ti vu
Full Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2015
- Messages
- 12,799
I don't disagree that you open up would give us the chance. The point is there was a notion that L'pool gave everything to win. In reality you didn't take that extra risk. What you said exactly explained the pragmatism in Klopp thinking, that's also what Mourinho implied.Well it's obvious that tactics and changes for Burnley won't be the same as playing against United. Against Burnley you can throw everything at them because the likelihood of them hitting you on the break is less (due to the lack of quality).
I find it hard to buy into the idea that switching from a midfield three to a two (adding another striker) would've improved our chances of winning it, because I think that it would've strengthened United's position and weakened ours.
I'm not working under the assumption that we would've scored with a midfield three, but I don't think throwing another attacking player on for a midfielder would've helped in that game.
And as I explained in previous post, given L'pool's scoring form and the quality downgrading subs Klopp made, Klopp gave up the idea to go for the kill in the end since even at your best in the game you couldn't score. You didn't increase the chance to win , instead you went and decreased that chance.
Edit: I meant looking at it this way. Klopp style is proclaiming to give everything regardless opposition. Mourinho didn't deny that his style is to adapt to opposition. What Mourinho implied is that Klopp didn't give everything like he proclaimed, so Mourinho being Mourinho can only adapt so much to Klopp's version of pragtacism