comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 34 minutes ago
Hincape looked decent didnt he, could be an option if we're wanting a versatile lcb? im a fan of the gomes lad in midfield for wolves too, think we were linked with him a lot before he went to wolves for 18m too. Small but combative, bit like mac10.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought he was poor, in fact I thought the 4-0 was more to do with how poor they were than how good we were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Felt he looks promising for 22? few unlucky moments when blocking and maybe some inexperience clearing his lines. And being the too deep as the last man i think he kept gakpo onside for example but was impressed overall. Dealt with Salah well at times as part of a back 3 was comfortable coming out covering and defending wide.

Toor was unhappy with tsimikas too i felt he looked comfortable, the handball moment was lucky but outside of that felt he defended well.

I thought Tsimikas was awful first half, nearly caused an issue everytime the ball came down his side with poor defending or position. A bit better second half.

Hincapie wasn't much better. Salah made a fool out of him the whole game.

Tsimikas was great second half.

He's much better when we're on the front foot as he does have a good cross in him. He's a decent back up in general but a worry if we're starting him regularly, for me. I certainly wouldn't be against a better replacement for him.

I thought the whole Leverkusen defence was poor, at least in the second half, there were so many times they lost their structure and had no line

comment by Loco Liverpool (U18018)
posted 5 minutes ago
I thought the whole Leverkusen defence was poor, at least in the second half, there were so many times they lost their structure and had no line
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah that's why I said Leverkusen being poor was more to do with the scoreline than how good Liverpool were. I thought they were defensively awful second half. Even going forward they had no real ideas, basically just hitting shots from distance but it was defensively which surprised me.

I think poor is probably a little harsh on BL. We just produced three moments of absolute quality (Jones' ball, Diaz finish and Salah cross) in 2 mins.

They looked shell-shocked after that and then when they recovered and started to push forward again themselves, we picked them off on the break.

comment by Szoboss (U6997)
posted 30 minutes ago
I think poor is probably a little harsh on BL. We just produced three moments of absolute quality (Jones' ball, Diaz finish and Salah cross) in 2 mins.

They looked shell-shocked after that and then when they recovered and started to push forward again themselves, we picked them off on the break.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously Liverpool had a lot to do with it but apart from the first goal, when they'd been decent up to that point, every goal was defensively poor. It's like the fell apart when they realised their tactic of keeping it tight had been undone when the goal went in.

I said this before the game and it seemed to work out that way, I thought Alonso would afford us too much respect and that would play into our hands.

They kept the ball well whilst not being too threatening, which was odd as they were finding huge pockets of space to hurt us from in the beginning. I dont think they were poor defensively at all and it took a wonderful pass and finish to open the scoring. They fell apart a bit after that tbf.

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 58 minutes ago
They kept the ball well whilst not being too threatening, which was odd as they were finding huge pockets of space to hurt us from in the beginning. I dont think they were poor defensively at all and it took a wonderful pass and finish to open the scoring. They fell apart a bit after that tbf.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You don't think they were poor defensively? Three out of the four goals was awful defending. Somehow they had seven players back for the second and still Salah was unmarked before he put the cross in and Gakpo was left with a free header. The third and fourth were basically ping pong with Diaz being free both times, once in-between two players to put into the net unchallenged, yet they had loads of players back.

they fell apart after the first yh but that came 2/3rds into the game so not overall not. the 2nd came moment after conceding and the last 2 very late in the game tired and going for it?

Another Gyokores article

Does anyone think we are deliberately taking it easy in first halves, letting the opposition do all the running and keeping it tight, and then go for it in the second half when they have tired a bit? Might just be a coincidence but it does seem a bit of a pattern. If it is intentional, it's working well but could backfire.

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 3 minutes ago
they fell apart after the first yh but that came 2/3rds into the game so not overall not. the 2nd came moment after conceding and the last 2 very late in the game tired and going for it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes I agree. First half they were compact but for much of the second half they were poor defensively and not much better going forward. Listening to Xabi's post match interview they set up to make it difficult for Liverpool to know who to press so he obviously done his homework on Liverpool's pressing which is why we saw strange things like Diaz and Gakpo ending up both on the left and Jones up top, in the first half. Second half the Liverpool players had this sussed and their defence crumbled when put under pressure.

comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 7 minutes ago
Does anyone think we are deliberately taking it easy in first halves, letting the opposition do all the running and keeping it tight, and then go for it in the second half when they have tired a bit? Might just be a coincidence but it does seem a bit of a pattern. If it is intentional, it's working well but could backfire.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whats not making it easy to gauge is that we saw it a lot under Klopp too, famous for going behind in games and poor starts in the end with him? Similar vibes starting games for sure, which points to a player issue?

Villa lose in Brugge

Theres dropping off and taking it easier but doesnt excuse the poor possession does it? felt we were well off it as we have done a lot of 1st 45s under Slot when it comes to ball retention and control.

comment by Keep It Greasy - Music is the BEST (U1396)
posted 2 minutes ago
Villa lose in Brugge
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do people see this as a positive or negative for us? In general? I'd say im more cautious when a decent sides in poor form or rather after a bad defear, always feel theyre hurting and wanting to take it out on someone. I assume many are the opposite and see it as the best time to face them, low on morale or w.e.

Its nice for once we have an extra day rest and prep though for the game on saturday. Surprised its been put sat as its a disadvantage for Villa and not us. BT are just gutted we wasnt playing at h ome wed and villa tues, bet they were itching for it to be their 12.30

It's a positive to me, well certainly in terms of results, although a negative in terms of entertainment. We aren't shooting right out of the traps like we used to but playing a controlled game. This allows Slot to look at it and make tweaks based on how the game has played out, which has worked excellently thus far.

Of course if we were losing games then it wouldn't be a positive as we haven't controlled the game and haven't been able to react to what's happening on the pitch. When we're winning there's obviously no way this can be seen as a negative.

Ah misunderstood

Thought you were asking if the first half tactics were a positive when they then get tweaked at half time.

comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Keep It Greasy - Music is the BEST (U1396)
posted 2 minutes ago
Villa lose in Brugge
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do people see this as a positive or negative for us? In general? I'd say im more cautious when a decent sides in poor form or rather after a bad defear, always feel theyre hurting and wanting to take it out on someone. I assume many are the opposite and see it as the best time to face them, low on morale or w.e.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I'd say it's more a positive. If a team is in good form and lose a game unexpectedly then you'd expect a backlash, but Villa have now lost their last three and so may be a good time to face them.

Saturday has got a 0-1 Villa win written all over it. Emery loves a big game tactical battle.

less time to prep for us, theyve been poor after midweek europe games esp away. Were awful in the 3 games ive seen them this season. Utd Arsenal Spurs i think it was? But yeah have to be on it as theyre decent and more than capable under Unai.

comment by Mo Salahhhhh 7-0 Egyptian King 👑 (U8829)
posted 16 minutes ago
Saturday has got a 0-1 Villa win written all over it. Emery loves a big game tactical battle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No chance