Gerrard injured or rested...?

Rested for what?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/32508296

"Rogers, who rested Steven Gerrard, defended Mario Ballotelli... "
Resting Gerrard and defending Ballotelli indicates to me that Rogers has got things SO wrong, he MUST lost the plot.

Gerrard should still have been on the bench. Don't think he is fit enough to play 3 games a week.

I dont know why this indicates a bust up within the team?

Rodgers said he doesnt think he had sufficient rest period between the two games.

We have to move on.... the obsession with if Gerrard plays or not is now a waste of time, he will not be here come August so what does it matter?

Give him a great send off to a fantastic servant and lets move forward.

That's the sort of game Gerrard would have been instrumental in. It was a must win game so you have to play the best players you have at your disposal. Gerrard will want to play every minute he can whilst still in a Liverpool shirt so for him to be 'rested', especially after being injured and then suspended, would mean that he wouldn't be knackered enough to warrant being given a time out. If he's injured, fair play, but if he's not being played for any other reason, I think it's another nail in the Rogers coffin.

comment by (U20209)
posted 46 minutes ago
That's the sort of game Gerrard would have been instrumental in. It was a must win game so you have to play the best players you have at your disposal. Gerrard will want to play every minute he can whilst still in a Liverpool shirt so for him to be 'rested', especially after being injured and then suspended, would mean that he wouldn't be knackered enough to warrant being given a time out. If he's injured, fair play, but if he's not being played for any other reason, I think it's another nail in the Rogers coffin.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree.. it suggests a disagreement. My only problem is that if Gerrard HAD played, based on recent performance, it would have had minimal impact. We were going to lose to Hull whether Gerrard played or not.

I'm not sure about that. Ask any opposing team if they would prefer to play Liverpool with Gerrard in the team or out the team, they will always say out. The prospect of facing Gerrard or Allen is a no brainer. As soon as Hull saw Gerrard was nowhere to be seen, their eyes would have lit up and they would have fancied their chances. Psychology plays a big part too.

comment by (U20209)
posted 1 day ago
I'm not sure about that. Ask any opposing team if they would prefer to play Liverpool with Gerrard in the team or out the team, they will always say out. The prospect of facing Gerrard or Allen is a no brainer. As soon as Hull saw Gerrard was nowhere to be seen, their eyes would have lit up and they would have fancied their chances. Psychology plays a big part too.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, I guess you're right. Chelsea would have been well chuffed that Gerrard played against them last season.