wise.

I think we would all prefer to play Suarez in every game but its realistically not practical to do that anymore.

It is a great post and the sentiment is perfectly spot on and agree with the money and the pampered players etc

But the game has changed as much as we all hate it, it's a different animal compared to those days. I'm not saying its better now its just different and every club rest players to ensure they are fully fit and at the top if their game fitness wise. If you don't do it you will end up playing players who are at 80% fitness against players who are at 100% fitness.

The reason why players in past years played every game is because everyone was at the same level. Squads were smaller and less subs were made so less players by the clubs were used.

It's modern football and its run by money - because there is so high a price on success then teams will ensure they are at their best in every single game both ability wise and fitness wise.

I think we would all prefer to play Suarez in every game but its realistically practical to do that anymore.

I think you should realise that the reserves used to play their football to the same pattern as the first team,so if a player was injured the reserve could step up .In my opinion a player who is rested should be demanding to know why he is not selected,just like Luis Suarez was doing last season when he got subbed.For a player who is tired the manager should show him the RED SHIRT and explain how lucky he is to be able to play for a team like LIVERPOOL FOOTBALL CLUB.I still go for playing the strongest 11 in every game and then if a player is not up to scratch replace him with one of the subs.

I think you should realise that the reserves used to play their football to the same pattern as the first team,so if a player was injured the reserve could step up

And that happens now - not sure what it has to do with playing your strongest in every game

.In my opinion a player who is rested should be demanding to know why he is not selected,just like Luis Suarez was doing last season when he got subbed.For a player who is tired the manager should show him the RED SHIRT and explain how lucky he is to be able to play for a team like LIVERPOOL FOOTBALL CLUB.I still go for playing the strongest 11 in every game and then if a player is not up to scratch replace him with one of the subs.

It's not the players that are doing the resting or asking to be rested - it's the managers looking after the squad

And that happens now - not sure what it has to do with playing your strongest in every game

It's not the players that are doing the resting or asking to be rested - it's the managers looking after the squad

I much prefer the DLS version about playing the strongest 11 to your version,after all he tells it as it is.

I think my views on subjects such as this are well known, but if not I'll explain it here.

Play your best XI whenever possible. Get games won then if you want to "rest" (christ I hate that term) players then bring them off when the game is won or at least looking comfortably won. I don't see the point in making players travel here there and everywhere, train with the squad and put them on the bench in games if they're being "rested".

Winning breeds confidence and continuing to win can only bring better performances. This whole stop start bollocks is what costs us because we don't know what team is playing when. And I can almost feel for certain players when they get put in the "lesser" competition games. I can almost understand why Skrtel would not want to perform against Young Boys at Anfield (I know he did and done ok but I could almost understand why he wouldn't). He'd be sat there thinking, Agger, Johnson, Enrique, Gerrard, Sterling, Suarez get "rested" or on  the bench at least yet he has to start when Coates is sat there. That must be a kick in the bollocks for any player. The reason I can't fully understand it is because at the end of the day it's still a game for Liverpool Football Club and therefore it means a f**king lot to a lot of people.

And that's why I think we should have our best side out whenever possible. It's a game for Liverpool Football Club and I don't care if it's a do or die match in the League against Everton or third round of the League Cup against Torquay, I want Liverpool to win and if we don't then it f**king crucifies me. I don't agree with putting emphasis on one game over another, especially from managers who say "one game at a time". I don't agree with players who only turn up for certain matches. Any game for Liverpool Football Club should be taken as seriously as possible.

And yes I'll do my token gesture of harking on about the good old days, days that in fact I didn't witness first hand. But in those days, the players were not super fit human beings but rather heavy smokers, drinkers and chippy diets. They weren't playing on carpet like pitches but rather mud baths that looked more like Stanley Park than a football field. They weren't trained in state of the art conditions but instead one wall with a few numbers on at Melwood. They weren't treated by the finest medical facilites around but instead they had Bob Paisley, a sponge and a bucket of water. They weren't pampered little fairies where a perfectly good challenge resulted in a red card but instead playing against some vicious cu*ts like Ron Harris and Billy Bremner who could kick them to kingdom come and still not get a free kick. They weren't playing with a feather like ball but instead a proper arl fashioned leather casey. They weren't travelling in first class jumbo jets that get them to their destination within hours but instead travelling on modes that sometimes took days to get them to and from European ties. And yet they still managed to play most of the games during a season without needing a "rest".

