Tassie Devil
Kennel Immortal
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2018
- Messages
- 17,187
- Reaction score
- 15,012
OK mate. Love the trouble you've gone to to reply to this so I'll attempt to come back at you. Though it is bloody late over here!
Your initial point:
"Out of your main starting 11, only VVD and Henderson played less than 30 games? Your front three played almost every game, your fullbacks were fit for the season and Allison only really missed 4 games etc."
Now you're saying:
"The difference isn't the injuries but the quality of depth."
The first point is that we really didn't have that many injuries to key players so we should've been OK. While the second one is saying we had injuries but the problem was depth. Bit contradictory, no?
The statement that only VVD and Henderson (from the starting 11) played fewer than 30 games is nuts and plain wrong. Leave to the side that clearly this isn't true as was shown by the amount of appearance (or distinct lack of) from players like Matip, Gomez, Thiago, etc.
Players need to be rested. Others get injured. So, starting your top 11 every game is never possible anyway so you need players to step in. The issue with Liverpool was that even the 'deputies' were injured so we had to start chopping things around.
You'll say this them means we needed more depth, true to a point but we only had two more CBs play and 2 more CMs play than City for example. Considering both you and coach have been trying to claim that City's injuries were just as bad, doesn't this demonstrate that we had to dig deeper into our depth to get players?
You point to Liverpool having at least "4 of Thiago, Fabinho, Ox, Henderson, Milner or Jones" as some type of measurement to us not having it difficult with injuries? How many games, continual games, could 3-4 of those players play together? How many of those games was Fab playing in CB? Hendo as a CB? Milner at RB?
You're really simplifying this when it's not simple at all. You can't expect a midfield to be functional when a player like Thiago is coming back from a major injury? Or Ox? Or Jones? Or Hendo? It doesn't work that way. There needs to be continuation and fluidity. I'm sure you can agree on that, so saying that they 4 were 'available' at all times is way too simplistic of thinking.
And we haven't even talked about the backline of Liverpool. Was it 16 different partnerships? That affects the whole team mate, the midfield included. Especially the fullbacks. You say that they were available all year, sure, they were. But, they had 16 different partnerships to play alongside. how the hell are they supposed to function like that?
But, to you it's simply saying that 4 CMs were available for each match means there weren't any true injury issues ...
Liverpool made mistakes. Without doubt. I've always said that and I think any Liverpool fans has said the same.
The biggest mistake in hindsight was moving Fabinho back to CB as it then left a gaping hole in midfield that couldn't be adequately covered by other players. It offset the balance in the team, and it was a tactical mistake by the club and Klopp. We should've got another CB in as early as possible. We didn't.
I've said it already that we made a number of mistakes in not bringing in reinforcements to our backs. Agree that Liverpool can't blame injuries completely on our form. We should've reacted differently as a club, we didn't.
But the rest of the tosh you're spewing out about Liverpool is hilarious mate. Anyway to dance around the facts. Liverpool got fucked by injuries. Plain and simple. Of course we made mistakes, but to argue that we didn't have injuries is just trolling mate. And we both know that you're doing that now
Enjoy the convo though! But it's killing my sleep
