Were Liverpool ever this bad?

Yes they were bad for some time. They have won 1 premiership in 30 years, so this tells us something. The best sides win the League ( maybe except for Leicester season).
Klopp's first season they finished 8th but we must give him credit for the improvement they have made since. But for Pep and his City teams, Liverpool would have won more. We can get back to this standard, but the manager must be given the backing.
 
If you are talking about supposed player quality and ability as well as placements in the league, then they've been far worse than we are now.

If you talk about commitment to the cause and competitiveness in one-off games or derby matches, then no, they were never as bad as we are now.

Relativity is vital for a question such as this; and relative to the finances and players pumped into a squad, we are far, far worse because Liverpool had so many players who were laughably bad on paper, let alone over a league campaign that it was to be expected that they wouldn't compete for anything. By contrast, going by names on paper, we are massively underpeforming whilst paying one of the highest wage bills in football, not just the league.

In the 80's we had a greater underdog spirit than Liverpool despite them being top dogs; in the 90's and 00's, their underdogs always gave us, as top dogs, a game; the '10's saw the balance shift, and the '20's are seeing us wilt, or certainly not showing anything like the fire and commitment we had in the 80's.

So, 'bad' by league places and personnel, they were worse, but by any other metric, what we are now is worse than what they were.

If your players are at least willing to put in everything for these games, you can hold your head high, as you've let your rival know you're still a bastard to play against. When your players are wet tissues in these times, the misery is compounded.
 
Eddy_JukeZ said:
Yes we were.

Our 2008 team would give them a very tough game.
Click to expand...
I assumed people would say that but they’ve been up near 100 points a season the last few years, we’ve never reached that sort of consistency over a long period
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
I assumed people would say that but they’ve been up near 100 points a season the last few years, we’ve never reached that sort of consistency over a long period
Click to expand...
Jesus christ is that your metric for quality? feck me.
 
They have had worse teams but I do not recall a Liverpool/ United game that was as easy to call as tonight’s one.
 
Valid question. If you only started watching football in the last year or 2!
 
The two poorest Liverpool teams since the 1970s were the early 90s post-boot-room Souness mess (25 point gap at the end of 92/93) and the Hodgson and Dalglish dinosaur show in the early 10s (37 point gap at the end of 11/12). Those teams were worse than this United side. All of that said, I think this is the clearest example of a very poor side against an absolute top one. In contrast Liverpool were fairly competitive when United were at their prime.
 
Last edited:
Liverpool never went into any game as big an underdog as we are tonight.
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
It’s probably the best metric we have, better than Champions League performances I’d say
Click to expand...
It just isn't because there are so many other factors it doesn't take into account around the quality of the rest of the league etc. When this Liverpool team have won the title three years on the bounce with a Champions League thrown into the mix as well we can talk; that's top level consistency.
 
They were proper pants under Evans....Ruddock, Dicks, Walters, aging Barnes, Sean Dundee, Nigel Clough...woefully bad, but as others have said they always gave their all which is something this current United squad.

Even as badly coached as this squad is, if they gave their all we would comfortably be top four, the fact we are not speaks volumes for the mentality of this team
 
They were horrible in a period where teams like City, Leicester City and Spurs didn't exist with the quality they have shown in the last 10 years.

It was United & Arsenal. Then eventually after Abrahmovic Chelsea joined.

Now there is United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City, Tottenham and Leicester City all fighting for a top 4 place; eventually possibly involving Newcastle United too.
 
They were fecking hilarious under Hodgson and... Sammy Lee? There's that hilarious photo of them that underwent various photoshops. But I don't think they were quite as consistently bad as we have been. Even during the really memeable moments (Crystanbul, Suarez crying, that Gif that just keeps giving), they were still competing for the league.
 
Liverpool have been much worse over the course of a season, and had a few real horrific results.

Against us in isolation, they always performed and played for some pride in the shirt and their fans. Even when they were much much poorer than us as a team. That’s one thing you can’t say with any certainty about us.
 