The problem today is the players are f**king pampered little cu*ts who play two games within a week and all of a sudden need a rest because they know they'll be playing after their rest anyway. Something else which didn't happen in the good old days, when you were out back then you had to earn your place back which is why nobody wanted to be injured. The other problem is the money that ruins today's game. Because of the lack of prize money in the domestic cup competitions and the Europa League, the only thing clubs (and some sections of "big" clubs fan bases) are arsed about is getting into that top four and/or a decent Champions League run which is why you get these "rests" for players in certain matches.

And today's footballers and managers don't live in the real world. If Bill Shankly or Bob Paisley picked a "weakened" side for any game and we lost then they'd get berated by the fans who lived on the same street as them because they lived within the West Derby area. The players mixed with the common Scouse folk and were told to their face if they didn't put in the effort. The famous story of Elmyn Hughes taking a rolocking off a fan during a night out with his missus because we didn't win 4-0. If any manager or player of the past decade or so doesn't put in the effort, then they just swan off to their fancy homes in Formby or wherever in their latest car and don't have to mingle with the everyday common fan.

It's too easy for players and managers this day and age to not put the effort in. Even mickey mouse clubs are "resting" players for the League Cup in order to enhance their chances of staying in the League or in some cases win promotion from the Championship. When lower league sides are "resting" players you know you have got some serious f**king problems with the sport.

Ultimately until the money that is currently ruining football is sorted out, the sport will continue to die. And no matter what anybody says to me, I will still be of the belief that "resting" players is f**king about with this club. It's like saying a match for Liverpool Football Club isn't important enough. Well I'm sorry, but every game for Liverpool Football Club is important to me and I want to see it treated as so.

Every f**king word of this is true.

Before anyone else down the East Lancs thinks that they are are something more than great pretenders it will take another 88 years before any club can claim they were the most successful English club of that century.

Our success came from coming first and that could only happen by putting out on the field and playing our  juggernaut teams that we did week in and week out. Giants of players and I'm not talking Big Ron.

OUR European success came by way of the travels as mentioned. Hostile crowds. Even more break your legs ,spit in your face continental defenders.
We were the European pioneers and we won our Cups in Euroland by way of ruthless ...no prisoner... knock out rounds.

WE WERE the last team standing ...... not trying to work out the best point average in the group.

Some of our winning players were cracking in 60 plus games a season without  one moan.
Check some records.


We all need to wake up and smell the bullshit permeating.
I'm sick of waiting for tomorrow to arrive.

The players from the 60's were fit but not to the standard of todays "monitored" players. But they also knew if they got injured they would lose their place becuase if you got into the side and played well you stayed their and I think that helped players a lot.
Today you can score a hatrick on Saturday and be out of the team on WEDS.
I believe in playing your strongest possible team and players know if they do well they keep the shirt.Take Downing or Henderson playing in the Europa league they know full well that no matter what happens they will be out come the weekend(Yes I know about last weekend but thats was a one off) that must be a real downer for a player knowing the manager does not rate you.

I much prefer the DLS version about playing the strongest 11 to your version,after all he tells it as it is.

And I'm telling how it is right now and has been for the last two decades or so.

Rafa was the master of resting and rotating

We won the CL because he rested players to allow them to 100% fit for CL matches.

I guess no one minded players getting rested then

We got to number one in Europe because Rafa managed his squad

Phil Neal played 365 consecutive games for Liverpool between 1975 and 1983 when an injury made him miss just the one game.....f***in shirker.
Now 1975 to 1983 was a pretty good time for LFC no wonder he didnt want to miss a game.

He did - nearly 30 years ago.

Things have changed

Kenny rested and changed his team dependant on the game

So did Rafa

It helped us win trophies.

Obviously some people dont get the ignore button.
Manager do have their go to players and it must piss of some lads who dont seem to get the nod and are then expected to be world beaters in one off games.
I am not a fan of rotation playing the strongest team until a player either needs a break or is injured but I bet 100% not a single player would admit to being tired and needing a rest if they thought there was someone who could take their position.

It's the same as some don't get it's no longer the 80's.

 

He did - nearly 30 years ago.

Things have changed

Kenny rested and changed his team dependant on the game

So did Rafa

It helped us win trophies.

It may be 30 years ago George ,but winning is winning no matter when ,i mean they have it so much harder today ,all that training ,shopping ,spa,s ,all the stodgy food they got to eat ,fck sake i dont know how they manage to compete ,shocking really.
A manager can rest players that is so ,but there is a time and place the trick is to get it right ,i am with Billy on this one though best available team always for me.Great post Billy .

