small-time would be claiming a league win is legitimate in a year with a seismic shift the nature of a pandemic that killed millions
Jurgen Klopp Sack Watch
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
small-time would be claiming a league win is legitimate in a year with a seismic shift the nature of a pandemic that killed millions
I mean, 1 point is definitely closer than we were but we’d also have 2 more. None of our managers sadly did anything in the CL though.
It was legitimate. They were absolutely walking it.
Twice. Where was he the other times through this so called pep klopp rivalry
You do get the other end of the spectrum as well though (as evident on this page) with people seemingly arguing in all seriousness that even the title he did win isn't legitimate.
Ultimately, he's Liverpool's best manager of the PL era by some distance, and has guided them to success during his time there that we're basically dreaming of at this point. However, the fanfare surrounding Liverpool sees him sometimes placed alongside the greatest ever managers, which given his record, is obviously bollocks.
Watford had just burst your bubble and you were clearly running on fumes. City are a different beast in the final months of the season.
Also you're missing the main point. The pandemic was brewing for several months before the league was stopped. It gave you the incentive to keep going after a flying start because everyone knew the league could be off at any moment. So for months you didn't have to overthink it because every game could've been the last. That gave you 10+ cheap wins between December-March simply because of the looming pandemic. Likewise that was demotivating for City and they dropped points they never would've in a regular season. I mean we were crap for most of the season yet still found a way to do the double over them. That never happens in a normal season.
You lucked out with the fact that the world decided to shut down the one year you had a rapid start. Everything that happened from December onwards was a farce and you simply took full advantage of it (fair play for doing that). But it's really beyond delusion to think that you could have a 22 point lead on City (not 25 as you conveniently left out their game in hand) under normal circumstances. Pep has finished ahead of you in all other seasons yet we're supposed to believe he was 22 points worse than you in that one covid riddled year. Right. Makes total sense.
In a completely normal season you would've at best been 5 points ahead of them with 10 games to go and you would've bottled it like you have in every non-covid year.
Ding ding ding
Yes very likely. The break came at just the right time.
It certainly is but I would never dream of winding up one of our Liverpool supporting friends on here.
Astonishingly ridiculous post.
You know what, just for a laugh can you explain how football was a farce from December through to when the shutdown actually started in March? How did Covid impact the following results:
Man City 2-2 Spurs
Norwich 3-2 City
City 0-2 Wolves
Liverpool 3-1 City
Newcastle 2-2 City
City 1-2 United
Wolves 3-2 City
Those are all points dropped by City in the first 19 games of the season. During that same period Liverpool won 18 and drew 1. How did Covid impact those results, or Liverpool's for that matter? Liverpool were on 55 points, City were on 38 I believe. That's a gap of 17 points. City also drew at home to Palace in January 2020, and lost 2-0 away at Spurs February 1st 2020.
The lengths some of you will go to downplay anything Liverpool do is embarrassing. I get that there's a rivalry but try to maintain some sense of logic at least.
But when you think about it people are always walking right before they fall.
Three times, including this season. Won one, narrowly lost three times. This is closer than anyone else managed to run them.
You can say the same about SAF and Wenger. The total number of titles are not comparable, but for a while, it was close.
Yep before the Covid shutdown they were 25 points clear of 2nd placed City with 9 games left, who for it’s worth had a game in hand. City’s last game before the shutdown was the 2-0 defeat at Old Trafford with Utd securing a first league double over them for 10 years.
So Liverpool needed 6 points from their final 9 games to wrap up the title. And as it turned out, even if they lost all 9 of those games, City finished with fewer points at the end of the season (81), than Liverpool had before the shutdown (82).
However the fact they won the title without being able to celebrate it properly, and fans in the stadium when it was confirmed or for a while afterwards etc., is at least a comfort to those of us who dislike Liverpool.
And their recent run of results with the ‘Magic of the Kop’ not helping them, has been very enjoyable !
If you insist on feeding the trolls you have only yourself to blame.
Be glad to see the back of him but now City will have it easier. No one could get close to city apart from Klopp. He’s the 1 manager that can go head to head with Guardiola.
Not wrong though is he/she? Saying their title win should come with an asterisk or worse, shouldn't count, is extremely childish.
