Dose of reality (well, my reality, at least)I think there's something very deluded about Liverpool fans if they think the team can go to places like Blackburn, in their best form for a decade (built on being hard to beat), and simply turn them over. It just doesn't happen.
Already this season, Arsenal and Chelsea have failed to beat Rovers in the league. Like visiting Portsmouth, where United have failed to win in the last two seasons, some fixtures are deceptively tough.
Maybe if the Reds were in full flow you could expect a win. But for me, it's not a fixture where you can have must-win expectations. Blackburn at Anfield, even with Rovers in their best form for 100 years, would be a game where Liverpool must always win, but not at Ewood Park.
Going back to the halcyon days, away draws were part and parcel of successful campaigns. The Reds had to grind out results, and that included drawing at places other than Old Trafford and Highbury. When winning the title in 1984, Joe Fagan's men racked up a staggering 14 draws from 42 games. Liverpool drew nine away games, and won only eight, losing a further four. The Reds also failed to win seven home games, but still won the league.
Even though it was three points for a win in 1984, it seems the draw nowadays is treated the same as a defeat.
Let's be honest: this season, Liverpool, despite being unbeaten, have clearly had some bad results in the league. The home draws with Spurs and Birmingham are games where nothing short of a win is to be expected, particularly with both struggling.
These were dropped points: four in total. No excuses.
The draws against Chelsea and Arsenal, however, are more confusing. Both were unbeaten upon arrival, but Chelsea should have lost their status that day. Just as Liverpool did at Everton, they got lucky.
The Arsenal game was strange, in that they played some lovely stuff without really troubling the Reds too often until towards the end, while Liverpool had many of the best chances. While you should never lose these big home games, they can easily end in draws if the other team is on form. So they're 'okay' results.
However, while the Reds' unbeaten tag therefore doesn't tell the full story, in masking at least two failures, it's still a psychological boost. That's undeniable. But draws need to start becoming wins sooner rather than later.
(As a side note, in the Champions League, where it doesn't look like being our year, I see the draw away at Porto as a very good result, while the two defeats were clearly bad results. And I said at the time, the Marseilles game was atrocious. I just don't see a correlation between that level of showing and the weekend's game.)
No matter how I look at it, the draws at Portsmouth and Blackburn were good results. Not great results, not 'roll out the bunting' results, but to me, undeniably decent ones –– more than acceptable. Few top teams will go to the Parks of Ewood and Fratton and win, even when playing their best football and the home teams play their worst.
The problem for Liverpool has been the home form, but we've seen enough in the last three years at Anfield to know it can be particularly strong under BenÃtez. Getting back to that, while maintaining something like this away form, will mean a very good season. But the home games are mostly must-win ones from now on, as well as two-thirds of the remaining away games.
The Reds weren't great in the first half at Ewood Park, but it's also true that both teams had just one good chance: Bentley's, when he broke free, and Babel's, when he cut inside. It seemed like a European away performance, designed to quiet the crowd and hope to make the quality tell as the game opened up later on.
But for poor finishing, a brilliant goal-line clearance from Crouch's header, and good goalkeeping from Freidel, that should have been the case. Reina had little to do at the other end.
Other than Bentley's effort in the first half, Dunn had a great pop at goal, but it wasn't so much a chance as a punt from long range, and like Bentley's it was off target (yes, in many ways it's unlucky to hit the post, and you applaud the effort, but ultimately it's not going in unless the goalposts up and move themselves.)
As the game wore on, Liverpool improved, and missed some great opportunities. Gerrard's shooting wasn't quite sharp enough when forcing Freidel into good saves, and Kuyt's shooting ranged from poor to downright terrible. There were also a couple of breaks where the extra men should have led to goals, with Kuyt again guilty.
Everyone can see that there are problems with the Reds' play at the moment. Many of them will solve themselves in natural ways, while a few need to be addressed.
The biggest problem is injuries, and these will solve themselves in time. Torres, Agger and Alonso are not average players you can do without.