It may be 30 years ago George ,but winning is winning no matter when ,i mean they have it so much harder today ,all that training ,shopping ,spa,s ,all the stodgy food they got to eat ,fck sake i dont know how they manage to compete ,shocking really.
A manager can rest players that is so ,but there is a time and place the trick is to get it right ,i am with Billy on this one though best available team always for me.Great post Billy .

So what did you think when Rafa was resting players to enable us to be fresh for the CL and then to help us win it ?

Its all ifs and buts George ,the truth i didnt like it one bit ,you as always are making an assumption that because he rested players we won the CL ,when realistically it is not as simple as that, anyhow back on topic any player not giving his best in any game for us wants his bollocks pulled off, the best players always want to play and win thats why they stand out ,same as any other sport ,the people who really want it stand out and shine ,sadly at the moment we dont have enough players who really want it.

So what did you think when Rafa was resting players to enable us to be fresh for the CL and then to help us win it ?

Truthfully?

I hated it.

I'd rather of seen us go and win every League game as well as every Champions League game as opposed to prioritising one over the other.

As it turned out we won the European Cup and yes it was the greatest sporting night of many Liverpool fans' lives. Finishing behind Everton in the League is still not something I look back on with any joy however.

Truthfully?

I hated it.

I'd rather of seen us go and win every League game as well as every Champions League game as opposed to prioritising one over the other.

As it turned out we won the European Cup and yes it was the greatest sporting night of many Liverpool fans' lives. Finishing behind Everton in the League is still not something I look back on with any joy however.

But can you understand the reasons why it is now common place within the game as much as its not liked

But can you understand the reasons why it is now common place within the game as much as its not liked

Yes mate I can. (genuine football fan's head talking)

I can't understand, however, how any Liverpool manager can feel any game involving Liverpool Football Club isn't worthy of their best side. (biased, passionate, only care about Liverpool fan's heart talking)

Yes mate I can. (genuine football fan's head talking)

I can't understand, however, how any Liverpool manager can feel any game involving Liverpool Football Club isn't worthy of their best side. (biased, passionate, only care about Liverpool fan's heart talking)

And that is fair enough.

I think these days though its bloody hard to know who is the strongest 11

I think currently we have

Suarez , Johnson , Agger , Skrtel , Pepe and Lucas when fit are guaranteed strongest 11 players - then players like Gerrard , Allen , Enrique and Sterling are prob involved as well.

Plenty of anachronism here. The game has changed and is much more demanding nowadays, players can't be expected to play every game of every competition and deal fine with it. Very few will do. Teams that have tried to do so to different degrees have failed in different fronts - it's not possible to always play the very best of your squad without the luxury of a big money all star squad.

Recently I've read a scientific study analyzing the impact of European football to small clubs like Auxerre and Villarreal. The Spanish club in particular, very recently the example of how a small city team can still be relatively successful (having reached a UCL semifinal against all the odds), did not have the financial backing to sustain a squad of the same quality in depth of its competitors. With the added fixtures of the European calendar, the club faded and it ultimately sent them to the 2nd division.

Obviously, fatigue isn't the only explanation for their downfall. To deny the increased impact it has in modern football, however, is living in the past.

By the way, it's even more anachronistic to say managers did not rotate their teams decades ago. They did... and to do so, for a while they counted on huge squads based on the fact there was a maximum wage for footballers, so it was possible for clubs to sustain a big number of players who were rarely used.

Rotating teams and prioritizing competitions in detriment of others wasn't so much a feature of the game as it is today, but looking at it as a totally new animal is stretching the point way too much.

And that is fair enough.

I think these days though its bloody hard to know who is the strongest 11

I think currently we have

Suarez , Johnson , Agger , Skrtel , Pepe and Lucas when fit are guaranteed strongest 11 players - then players like Gerrard , Allen , Enrique and Sterling are prob involved as well.

I think, judging by Brendan's selections earlier in the season, he does fancy Martin Kelly at right back with Johnson on the left. And that's something I'm more than happy with. Maybe pushing Enrique further up field on the left wing will help that.

Sterling looks nailed down on either of the two wings at the moment. Gerrard will always be a regular starter I think. (it'd take some brave c**t not to pick him). Allen seems like Brendan's blue eyed boy - though I'll be honest I don't really rate him that highly meself. And I'd assume Lucas will play when fit but if not it looks like Shelvey is next on the list.

And up front of course we have Suarez.

So I think Brendan will know his best XI, whether he's had a chance to play it yet is another question.