There’s no way reasonable fans actually believe that Liverpool wouldn’t have won the league anyway without covid. They are just trolling - quite successfully it seems.
Without the covid pause and the games in empty stadiums, they'd have well over 100 pts. Thank feck for that break.
If Liverpool don’t win the title this season (like the rest of you I hope they don’t), they’ll have won one league title in 34 years, having only been in serious title contention during 8 of those 34 years (4 times pre-Klopp and 4 times under Klopp). And they’ll have won the same no. of league titles during that period as Blackburn and Leicester, despite being clearly the second biggest club in the country, despite having a higher net and gross spend on transfer fees than Utd during Fergie’s reign etc.
We can laugh at them for that, without needing to try to downplay their absolutely legitimate 2019/2020 title win.
We can laugh at them for that, without needing to try to downplay their absolutely legitimate 2019/2020 title win.
Last edited:
I’d say it’s hard to argue he’s not among the best of the last 10-15 years or so. I’m not sure anyone but Pool fans would put him in the greats of all time.
This has to be your worst WUM post in a while, and that's saying something going by your usual standards. "From December onwards" gave me a good laugh though, not gonnal lie
Managers? He's top 5 all-time in the PL. Pep, Wenger, SAF above him, and he's competing with Mourinho for #4 (who should be above Klopp based on his Chelsea stint but should be ducked points for his Spurs and Utd period imo).
So depends on how narrowly you wanna define the "greatest of all-time" debate - he doesn't have a claim to be top 3 or anything like that, that's for sure yeah.
Ranieri is well above Klopp for winning the PL without any debate as to the legitimacy of the win.
Yeah sure
Couldn't win anything with a Chelsea side that Mourinho turned almost unbeatable right after. Got sacked by Leicester midway through the season because they were one place above the relegation zone. The less said about his Watford period the better I guess.
Top 5 all-time for one season!
Sam Allardyce is well above Klopp for managing a much larger variety of Premier League clubs and saving many of them from relegation. Not once has Klopp actively been the difference between relegation and staying up.
You could argue he’s done that 9 times?
Nah, Liverpool would never have been relegated with a lesser manager. Klopp hasn't saved clubs from the abyss like Big Sam Allardyce has done numerous times.
you sound just like one of them.
SAF
Pep & Wenger & Mou
Klopp, Dalglish, Mancini, Pellegrini
is how'd they'd look if it was tiered.
Pep & Wenger & Mou
Klopp, Dalglish, Mancini, Pellegrini
is how'd they'd look if it was tiered.
Delivered sans sputum
You can’t take away from mourhino just because he stayed in the league instead of pissing off when at good too hard to maintain motivation
Of course I can, his demise at both of his clubs after Chelsea was painful to watch and does take away from his overall accomplishments in England. Just like his status would've been further elevated if he had gone on to win the Premier League with either one of those teams.
In a hypothetical scenario where Klopp would come back in a few years to manage Spurs and he would do with them what Mourinho did, and nothing else, it would take away from his status as a manager in the PL.
You can dress it up any way you like but there will always be an asterisk next to that Liverpool title win.
What's there to argue/discuss here?
SAF top of the list and head and shoulders above everyone.
Wenger and Mou.
Pep - helped by many unmentionables (no need to elaborate)
SAF top of the list and head and shoulders above everyone.
Wenger and Mou.
Pep - helped by many unmentionables (no need to elaborate)
Yes easily, not sure if you read my post but you seem to be agreeing with me.
I'd not even have Pep on the list until we know the extent of what they've done. If even half of what they are accused of is proven, he's down with De Boer.
I wouldn't dock managers 'points' for other stints. Mou managed to get Spurs to a final and then wasn't allowed to coach it and there are so many variables in football it just seems a bit harsh. For example if Klopp won you 5 PL's in a row but then moved to Bouremouth for unknown family reasons and floundered around the bottom of the league/Championship for 10 years, it wouldn't make his achievements lesser.
Why bother with this though? It's something you can't prove. It just makes you look like a jealous, bitter little child.
Liverpool won the league. Get over it.
Exactly. That’s the entire function of the asterisk.
Proper mayhem in here.
Considering that Liverpool compare every incoming signing to the best players the world has ever seen, it could be argued that he's massively underachieved and should have won the treble every season