Agger is the quickest runner and the move-starter from the back. Alonso is the move-starter and tempo-setter from the middle. And Torres is the move-finisher and, with his searing pace, the opposition-stretcher.
These are three of Rafa's best players; it's natural the team will not be as good without them. How can it be? How could United possibly be as good without Rooney, Ferdinand and Ronaldo? Indeed, United's defeat at Man City came with the latter suspended, while they were hopeless against Spurs without him, but contrived a lucky win.
I don't expect there to be much sympathy from outside of Liverpool Football Club for the injuries, but I do expect the club's own fans to understand the situation.
There is cover for a player like Jermaine Pennant, but not for the very best players who comprise the spine.
You cannot judge a BenÃtez team without these players. You cannot judge his total spending, either, if those on whom he's spent the most money are absent. It's not an excuse, it's a fact of football life. And while the team is struggling without its best players, at least some points are being racked up in games that are not 'bankers'.
And there's also Harry Kewell who, after 73 years out injured, including one particularly nasty incident with a ruptured ponytail, is back on the scene –– but, alas, not yet fully match fit. Thankfully, he looks surprisingly sharp, but is clearly not yet capable of 90 minutes. But it won't be long.
Two and three years ago I was arguing about how he's one of our best passers, and how the football is definitely better when he's in the team, even if he isn't tearing past defenders. But if he can do the latter as well, he'll be a massive plus, as there are few wingers of his quality in the country.
Another problem is new players settling in. Only this week Arsene Wenger said (not for the first time) that you should never judge an import in his first year. He should know. He's had some of the worst starters (Pires, Henry) who, after a year or so, turned into the country's best players. Some do settle quickly, like Torres, but you can never write off anyone who doesn't. Everyone is different.
Ryan Babel is a real talent, but he's just 20, and struggling like Pires and Henry. He must –– and I mean must –– be cut some slack. Again, it's not an excuse, but a fact of Premiership life.
A further problem is confidence, both individually and as a team. Momo Sissoko was woeful a few weeks back, but after encouragement from Rafa he played far, far better at Blackburn. The team's passing in midfield was much neater on the whole, but it lacked killer passes until the second half.
Now we have Dirk Kuyt in the same boat as Momo a few weeks back; he'll never be a world-class talent, but he's much better than he showed at Ewood Park. Yes, he's a workhorse, but you often need those to complement the more gifted players.
Admittedly I expected a lot more from Kuyt this season, but at the same time he's not as bad as some make out. I was impressed with him last season, at times very much so, although he could have scored a few more goals. (Had he taken our penalties last season in the way he has this, he could have had 20 goals.)
This year it's just not happening for him ... yet. His confidence is rock bottom, and anyone can look bad in those circumstances. Michael Owen was a prime example.
But without Torres, the pace is missing from the attack and Kuyt is left exposed; the same can be said of Crouch. Torres was designed to be our cutting edge; but he's injured. I'd like to see Chelsea get by anywhere near as well without Drogba (if memory serves from earlier this season, they didn't). Oh, and to be without John Terry and Michael Essien at the same time.
I'm a big fan of Peter Crouch, which is obvious from the way I was defending him when everyone else was calling him hopeless two years ago. And while some may feel he's being harshly treated, he had not played well in his limited appearances until last week, when he came on against Arsenal and really looked at it.
Now he's coming into a bit of form, despite a fairly uneventful Carling Cup showing, it could be the time to play him from the start.
But I also understand the problem of the rest of the team, when lacking confidence, looking long to him and bypassing the midfield. I'm guessing Rafa wants us to play through the middle a bit more, to find the flow again. Providing the team look to Crouch's feet, where he's at his best, it's hard to see him not featuring heavily before Torres' return.