But even in that XI, there's still some weak areas for me. I'm not a fan of Enrique and don't believe he's playing out of his skin of late, just slightly better than usual because he hasn't had to defend as much. As I stated I don't rate Allen too highly, especially if he's to be paired with Lucas because our attacking threat from the middle looks to be next to nothing. I think there was a thread on here about them being more like Mascherano and Lucas or Mascherano and Alonso. From what I've seen of Allen and from what I know we'll get from Lucas, it looks to be more like Mascherano and Lucas in terms of attacking threat.

But that team (Reina, Kelly, Skrtel, Agger, Johnson, Sterling, Gerrard, Lucas, Allen, Enrique, Suarez) should have enough quality to play week in week out.

Lucas is a more complete player than Allen and a better footballer than his holding position suggests. Hopefully Allen and Lucas will be compatible and I would move Stevie out wide with Sterling and him swapping from time to time.
Just a thought but should we find ourselves with only the league to compete in come January will rotation still be necessary.But ~I agree their is more than enough in that team to be a lot further up the league.

Plenty of anachronism here. The game has changed and is much more demanding nowadays, players can't be expected to play every game of every competition and deal fine with it. Very few will do. Teams that have tried to do so to different degrees have failed in different fronts - it's not possible to always play the very best of your squad without the luxury of a big money all star squad.

Recently I've read a scientific study analyzing the impact of European football to small clubs like Auxerre and Villarreal. The Spanish club in particular, very recently the example of how a small city team can still be relatively successful (having reached a UCL semifinal against all the odds), did not have the financial backing to sustain a squad of the same quality in depth of its competitors. With the added fixtures of the European calendar, the club faded and it ultimately sent them to the 2nd division.

Obviously, fatigue isn't the only explanation for their downfall. To deny the increased impact it has in modern football, however, is living in the past.

By the way, it's even more anachronistic to say managers did not rotate their teams decades ago. They did... and to do so, for a while they counted on huge squads based on the fact there was a maximum wage for footballers, so it was possible for clubs to sustain a big number of players who were rarely used.

Rotating teams and prioritizing competitions in detriment of others wasn't so much a feature of the game as it is today, but looking at it as a totally new animal is stretching the point way too much.

+1

Great informative post

I think, judging by Brendan's selections earlier in the season, he does fancy Martin Kelly at right back with Johnson on the left. And that's something I'm more than happy with. Maybe pushing Enrique further up field on the left wing will help that.

Sterling looks nailed down on either of the two wings at the moment. Gerrard will always be a regular starter I think. (it'd take some brave c**t not to pick him). Allen seems like Brendan's blue eyed boy - though I'll be honest I don't really rate him that highly meself. And I'd assume Lucas will play when fit but if not it looks like Shelvey is next on the list.

And up front of course we have Suarez.

So I think Brendan will know his best XI, whether he's had a chance to play it yet is another question.

But even in that XI, there's still some weak areas for me. I'm not a fan of Enrique and don't believe he's playing out of his skin of late, just slightly better than usual because he hasn't had to defend as much. As I stated I don't rate Allen too highly, especially if he's to be paired with Lucas because our attacking threat from the middle looks to be next to nothing. I think there was a thread on here about them being more like Mascherano and Lucas or Mascherano and Alonso. From what I've seen of Allen and from what I know we'll get from Lucas, it looks to be more like Mascherano and Lucas in terms of attacking threat.

But that team (Reina, Kelly, Skrtel, Agger, Johnson, Sterling, Gerrard, Lucas, Allen, Enrique, Suarez) should have enough quality to play week in week out.

They do - but not the super human physical fitness levels to allow them to compete at 100% in every single game

Obviously some people don't get the ignore button.

 

 

Agree

Really funny how someone knows what someone is posting when on ignore

Thank god you're not a football manager

You need a big dose of reality.

And you need to know that footballers are never 100% injury-proof.

Resting players that worked once doesn't justify it as a permanent measure. I also remember Burnley, Barnsley, Reading and Northampton who all benefitted from our coach fielding weakened sides in cup competitions.

Today you can score a hatrick on Saturday and be out of the team on WEDS.
I believe in playing your strongest possible team and players know if they do well they keep the shirt.Take Downing or Henderson playing in the Europa league they know full well that no matter what happens they will be out come the weekend that must be a real downer for a player knowing the manager does not rate you.

I remember seeing Cavalieri's face after the Reading FA Cup game. It must have been more upsetting for him knowing he would never play for us again because of the result that night. Sure enough he never did.

The best way of getting a first team place is by earning the shirt on merit, not because it's a cup game or not. That upsets players, cheats fans, and disrespects competitions. And serves no worthwhile purpose anyway.

Here is the way it is..no matter how you want to cut it this is what it comes down too.

