Having Googled tactical analysis of the game, everywhere suggests Liverpool conceded possession in the second half and played on the counter packing the middle and forcing them wide and they struggled to create chances. Some suggesting we were too cautious and then by bringing on a defender for a midfielder we conceded the midfield which made it very difficult but still managed to limit them to long range shots and crosses. Of course on 80 minutes they scored from a long range chance and that changed everything.
Ultimately the tactic would have worked but for the offside penalty.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
Or, they had more possession because we didn't keep the ball which ultimately led to us being forced deeper and deeper. It comes back to why would we change tactics at half time when we had been the better team for 45 minutes. If it was the last 15 i could understand. At no point before or after have we employed these tactics so early in a game. Spurs came out and changed things leading to them getting a grip of the game and we couldn't adjust. If it had been the other way around I reckon you would have said it was down to us being better as opposed to spurs dropping off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably because we wanted to hold onto the lead and felt they would have to go for it and therefore leave space, so we conceded possession to hold the lead and hoped to hit them on the counter. We didn't do the latter part well enough so conceded the midfield and brought on a defender for the last 20 minutes, to hold on.
This is what I noticed during the game and what the websites are saying happened, some complaining that Klopp was too cautious in the second half.
I'm not sure why this seems strange to you. Because one team has the ball doesn't mean the other team have been played off the park by the better team on the day. Football can be a tactical game and many saw the game as allowing Spurs to have the ball, limiting them to long shots and crosses and Spurs not creating anything with it but the one save from Karius when he had to rush off his line. The tactic got thrown in the air when they actually scored with a long range shot, late on.
Bloody Hell, TOOR. I've never seen somebody so in denial about something so trivial.
comment by Edbo (U17933)
posted 17 minutes ago
Bloody Hell, TOOR. I've never seen somebody so in denial about something so trivial.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not in denial, everybody who analysed the game stated exactly what I had thought after watching the game. You're in denial, as you felt you dominated the game, just because you had possession. Football doesn't work like that, which is why teams don't always win with the majority of possession.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
Or, they had more possession because we didn't keep the ball which ultimately led to us being forced deeper and deeper. It comes back to why would we change tactics at half time when we had been the better team for 45 minutes. If it was the last 15 i could understand. At no point before or after have we employed these tactics so early in a game. Spurs came out and changed things leading to them getting a grip of the game and we couldn't adjust. If it had been the other way around I reckon you would have said it was down to us being better as opposed to spurs dropping off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably because we wanted to hold onto the lead and felt they would have to go for it and therefore leave space, so we conceded possession to hold the lead and hoped to hit them on the counter. We didn't do the latter part well enough so conceded the midfield and brought on a defender for the last 20 minutes, to hold on.
This is what I noticed during the game and what the websites are saying happened, some complaining that Klopp was too cautious in the second half.
I'm not sure why this seems strange to you. Because one team has the ball doesn't mean the other team have been played off the park by the better team on the day. Football can be a tactical game and many saw the game as allowing Spurs to have the ball, limiting them to long shots and crosses and Spurs not creating anything with it but the one save from Karius when he had to rush off his line. The tactic got thrown in the air when they actually scored with a long range shot, late on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never said we got played off the park. I am saying that I don't believe that for that one game only, at home, Klopp sent us out to sit back and defend, considering how suspect we were at the back, his management style and how decent Spurs are/were going forward. If it was something that happened a few times, then I could see some tangible evidence that maybe Klopp did think like that. All I saw was Spurs keep that ball far better, us lose it far too easily, and then us drop further and further back due to not being able to keep the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't believe we did that for that one game either. We've done it in other games also. Gradually throughout Klopp's time at the club we've got more defensive, especially when holding on to the lead. That doesn't mean we've become defensive, we've just become better at managing games which is something Klopp has spoken about regularly.