They were terrible for quite some time, their recruitment was shocking and their overall style was terrible for years. They were just as shite as we are now - only difference is that we have so called world class players that don’t seem to be bothered - they had a lot of dross and the ridiculously overrated Stevie G.

The same punditry shite was being talked about them being so far off Utd and Arsenal in the naughties but the commentary wasn’t so vociferous as now - it’s quite ironic that Souness is on the TV these days when he was responsible for some of their terrible signings and started their complete demise - not enough is said to pull him up on it.

Nowadays unfortunately the commentary is full of highly successful ex Utd players who just compound what state we are in.

Everything is cyclical. Once Kloop goes in a couple of years this cycle for them will erode and fall apart, same for City when Pep goes. Both those clubs have to replace big shoes and it isn’t easy as Utd and Arsenal have seen.

Twats like Carragher and Redknapp will be crowing for a little while longer but we will return and I really look forward to that tide turning again.

We can’t stay this shite for ever….just like they can’t stay this good.
 
They had far worse players / squads than we have now, but they never had a squad that collectively didn't care in the way that ours doesn't currently.

So I would say when you weigh it up, we're worse than they've been at least in my lifetime (1995-)
 
Yes. Houlleir had a good spell with them. Otherwise they were bad mediocre at best. 96 cup final we beat them with a mixture of youngsters and experienced players.

There ownership kept changing there managers did, ring any bells in similar situations as we got. Pick the right direction goes a long way. SAF was utd direction for 26 years.
 
Thiagoal said:
So, heading into tonight’s match I’m wondering- was there a time in Sir Alex’s reign where the gap between us and them was as large? Did they ever rock up to Old Trafford expecting to be beaten by at least 3 clear goals; their fans dreading what was about to be dished up before their eyes?

I always seem remember our matches being tight affairs which could go either way?
Click to expand...

You must clearly have a short memory, they were utterly horrible under Hodgson and Kenny before. The period after Rafa and before Rodgers was horrible for them, don't think we're as bad as they were then.

Regarding games against us, I think we were beating them though not as viciously as they have done to us, but I think that's down more to Klopps tactics versus SAF. Don't think SAF was ever as all out assault as Klopp has been in these games lately.
 
GoldanoGraham said:
They were terrible for quite some time, their recruitment was shocking and their overall style was terrible for years. They were just as shite as we are now - only difference is that we have so called world class players that don’t seem to be bothered - they had a lot of dross and the ridiculously overrated Stevie G.

The same punditry shite was being talked about them being so far off Utd and Arsenal in the naughties but the commentary wasn’t so vociferous as now - it’s quite ironic that Souness is on the TV these days when he was responsible for some of their terrible signings and started their complete demise - not enough is said to pull him up on it.

Nowadays unfortunately the commentary is full of highly successful ex Utd players who just compound what state we are in.

Everything is cyclical. Once Kloop goes in a couple of years this cycle for them will erode and fall apart, same for City when Pep goes. Both those clubs have to replace big shoes and it isn’t easy as Utd and Arsenal have seen.

Twats like Carragher and Redknapp will be crowing for a little while longer but we will return and I really look forward to that tide turning again.

We can’t stay this shite for ever….just like they can’t stay this good.
Click to expand...
Agree spot on about Souness.
 
They were worse - but they never had a budget like this.

United's poor spending is criminal. The sheer waste of resource would put any other organisation out of business.
 
No, not really, they always turned up for the United game and fought all the way. I can remember decent wins against Liverpool and lucky ones, but don't ever remember giving them the run around like the did us in the 0-5 result.

All I want from our lads tonight is to put up a fight, finish the match with their socks around their ankles, having lost 3-5 lbs in weight due to the effort... and to see Phil Jones in the mix somewhere, scare the shit out of Liverpool, our players have nothing to lose their players have everything to lose, they need to be looking over their shoulders all night long.... :devil:
 
kthanksbye said:
Quality wise, yes they've been worse, but commitment wise, never. Even at their worse, they've always managed to give us a game, played it like it's their cup final.
They've never had a half arsed half like we've done against City and them.
Click to expand...
Pretty much this. Regardless to results, I don't remember a worse united team in terms of character. Liverpool just didn't have enough quality, but they always worked hard and were always difficult to play against. This United squad is just shameful.
 