It will never change no matter the opinions or how much we bi*ch and moan about it.

The players are a commodity, they know it and the people that paid for them and write the checks to them every week knows it.

Luis Suarez is worth about 40 million fit. He gets paid 2-3 million a year. LFC has a lot invested in him now and going forward.

Therefore they are not going to risk his health, and neither should we want them too.

Cup competitions/Europe/Premier league/National duties is a lot of football for someone like Luis Suarez. Improper rest can lead to ligament/nerve damage that is a proven medical fact that did not exist 30 years ago...now it does.

So if you all want to take someone like Luis and run him til he drops over in a few years with ACL/MCL damage then fine so be it, but I would rather control his workload to make sure he stays fit his career.

And you need to know that footballers are never 100% injury-proof.

Resting players that worked once doesn't justify it as a permanent measure. I also remember Burnley, Barnsley, Reading and Northampton who all benefitted from our coach fielding weakened sides in cup competitions.

I remember seeing Cavalieri's face after the Reading FA Cup game. It must have been more upsetting for him knowing he would never play for us again because of the result that night. Sure enough he never did.

The best way of getting a first team place is by earning the shirt on merit, not because it's a cup game or not. That upsets players, cheats fans, and disrespects competitions. And serves no worthwhile purpose anyway.

Well it worked to help us win a CL - that's good enough for me - that to me seems a very worthwhile purpose

World Class Top of the Pile Trophy CL and Title Winners do it - guess who knows more about managing a squad of players ? Them or you ?

They do it for valid and good reason. It's quite clear why they do. Maybe one day you will realise that.

Here is the way it is..no matter how you want to cut it this is what it comes down too.

It will never change no matter the opinions or how much we bi*ch and moan about it.

The players are a commodity, they know it and the people that paid for them and write the checks to them every week knows it.

Luis Suarez is worth about 40 million fit. He gets paid 2-3 million a year. LFC has a lot invested in him now and going forward.

Therefore they are not going to risk his health, and neither should we want them too.

Cup competitions/Europe/Premier league/National duties is a lot of football for someone like Luis Suarez. Improper rest can lead to ligament/nerve damage that is a proven medical fact that did not exist 30 years ago...now it does.

So if you all want to take someone like Luis and run him til he drops over in a few years with ACL/MCL damage then fine so be it, but I would rather control his workload to make sure he stays fit his career.

Back of the net !! Summed up brilliantly +1

I was watching the Sunderland-Q.P.R. match when the the commentator made an interesting comment that aptly fits into the heading of this thread.
          Here is the comment-Some players do not have the will or inclination to win,in other words they are quite happy to pick up their big pay and not worry about the result and what it means to the supporters.We at Anfield have had examples of this type of player  on several occasions over recent years.

Ditto walton, according to George Lucas after all your years of watching L.F.C. you cannot possibly know as much as him regarding how football is played.Now this may well cost me a ban but I have had enough of his diatribe where he makes out that nobody else can possibly know as much about modern day football as him.I have come to the conclusion that George Lucas is MacRed reincarnated.

Ditto walton, according to George Lucas after all your years of watching L.F.C. you cannot possibly know as much as him regarding how football is played.Now this may well cost me a ban but I have had enough of his diatribe where he makes out that nobody else can possibly know as much about modern day football as him.I have come to the conclusion that George Lucas is MacRed reincarnated.

Could you please at least try to be civil and stop posting digs and insults about me - if you don't like my posts that much then follow your buddies and ignore me.

I think I understand your point BBB, and it is interesting. A player looking after himself and not making gut busting runs for 90 mins so he can peak later in the season and avoid strains, pulls etc. is completely unacceptable. But a manager resting key players for certain games, reducing our chances of winning for the same reasons is perfectly ok?

**For the record I'm not condoning or condemning either action, just making sure I understand.**

That's it '91.

Very good topic Bad Boy

Thanks 'debs; I appreciate that.

To be honest I just wanted to see what makes us think the way we do as fans. There is no right nor wrong answers as far as I was concerned - that's why I asked for no rowing and no spamming. How daft was I; eh? 

I just wanted to, maybe' read something that would make me think "you know what... maybe I should accept us fielding an understrength team, in cups, in the hope of a better league position." [which is something I actually referenced in the O.P. but has got lost in the white noise of 'he who must be heard'].

I know why we don't accept anything less than 100% from the individual and...  I know why we "prioritise" as a club - money - the league is a better payer but even then I still can't see how that money has enhanced our standing as a club. As a fan I just can't bring myself into accepting institutionalised not giving 100% (strongest team possible = 100%; anything else, by default, is less) - that maybe a failing on my part.