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 54 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
Or, they had more possession because we didn't keep the ball which ultimately led to us being forced deeper and deeper. It comes back to why would we change tactics at half time when we had been the better team for 45 minutes. If it was the last 15 i could understand. At no point before or after have we employed these tactics so early in a game. Spurs came out and changed things leading to them getting a grip of the game and we couldn't adjust. If it had been the other way around I reckon you would have said it was down to us being better as opposed to spurs dropping off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably because we wanted to hold onto the lead and felt they would have to go for it and therefore leave space, so we conceded possession to hold the lead and hoped to hit them on the counter. We didn't do the latter part well enough so conceded the midfield and brought on a defender for the last 20 minutes, to hold on.
This is what I noticed during the game and what the websites are saying happened, some complaining that Klopp was too cautious in the second half.
I'm not sure why this seems strange to you. Because one team has the ball doesn't mean the other team have been played off the park by the better team on the day. Football can be a tactical game and many saw the game as allowing Spurs to have the ball, limiting them to long shots and crosses and Spurs not creating anything with it but the one save from Karius when he had to rush off his line. The tactic got thrown in the air when they actually scored with a long range shot, late on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never said we got played off the park. I am saying that I don't believe that for that one game only, at home, Klopp sent us out to sit back and defend, considering how suspect we were at the back, his management style and how decent Spurs are/were going forward. If it was something that happened a few times, then I could see some tangible evidence that maybe Klopp did think like that. All I saw was Spurs keep that ball far better, us lose it far too easily, and then us drop further and further back due to not being able to keep the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well you did say Spurs were ‘by far the better team’ 8’ that game, and that’s simply not true.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Michael Edwards FC {Proud owner of the 5 000 000th comment} (U2720)
posted 5 days, 21 hours ago
Routine 1-0 win with a howler from Lloris to gift us the goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who wants the lotto numbers?
comment by Michael Edwards FC {Proud owner of the 5 000 0... (U2720)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Michael Edwards FC {Proud owner of the 5 000 000th comment} (U2720)
posted 5 days, 21 hours ago
Routine 1-0 win with a howler from Lloris to gift us the goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who wants the lotto numbers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll take half of them as you got the score wrong. The correct half please.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Sign in if you want to comment
Spurs innit
Page 4 of 4
posted on 27/3/19
Having Googled tactical analysis of the game, everywhere suggests Liverpool conceded possession in the second half and played on the counter packing the middle and forcing them wide and they struggled to create chances. Some suggesting we were too cautious and then by bringing on a defender for a midfielder we conceded the midfield which made it very difficult but still managed to limit them to long range shots and crosses. Of course on 80 minutes they scored from a long range chance and that changed everything.
Ultimately the tactic would have worked but for the offside penalty.
posted on 27/3/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 27/3/19
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
Or, they had more possession because we didn't keep the ball which ultimately led to us being forced deeper and deeper. It comes back to why would we change tactics at half time when we had been the better team for 45 minutes. If it was the last 15 i could understand. At no point before or after have we employed these tactics so early in a game. Spurs came out and changed things leading to them getting a grip of the game and we couldn't adjust. If it had been the other way around I reckon you would have said it was down to us being better as opposed to spurs dropping off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably because we wanted to hold onto the lead and felt they would have to go for it and therefore leave space, so we conceded possession to hold the lead and hoped to hit them on the counter. We didn't do the latter part well enough so conceded the midfield and brought on a defender for the last 20 minutes, to hold on.
This is what I noticed during the game and what the websites are saying happened, some complaining that Klopp was too cautious in the second half.
I'm not sure why this seems strange to you. Because one team has the ball doesn't mean the other team have been played off the park by the better team on the day. Football can be a tactical game and many saw the game as allowing Spurs to have the ball, limiting them to long shots and crosses and Spurs not creating anything with it but the one save from Karius when he had to rush off his line. The tactic got thrown in the air when they actually scored with a long range shot, late on.
posted on 27/3/19
Bloody Hell, TOOR. I've never seen somebody so in denial about something so trivial.
posted on 27/3/19
comment by Edbo (U17933)
posted 17 minutes ago
Bloody Hell, TOOR. I've never seen somebody so in denial about something so trivial.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not in denial, everybody who analysed the game stated exactly what I had thought after watching the game. You're in denial, as you felt you dominated the game, just because you had possession. Football doesn't work like that, which is why teams don't always win with the majority of possession.
