In short: For a guy that compains we were too defensive, why would you pick apart our defense for being good instead of amazing instead of our attack that was average instead of good. There was also the transition from man-to-man marking from zonal (takes time to adjust), Konchesky instead of Insua (Insua was a better defender).
Our defence hasn't been good for two years, especially for a side that is so defensive. To be carved open as often as we were last year and as often as we have been this year is criminal for a defensive side. And I think you'll find that our attack has been slaughtered by myself over the past two years.
Xabi scored on average 1-2 goals more a season, it's hardly as if that amount would catapult us to the next tier of footballing prowess. Conversely, Lucas does more defensive work - if he stops one or two goal a season more, it evens out.
Xabi was here for six years, scored 19 goals in all competitions. That averages out at just over 3 a season. It's not great as I said, especially for a player of his ability. However it's much better than either Lucas' or Mascherano's.
It's not your job to define the role of how Liverpool's central midfielders should play, stop thinking it is.
So why is it your job to define how they should play? You say it's alright if they do this, that and the other - defining what's acceptable for a Liverpool central midfielder. Read your own line above "if he stops one or two more, it evens itself out" defining there. Well done on the contradiction lad.
Mascherano is not a poor man's Didi, you're wrong. We don't need to invent terms like defensive midfielder, they've been around for many years. Stop clinging onto the past like a 2 year old with a teddy or a religious zealot who takes the bible literally.
Mascherano is a better player than Meireles. Meireles just suits our game better at the moment so he's more useful to us.
Mascherano is a poor man's Didi and isn't better than Meireles. He's an average player who for some reason has such a great reputation. And yes defensive midfielders have been around for a while, they played as central midfielders who chipped in with goals as well as doing their defensive work. Souness and McMahon being two of our examples would allow Terry Mc and Jan Molby respectively to do more of the offensive work as that suited them but both Souey and Macca would still chip in. Something Mascherano didn't do at this club - something however that Didi did.
Rafa blamed Purslow for changing the emphasis to cost-cutting which included change in personnel, big difference.
As I said, Rafa said it so it'll be swallowed.
Our priority should be Europe if our finances are in dire straights. The difference between winning the league and 4th is about £3m, the difference between a CL final and being knocked out in the group stages is about £30m. You'd make an awful accountant.
No our priority should be the League, first last and always. It's all very well putting Europe first if you're reaching finals but in the three full seasons under Hicks and Gillett we made the semi finals (07-08) the quarter finals (08-09) and knocked out at the group stages (09-10). So we didn't go on making too many finals there did we? Maybe with a slightly bigger push in the League we'd still be playing football in Europe's premier competition. But hey, it's alright if we put Europe as long as it was Rafa that was manager.
Actually, he's prioritised the league but due to us shitting on 3 other opponents by right of being a big club we've qualified using young guns and fringe players. Europe hasn't started yet.
Right, so Europe hasn't started because Hodgson has got a decent run in Europe. If however we'd lost one or two games, Europe would of most definitely started for you and a few others. Europe started in our first qualifier, since then we've gone unbeaten. And Hodgson has priortised the League, picking overrated players who don't perform on a regular basis whereas in Europe he's gone with players who are hungry and want to prove a point.
I'd bet my house that Rafa wouldn't have allowed himself to be bullied in the transfer market nearly as heavily as Hodgson was.
And if he had, you'd of found someone else to blame.
edit: You're also undermining Rafa's abilities at coaching the defensive game (he's one of the best in Europe at doing so, while Hodgson prefers to concentrate on fitness). Also the quote you keep repeating as gospel is actually “Football is a simple game based on the giving and taking of passes, of controlling the ball and of making yourself available to receive a pass. It is terribly simple”.
I'm not undermining anything, but for the record - it is as follows “football is a simple game made complicated by those who should know better”
And for anybody who thinks the English game has copied those from abroad - Guardiola has admitted to copying Shankly's methods/systems. Funny that eh that the second best side in world football, is trying to emulate what the world's greatest side was doing over 50 years ago.
Also, just to keep it on topic - Rafa's squad is better than Houllier's.
More than debatable.
DLS - one overbiding memory of those Euro winning sides and all the sides playing in Europe were the words "And back to Clemence" or whoever the goalie happened to be...
The back pass rule was brought in precisely because of the WAY we dominated - go a goal up, keep the ball amongst the back four and pass it back to the goalie.
Of course it wasn't like that in every game, but you'd do well to remove those rose tinted glasses, and remember the reality.
As for ignoring the rest of my post - it's what you usually do when you can't address someone elses point, so I'm used to that kind of bullshit at this stage.
I ignored the rest of the post because it was bollocks, more so the part that I did mention.
As for the back pass rule, yes you could do that. But so could the opposition. It wasn't just the English sides that were allowed to do that. Truth is, the English sides were better back then. And could only be caught by the rest of the continent by banning us. Plain and simple.
