I’ve never heard a manager complaining about an injury “crisis” when it’s the opposition that is dropping like flies. It’s United that should be talking about a crisis for feck sake.
Excusergen Klopp
Seriously, did that happen? Doesn't surprise me that he'd give no credit to us but … really? I missed Post Match as my "cough" mode of viewing switched immediately to the EPL final.Had no courage to go for 3 points even after our injury crisis, considering we had Matic and Martial out before even a ball was kicked it was unbelievably negative approach to the game.
Not that it'll be called out in the media, you have Souness claiming it was a footballing masterclass and a massive statement from Liverpool.
Pragmatic yes, but negative no. He subbed a DM for an AM to be a bit more positive.Had no courage to go for 3 points even after our injury crisis, considering we had Matic and Martial out before even a ball was kicked it was unbelievably negative approach to the game.
Not that it'll be called out in the media, you have Souness claiming it was a footballing masterclass and a massive statement from Liverpool.
Seriously, did that happen? Doesn't surprise me that he'd give no credit to us but … really? I missed Post Match as my "cough" mode of viewing switched immediately to the EPL final.
Pragmatic yes, but negative no. He subbed a DM for an AM to be a bit more positive.
With that said he clearly respected United's quality and the attacking players were a bit more isolated.
You make one excuse, we'll make two!Gegenexcuses.
CheersHe did, I'd recommend you to watch post-match 'analysis' but its pointless at this stage. Scouse delusion is reaching unprecedented levels.
Can you hear people raising an eyebrow?I’ve heard a few people start to raise an eyebrow to it now.
Have a bit of Old Trafford salad, ye gobshite.
I don't understand what your trying to say. Refusing to press the opposing CBs so you won't get caught on the counter is a clear example of pragmatism. Also subbing a defensive midfielder for an attacking one proves he wasn't negative (as you claimed) and more positive if anything (as I claimed).That was him not being pragmatic, we played without a proper DM and there was space to be exploited in middle. Liverpool refused to press our CBs at all in the fear of being caught out on counter. Nothing in their strategy changed after we had to change our entire midfield and 2/3rd attack was out injured/playing injured.
I expected them to push us in 2nd half and it was same old shite of keeping ball and pumping in long balls into channel. We had the chances to win it, make no mistake they were lucky to get away with 1 point. Their performance against this crippled United side warranted nothing.
What an insightful man
What an insightful man
What an insightful man
I don't remember that, but he clearly does this against us. Saying after the game what a shit game, but the fact is he is a big shit talker of the highest level, so he should thank himself but he will rather complain about us having 3 injuries in a half . Weirdo.I remember Jose accusing him of this. Their first game here was it?
"Their injuries cost us our rhythm"
Yeah sorry pal. That really upset your team didn't it.
Imagine it happening to your team!
I don't understand what your trying to say. Refusing to press the opposing CBs so you won't get caught on the counter is a clear example of pragmatism. Also subbing a defensive midfielder for an attacking one proves he wasn't negative (as you claimed) and more positive if anything (as I claimed).
What an insightful man
To be fair, I understand Klopp. He didn't say it in a negative way, it was just the truth. There were so many stoppages in the first half because of injuries (4 subs and the game got stopped for another couple of times), which made impossible for any team to play well, or as Klopp said, to get in the rhythm.
Second half is an another matter though.
Bolloc*s-he is fluent in itI mean what language is he even speaking there?
I still don't understand what you are arguing.Rashford was injured 10 mins into the match and we had Lukaku and Mata on counter, hardly speed demons. Pragmatism makes sense when opposition are in great form and lethal on break. We were without our 2 best counter attackers in Martial/Lingard while Rashford wasn't fit. Not to mention we weren't moving the ball in midfield with same speed without Matic and Herrera. He was overly negative at the start, and failed to capitalize when injuries hit us which by the way completely ruined any tactical work or planning we had done in the midweek.
Also, he only brought on Shaqiri in final 15 minutes. If he was willing to risk it, that substitution would've happened much earlier. You can dress it however you want, 1 shot on target in 90 minutes speak volumes of the 'attacking' Liverpool did today.
Bolloc*s-he is fluent in it
Jurgen, is that you?I still don't understand what you are arguing.
Liverpool were not negative (as you claimed). Their fullbacks still bombed forward and they still had a lionshare of possession. Regardless, they clearly respected Ole's squad and didn't throw the kitchen sink at United as they would with other teams. This is pragmatism plain and simple.
Let's also not forget Firmino (their most important attacking player IMO) went off injured and they are away to a rival who is in good form. That's like saying City was negative at Anfield or even Ole was negative this match. Mourinho's tactics were the definition of negative football (fullbacks not pushing forward, no pressing, etc) today's match was not.