posted on 27/3/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 27/3/19
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
Or, they had more possession because we didn't keep the ball which ultimately led to us being forced deeper and deeper. It comes back to why would we change tactics at half time when we had been the better team for 45 minutes. If it was the last 15 i could understand. At no point before or after have we employed these tactics so early in a game. Spurs came out and changed things leading to them getting a grip of the game and we couldn't adjust. If it had been the other way around I reckon you would have said it was down to us being better as opposed to spurs dropping off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably because we wanted to hold onto the lead and felt they would have to go for it and therefore leave space, so we conceded possession to hold the lead and hoped to hit them on the counter. We didn't do the latter part well enough so conceded the midfield and brought on a defender for the last 20 minutes, to hold on.
This is what I noticed during the game and what the websites are saying happened, some complaining that Klopp was too cautious in the second half.
I'm not sure why this seems strange to you. Because one team has the ball doesn't mean the other team have been played off the park by the better team on the day. Football can be a tactical game and many saw the game as allowing Spurs to have the ball, limiting them to long shots and crosses and Spurs not creating anything with it but the one save from Karius when he had to rush off his line. The tactic got thrown in the air when they actually scored with a long range shot, late on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never said we got played off the park. I am saying that I don't believe that for that one game only, at home, Klopp sent us out to sit back and defend, considering how suspect we were at the back, his management style and how decent Spurs are/were going forward. If it was something that happened a few times, then I could see some tangible evidence that maybe Klopp did think like that. All I saw was Spurs keep that ball far better, us lose it far too easily, and then us drop further and further back due to not being able to keep the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't believe we did that for that one game either. We've done it in other games also. Gradually throughout Klopp's time at the club we've got more defensive, especially when holding on to the lead. That doesn't mean we've become defensive, we've just become better at managing games which is something Klopp has spoken about regularly.
posted on 27/3/19
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 54 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
Or, they had more possession because we didn't keep the ball which ultimately led to us being forced deeper and deeper. It comes back to why would we change tactics at half time when we had been the better team for 45 minutes. If it was the last 15 i could understand. At no point before or after have we employed these tactics so early in a game. Spurs came out and changed things leading to them getting a grip of the game and we couldn't adjust. If it had been the other way around I reckon you would have said it was down to us being better as opposed to spurs dropping off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably because we wanted to hold onto the lead and felt they would have to go for it and therefore leave space, so we conceded possession to hold the lead and hoped to hit them on the counter. We didn't do the latter part well enough so conceded the midfield and brought on a defender for the last 20 minutes, to hold on.
This is what I noticed during the game and what the websites are saying happened, some complaining that Klopp was too cautious in the second half.
I'm not sure why this seems strange to you. Because one team has the ball doesn't mean the other team have been played off the park by the better team on the day. Football can be a tactical game and many saw the game as allowing Spurs to have the ball, limiting them to long shots and crosses and Spurs not creating anything with it but the one save from Karius when he had to rush off his line. The tactic got thrown in the air when they actually scored with a long range shot, late on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never said we got played off the park. I am saying that I don't believe that for that one game only, at home, Klopp sent us out to sit back and defend, considering how suspect we were at the back, his management style and how decent Spurs are/were going forward. If it was something that happened a few times, then I could see some tangible evidence that maybe Klopp did think like that. All I saw was Spurs keep that ball far better, us lose it far too easily, and then us drop further and further back due to not being able to keep the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well you did say Spurs were ‘by far the better team’ 8’ that game, and that’s simply not true.
posted on 27/3/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/4/19
comment by Michael Edwards FC {Proud owner of the 5 000 000th comment} (U2720)
posted 5 days, 21 hours ago
Routine 1-0 win with a howler from Lloris to gift us the goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who wants the lotto numbers?
posted on 1/4/19
comment by Michael Edwards FC {Proud owner of the 5 000 0... (U2720)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Michael Edwards FC {Proud owner of the 5 000 000th comment} (U2720)
posted 5 days, 21 hours ago
Routine 1-0 win with a howler from Lloris to gift us the goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who wants the lotto numbers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll take half of them as you got the score wrong. The correct half please.
posted on 1/4/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/4/19
2 minus 1 equals 1
Page 4 of 4