Elsewhere, Steve Finnan is getting better at last, but he had a horrible, lethargic start to the season. Jamie Carragher just doesn't seem fully on his game at the moment; maybe the rib injury knocked him back a bit. He's still defending brilliantly at times, just not all the time. He's making uncharacteristic mistakes, and at least one a game, although getting away with most of them. When on form, these two are top Premiership players, up there with the very best.
Alongside Carra, Sami Hyypia is struggling to cope with so many games as the years wear on. He's not losing pace, as he had none, but he himself admits the bones are creaking and the muscles aching. It's more about the cumulative effect of so many matches, physically and, in turn, mentally.
And with Agger absent, both he and Carragher are weak links when it comes to distribution from the back. Jack Hobbs, a talented player on the ball, is still a year or two away from being ready to be a regular at this level, but he has all the attributes necessary to succeed. For a teenage centre-back, where it takes time to mature, he's an outstanding prospect, and a lad with real character.
But the failure to land Heinze has left BenÃtez short of options at the back for this season (or until January) at least.
Another defender, John Arne Riise, has become a target of criticism, but again, I don't feel he presents a massive problem; he's not playing well, but there are worse left-backs around, while I just don't see it as a key position.
Again, at just 18 it seems Insua, a far more naturally gifted footballer, is still a year or two away from taking the spot regularly. These are the kinds of players Arsene Wenger has had time to bring through, but which Rafa hasn't.
Insua, who is great going forward as well as defending on the deck, is alarmingly small, so that would give us a weak area teams could look to exploit; for all his limitations, Riise is surprisingly good in the air defensively. Fabio Aurelio is a more talented passer and classier footballer, but he's been out for six months and needs time to find his feet.
Can we improve on Riise? Yes. But is he a major weakness? No.
However, like any player who is struggling, his form isn't helping the team play better football. And his ludicrous, left-footed clearance in the second-half on Saturday evening was woeful –– at times you cannot, under any circumstances, use your favoured foot if the ball is completely on the other side of your body. But despite his flaws, he can weigh in with goals, and some fairly important ones at that.
Elsewhere, Steven Gerrard is getting back to his best, but his control with his back to goal let him down a lot at Ewood Park. He is better when striding forward from deeper areas, but at the same time he's had some top games, and scored a lot of goals, when playing behind the main striker. With his ability, he should not struggle in the role, particularly in holding onto the ball.
There's also the issue of him, come Tuesday, playing eight games in three weeks. With this in mind, I can see why BenÃtez might have wanted to try and use his attacking skills by keeping him in the final third, rather than having him charging from box to box.
Of course players can play that many games in such a short space of time and not die of exhaustion or see their limbs fall off, but equally, they can't be expected to be as fresh by the eighth game. Do marathon runners run eight competitive marathons in that time?
I don't want to imply that, by defending BenÃtez against some of the harsher criticisms and in trying to understand why I feel he's been making certain decisions, I believe everything is rosy.
Let's be clear: playing like this, Liverpool won't win anything of note this season. That much is obvious. But it all depends on whether or not this is us at our worst.
If it is, then, paradoxically, it leaves me very optimistic: because we're not being beaten or outclassed, Reina is having little to do, and key men are due to return.
The fact is, we don't know if this is us at our worst, and probably won't for some months. Hopefully, by then, we'll say it was, as an improvement in form turns draws into wins; at home, it simply has to happen.
But I am certain that Liverpool at their best can still be a force to be reckoned with in the league this season. It will, however, need the presence of the majority of the squad's best players to stand a chance, and we should not be favourites.
Of course, that was always going to be the case. While Liverpool have a big squad, and some very able deputies, there are some key players who are absolutely crucial to the team's ambitions. The 'one-offs'. And it will need those players to find their form as quickly as possible (which won't be easy for those returning from injury), and retain it consistently.
And finally, from what I can see, it will need fans to accept that a point away from home to an in-form and hard-to-beat team (who have set up at home to make it difficult and to hit us on the break) is not the end of the world, but rather, something to build on.
http://www.paultomkins.com/blog.html 
