Klopps Liverpool Vs Peps Barcelona

Zlaatan said:
In 2009 Barca had 8 shots on goal, United had 2. Xavi also hit the post on top of that. Even if it wasn't as bad as in 2011 it still wasn't an even game unless you ignore what happened after the first 15min, and I've yet to hear a single United fan, player or manager say otherwise.

Either way, my original point was that I doubt people in here just look at the 2011 CL final when they evaluate that 4-year period for Barca. Otherwise you'd have everyone in here saying that over the past 5 years United has been better than Klopp's Liverpool because we have a superior H2H record against them.
Click to expand...

Obviously they don’t only look at one game, that’s not what I said. Just that the one game is obviously clouding people’s judgement.

It’s true Barca had more shots on target and that they were better on the day but you must have been the only one thinking they were on a different level based on that game and that it was a similar game to the 2011 final. Pep’s Barca happened at a time with next to no challenges, in 2009 they played two very good teams in United and Chelsea but they didn’t look miles above everyone else like they would in the following years when the only properly good team about was a Madrid team that would go on to become a lot better after Pep left.
 
Infordin said:
It should be noted that while United were missing Fletcher, we (Barca) didn't have our strongest XI available either. Abidal and Alves were both missing. We played Puyol at RB, Yaya Toure at CB, and Sylvinho at LB.

The way I see it, is that if Fletcher was available, United might have had a decent chance of winning the game.

If Alves and Abidal were available, then Barca would have beaten any United team ever.
Click to expand...

Didn’t do it to Chelsea in the semis though. And Chelsea finished behind United that year.

Puyol and Yaya played out of position but they’re still Puyol and Yaya... they’re not exactly Anderson or John O’Shea, no disrespect.

The problem with Fletcher not being there was that they played against the best midfield ever with a trio of Carrick, Anderson and Giggs... people talk about Barca’s midfield being a lot better than Liverpool’s but for that final the gap in quality was even bigger imo.
 
Pep's Barca.

Henderson would be all over the place like a plastic bag in the wind trying to get the ball off Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets and Messi. It's easily the most press-resistant team I've ever seen and that's basically Liverpool's bread and butter.
 
Peyroteo said:
Didn’t do it to Chelsea in the semis though. And Chelsea finished behind United that year.

Puyol and Yaya played out of position but they’re still Puyol and Yaya... they’re not exactly Anderson or John O’Shea, no disrespect.

The problem with Fletcher not being there was that they played against the best midfield ever with a trio of Carrick, Anderson and Giggs... people talk about Barca’s midfield being a lot better than Liverpool’s but for that final the gap in quality was even bigger imo.
Click to expand...

I think that Chelsea's playing style was better suited to causing Barcelona problems than Man Utd's. Also while Man Utd did win 7 league games in a row to hold off Liverpool for the league title, and outplayed Arsenal in the CL semi-finals, I think that Chelsea probably ended the 2008/2009 season in slightly better form than them. After Hiddink took charge, they only lost 1 match out of 23 in all competitions with 17 wins, including a 4-1 win away to Arsenal in the Premier League (Arsenal's only league defeat against another top 4 club that season) and a 3-1 win away to an in-form Liverpool in the CL quarter-finals.

A potential Man Utd-Chelsea final in 2009 would have been 50-50 in my opinion, though I'm glad we didn't get one as I generally prefer to watch European finals between teams from different countries and matches that we don't already see during a domestic league campaign. The 2008 final was actually a 50-50 match, probably correctly finishing as a draw after 120 minutes and going to penalties after both teams took it in turns to dominate, and Man Utd probably were playing better overall at the end of the 2007/2008 season compared to the 2008/2009 one.
 
Barcelona is obviously the better team, and possibly the best team ever - but Klopp's Liverpool is well designed to counter them. Doesn't mean we're better (duh), but we'd definitely have a good fighting chance. People are seriously underestimating how good guys like Gini and Hendo are in their roles. With good odds (likely), I'd put a lot of money on us.
 
This matchup will depend on what kind of tactics Klopp uses.

If Liverpool try to attack and press that Barca team, they will get schooled.

If they defend deep and use Mane/Salah’s speed on the counter as a weapon, they stand a decent chance.

Basically, they need to play like Chelsea did, and not like how Man United did.
 
harms said:
Which year was their best year then? They're playing worse this season, despite the results.
Click to expand...

A bit off topic but I think he's referring to the 17/18 season, when we played arguably our most beautiful football under Klopp.
Might be ridiculous but most of us Liverpool fans have a soft spot for that season. Yeah we won feck all at the end, but the way we used to wipe the floor with the opposition in some games... somehow makes it my favorite season under Klopp.
 
Peyroteo said:
Obviously they don’t only look at one game, that’s not what I said. Just that the one game is obviously clouding people’s judgement.

It’s true Barca had more shots on target and that they were better on the day but you must have been the only one thinking they were on a different level based on that game and that it was a similar game to the 2011 final. Pep’s Barca happened at a time with next to no challenges, in 2009 they played two very good teams in United and Chelsea but they didn’t look miles above everyone else like they would in the following years when the only properly good team about was a Madrid team that would go on to become a lot better after Pep left.
Click to expand...

Here are some quotes from the first link I clicked on when doing a simple google search.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/may/27/champions-league-final-barcelona-manchester-united

"The celebrations of the Barcelona players are fairly muted, possibly because victory came so easy to them. They bossed Manchester United from the 10th minute on, pressurising them into repeatedly giving the ball away, while Xavi and Iniesta were allowed to do as they pleased in midfield throughout. Just as Barcelona's players aren't celebrating too raucously or wildly, Manchester United's don't look too gutted, probably because they know they were lucky to escape an even more embarrassing hiding."

Michael Hatcher: "played off park by a team with a makeshift defence."

"Men against boys, as a certain Man Utd defender may have said recently," writes David Junggren.

I don't really want to read stuff like that so I won't search for more, but if I can find that in 20sec then it's pretty obvious that I'm not the only one thinking United were outclassed that night.
 
Last edited:
Pink Moon said:
Pep's Barca.

Henderson would be all over the place like a plastic bag in the wind trying to get the ball off Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets and Messi. It's easily the most press-resistant team I've ever seen and that's basically Liverpool's bread and butter.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'd think Mourinho's 05 team would be a better Prem side to throw against Barca?

This Liverpool side would have been really good against the great Ronaldo united sides I think, though.
 
Pep's barca team was at least a couple of notches above this Liverpool team. Some of the stuff they played was pure gold.

The likes of xavi and Iniesta running the midfield. Surely no one can compare that with what pool have got out there.

Sure, Liverpool have shown amazing consistency, but got sheer quality its not even close
 
You must log in or register to reply here.