JB7 said:
It just isn't because there are so many other factors it doesn't take into account around the quality of the rest of the league etc. When this Liverpool team have won the title three years on the bounce with a Champions League thrown into the mix as well we can talk; that's top level consistency.
Click to expand...
The league right now is objectively the strongest it’s ever been so I don’t see how that’s something in the favour of our old teams.
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
I assumed people would say that but they’ve been up near 100 points a season the last few years, we’ve never reached that sort of consistency over a long period
Click to expand...
How about winning the league 3 times in a row twice, I'd call that a consistency. You dont get extra points or a title for 100 points.
 
Thiagoal said:
So, heading into tonight’s match I’m wondering- was there a time in Sir Alex’s reign where the gap between us and them was as large? Did they ever rock up to Old Trafford expecting to be beaten by at least 3 clear goals; their fans dreading what was about to be dished up before their eyes?

I always seem remember our matches being tight affairs which could go either way?
Click to expand...

They had times when they struggled to make Europe just likecwe are doing. But they always stepped up in games against us and worked their ass off. They were professional enough to understand the importance of the game to their fans.
 
Liverpool were seriously bad in the mid 90s. I think the difference between us and any of their poor squads is the fact that morale seems to be so much lower in this current united squad. I would love it if we could raise our game tonight and get something at
anfield
 
Generally, yeah they were absolutely dogshite.

But where we probably trump them is you would always expect them to raise their game to the occasion of playing us, I simply don't think we have it in us to compete with them over 90 minutes. They also always looked to have a trophy in them. We would never win the CL with a squad similar to their 05 team, and they even managed to pick up a League Cup under Kenny in 2012.
 
Yeah they were.

From when Sourness took over and left to Evans they were a fecking awful team and regularly made rubbish signings and were even worse under the combined Houllier / Evans situation. Even though they were still regularly around the top 3 or 4, they were still fairly rubbish.

Houllier on his own and Rafa did decent jobs, they were a good enough team and competed well in Europe.

Then from Rafa's last season they were pretty crap. Mostly because he had a brain fart decided to get rid of Alonso. What a fecking idiot. That kicked off a few years of utter shite football. Starting of course with Roy Hodgson and the second coming of King Kenny. They were really shite from Rafa's last season until Rodgers took them to second, then they went to shite again until Klopp sorted it all out.
 
https://www.transfermarkt.com/fc-liverpool/platzierungen/verein/31

There was a 7 year period there between 09/10 and 15/16 where they got top4 once, and as low as 8th twice.

Liverpool have been absolutely as bad as this version of Manchester United both during Sir Alex and after Sir Alex.

There is no need to rewrite history to further trample the team down. Liverpool have some results in the bag as well, including a 7-2 clobbering against Aston Villa in 2020.
 
JB7 said:
It "objectively" isn't. Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I’m sure the league was much stronger in the days where the smaller clubs couldn’t afford to hold onto any half decent player. The league has apparently grown weaker in the era were massive TV deals mean clubs who once relied on selling their best assets can splash the cash. That makes perfect sense.
 
Tavern in the town said:
Yeah, I’m sure the league was much stronger in the days where the smaller clubs couldn’t afford to hold onto any half decent player. The league has apparently grown weaker in the era were massive TV deals mean clubs who once relied on selling their best assets can splash the cash. That makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...
How old are you?
 
Their mid to late nineties run isn’t too dissimilar to what we’re going through right now.

Despite having Fowler, Owen and McManaman, they were incredibly flaky in terms of consistency. They had an exciting front line but behind that was a bunch of averageness…consisting of bad big buys like Phil Babb and youth players like Dominic Matteo and Steve Harkness, who were given way too many chances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.