Thanks for trying.

* slips out of thread before the Springer Spaniel pup comes back in demanding that we all look at him. 

Edit: Oops... too late. 

Could you please at least try to be civil and stop posting digs and insults about me - if you don't like my posts that much then follow your buddies and ignore me.

When you stop treating people as though they do not have a clue about the game today.For your imformation I think I understand as much about the modern game and more importantly about LIVERPOOL FOOTBALL CLUB as you do.As regards following my buddies as you call them ,I hold them in high regard  and sadly I cannot ever see you earning that respect.

When you stop treating people as though they do not have a clue about the game today.For your imformation I think I understand as much about the modern game and more importantly about LIVERPOOL FOOTBALL CLUB as you do.As regards following my buddies as you call them ,I hold them in high regard  and sadly I cannot ever see you earning that respect.

I never said I know more about the club than you ?

Can you please stop posting digs about me - that applies anyone else who feels the need to do it either blatently or on the sly.

Thank you

Plenty of anachronism here. The game has changed and is much more demanding nowadays, players can't be expected to play every game of every competition and deal fine with it. Very few will do. Teams that have tried to do so to different degrees have failed in different fronts - it's not possible to always play the very best of your squad without the luxury of a big money all star squad.

Recently I've read a scientific study analyzing the impact of European football to small clubs like Auxerre and Villarreal. The Spanish club in particular, very recently the example of how a small city team can still be relatively successful (having reached a UCL semifinal against all the odds), did not have the financial backing to sustain a squad of the same quality in depth of its competitors. With the added fixtures of the European calendar, the club faded and it ultimately sent them to the 2nd division.

Obviously, fatigue isn't the only explanation for their downfall. To deny the increased impact it has in modern football, however, is living in the past.

By the way, it's even more anachronistic to say managers did not rotate their teams decades ago. They did... and to do so, for a while they counted on huge squads based on the fact there was a maximum wage for footballers, so it was possible for clubs to sustain a big number of players who were rarely used.

Rotating teams and prioritizing competitions in detriment of others wasn't so much a feature of the game as it is today, but looking at it as a totally new animal is stretching the point way too much.

Excellent topic BBB, been considering it and I think Diego pretty much hits the nail on the head for me so I'll not add to it in any way just echo these thoughts.

Glen has been one of our better players this season with exceptional performances. Don't forget the angle you watch the game from is a lot better to judge the flight of a ball immediately than it is when you're playing and for the life of me I have no idea what passes you're referring to either.

What passes ? Any pass that Hendo plays would be apt .

Excellent topic BBB, been considering it and I think Diego pretty much hits the nail on the head for me so I'll not add to it in any way just echo these thoughts.

Thanks Luke. I was (coincidently) getting on to a reply to Diego's post when I read this.

Plenty of anachronism here. The game has changed and is much more demanding nowadays, players can't be expected to play every game of every competition and deal fine with it. Very few will do. Teams that have tried to do so to different degrees have failed in different fronts - it's not possible to always play the very best of your squad without the luxury of a big money all star squad.

Recently I've read a scientific study analyzing the impact of European football to small clubs like Auxerre and Villarreal. The Spanish club in particular, very recently the example of how a small city team can still be relatively successful (having reached a UCL semifinal against all the odds), did not have the financial backing to sustain a squad of the same quality in depth of its competitors. With the added fixtures of the European calendar, the club faded and it ultimately sent them to the 2nd division.

Obviously, fatigue isn't the only explanation for their downfall. To deny the increased impact it has in modern football, however, is living in the past.

By the way, it's even more anachronistic to say managers did not rotate their teams decades ago. They did... and to do so, for a while they counted on huge squads based on the fact there was a maximum wage for footballers, so it was possible for clubs to sustain a big number of players who were rarely used.

Rotating teams and prioritizing competitions in detriment of others wasn't so much a feature of the game as it is today, but looking at it as a totally new animal is stretching the point way too much.

Now that is a reply... nice one. Before I go any further I just want to say; I hope I'm not putting words into your mouth (tell me if I am) - I just want to be clear what you are 'saying'.

Have I picked it up right that there are, amongst others, two major factors as to why a club might not field it's strongest team? I.E.; 1: without "financial backing" the quality of a squad, by nature, isn't up to the job of competing (at the highest level) in all competitions and... 2: If a small club (Auxerre and Villarreal, for example) don't want to "over-stretch" it's better, long-term, for them to "prioritise". See that I get.

Would I be right in thinking that, (for the time being anyhow), for us Liverpool fans to grasp the concept of 'not fielding our best possible team' we (or me anyhow  ) need a change of mind-set?

Should I now be thinking; "We aren't a big club right now and we won't be until we have the finance in place (to field a quality, in depth, team in all competitions)"? Wow that is going to be hard. 

I appreciate your reply mate; it's definitely given me some food for thought. 

Better to think that we are still a big club but FSG haven't fully realised it yet so haven't strengthened the squad accordingly Mouse.

It's a great topic which I don't have the time to reply to just yet but I do think we more easily accept the manager rotating the squad and therefore not giving 100% than a player on the pitch as its much easier to judge and criticise effort while playing.

This season I definitely feel Brendan has his hands tied a bit and probably feels the need to change the team to try and get the best out of a quite small squad.

That's it '91.

Thanks 'debs; I appreciate that.

To be honest I just wanted to see what makes us think the way we do as fans. There is no right nor wrong answers as far as I was concerned - that's why I asked for no rowing and no spamming. How daft was I; eh? 

I just wanted to, maybe' read something that would make me think "you know what... maybe I should accept us fielding an understrength team, in cups, in the hope of a better league position." [which is something I actually referenced in the O.P. but has got lost in the white noise of 'he who must be heard'].

I know why we don't accept anything less than 100% from the individual and...  I know why we "prioritise" as a club - money - the league is a better payer but even then I still can't see how that money has enhanced our standing as a club. As a fan I just can't bring myself into accepting institutionalised not giving 100% (strongest team possible = 100%; anything else, by default, is less) - that maybe a failing on my part.

Thanks for trying.

* slips out of thread before the Springer Spaniel pup comes back in demanding that we all look at him. 

Edit: Oops... too late. 

It used to p*ss me off no end when Rafa constantly changed the team around, especially after a good performance/win but then started to accept it as a necessary evil.  It's strange how we "accept" things now that in the 70's/80's we would have been scratching our heads at.

As an example I've been following the progress of our Academy players for 3-4 years now and when I got the chance to go to Anfield for the Anzhi game I was really looking forward to watching a similar team to the ones who played at Young Boys and West Brom (League Cup).  I had "accepted" that we would field a "weakened" team.

We arrived at our seats just as the team was being announced and I had a brief " " when Stevie and Suarez' names were called but it quickly turned to a  when I realised it was a full strength team.

I long for the days when our bench will have multi million pound players named to replace multi million pound players when tactics need tweeking.  Will I live that long?  I hope so 

I think the days of superstar benches will die away if FFP does get implemented successfully. We would see a strong base 13 with a few fringe players plus a core of youngsters on the edge - pretty close to our current situation ( just need a few more strength players )

Another point that I'm not sure has been mentioned is the use of cup games to allow youngsters to gain valuable playing time and also to play alongside more established players - it's something that Wenger did successfully to give experience to players like Fabregas etc. BR seems to by using the away cup games to give our youngsters some valuable playing time

As an example I've been following the progress of our Academy players for 3-4 years now and when I got the chance to go to Anfield for the Anzhi game I was really looking forward to watching a similar team to the ones who played at Young Boys and West Brom (League Cup).  I had "accepted" that we would field a "weakened" team.

We arrived at our seats just as the team was being announced and I had a brief " " when Stevie and Suarez' names were called but it quickly turned to a  when I realised it was a full strength team.

You touch on a fair enough point 'debs. I was at last Thursdays game and didn't know what to expect - after all we did field our strongest team, (as you point out), against Anzhi and a win meant we could 'rest easy'. So the team selection was a tad disappointing (as too was the result btw).

Maybe the time has come for me to accept this may happen more often and I'll have to take a lead from the club and "prioritise" or be more selective about the games I attend... giving any and all cup games a bye.

Sad really but with money so tight (as it is for most fans, I guess) I'd rather spend it watching a full strength team trying their damnedest than paying my money and taking my chances with a cup game... ah well.   

This has been happening for decades though ?

It will happen the same amount it has done for at least the previous ten years. The club prioritising and the manager resting players for certain games has been happening since maybe GH arrived. Even before with Souness when he played players like Fowler in cup games.

Surely it can't be a new realisation that our manager will rest players accordingly but still putting out a team he believes can still win and they will still try their damnedest in each game.

It seems ( if im wrong please say so ) that there is a belief that if the strongest team isn't picked that is the manager not trying his best to win - I think that's wrong personally - the manager will always try his best utilising the squad he has.

You touch on a fair enough point 'debs. I was at last Thursdays game and didn't know what to expect - after all we did field our strongest team, (as you point out), against Anzhi and a win meant we could 'rest easy'. So the team selection was a tad disappointing (as too was the result btw).

Maybe the time has come for me to accept this may happen more often and I'll have to take a lead from the club and "prioritise" or be more selective about the games I attend... giving any and all cup games a bye.

Sad really but with money so tight (as it is for most fans, I guess) I'd rather spend it watching a full strength team trying their damnedest than paying my money and taking my chances with a cup game... ah well.   

But therein lies another issue mate, sometimes the full strength team/experienced players don't try their damndest whereas sometimes the inexperienced ones do. 

But therein lies another issue mate, sometimes the full strength team/experienced players don't try their damndest whereas sometimes the inexperienced ones do. 

Indeed 'debs and for another thread maybe?

Just a reminder of the O.P.... before the "Just George" show resumes:

I want to make a few things clear before I expand the discussion:

* This is not about Brendan – we have been “prioritising”  games for a number of years now and under different managers...

Ask yourself this too: what has happened to make it more acceptable, to you, that we “prioritise” by saving ourselves for the league? After all ”prioritising” hasn't exactly worked.

Indeed 'debs and for another thread maybe?

Just a reminder of the O.P.... before the "Just George" show resumes:

Thank you for pointing out my error

Do continue with your sly digs towards me.

Thanks Luke. I was (coincidently) getting on to a reply to Diego's post when I read this.

Now that is a reply... nice one. Before I go any further I just want to say; I hope I'm not putting words into your mouth (tell me if I am) - I just want to be clear what you are 'saying'.

Have I picked it up right that there are, amongst others, two major factors as to why a club might not field it's strongest team? I.E.; 1: without "financial backing" the quality of a squad, by nature, isn't up to the job of competing (at the highest level) in all competitions and... 2: If a small club (Auxerre and Villarreal, for example) don't want to "over-stretch" it's better, long-term, for them to "prioritise". See that I get.

Would I be right in thinking that, (for the time being anyhow), for us Liverpool fans to grasp the concept of 'not fielding our best possible team' we (or me anyhow  ) need a change of mind-set?

Should I now be thinking; "We aren't a big club right now and we won't be until we have the finance in place (to field a quality, in depth, team in all competitions)"? Wow that is going to be hard. 

I appreciate your reply mate; it's definitely given me some food for thought. 

To be honest, mate, I think that's the case. Yeah it's a harsh reality but it's also the nature of the game these days, money speaks more and more every day.

It's not to say we can't be competitive though, nor that "we aren't a big club". I surely don't think a team needs to spend as much as Man City to be successful. But without similar resources, we'll have to spend our money more wisely than our competitors. I'm not expecting us to only win a title again with a sugar daddy type of owner, if FSG themselves are willing to give more financial backing to the manager, I'll be optimistic about the future.

After all, Liverpool FC do have a big payroll (not so big now we got rid of so many players, but we don't have the data about this season so I'm talking about recent past), among the Top 4 or at least Top 5. There's a strong historical correlation between wages and league finish, so in the last few seasons we have been underachievers in this aspect.

Underachieving isn't nice but if we're willing to look at it positively, we can see it as a promising sign - the fact we do have the financial power to be near the top, just need to start spending it better.

That is, of course, if the owners are going to re-invest the money they've saved recently instead of cost cutting for its own sake - I'm still sitting on a fence about them so I'll wait and see.

By the way, my post about "anachronism" (is this word the right one in English?) was more specifically directed to the part of the debate trying to compare players of today with players of decades ago. I love football history and I think I know a little bit about it myself but I think too many people live in the past - complain about today's state of the game without thinking about what made it change.

Yes, in the past players were able to play more games with even greater frequency, but we also had alcoholics among the best players in the world. One of the genius of the Brazilian team of the WC 1970 used to smoke a cigarette before each game. That is simply not going to happen in today's game.

Yes, players used to be a lot more loyal to their clubs, but that was also largely due to the fact there were little more to gain moving clubs. Sir Tom Finney played his whole career for Preston North End, surely because he loved the club, but also because he was already paid the maximum wage allowed at the time at Preston, so moving to, say, Arsenal, would make no difference to his life standards at all. In today's game, a player that has the opportunity to improve his and his family's life standards massively will take it irrespective of the love he might have for his club.

I could go on, I think you'll get what I'm saying about "anachronism" here!

By the way, my post about "anachronism" (is this word the right one in English?) was more specifically directed to the part of the debate trying to compare players of today with players of decades ago.

Not quite the right word (in context) but I understood what you meant; both regarding the word and the part of the debate to which you were referencing.