West Ham were shit in the first half and a set piece had them level We dominated the game without truly hurting them first half so whatever you thought in first half didn’t play itself out on the pitch for me in the first 45 Anyways they were gifted two goals in second half so not buying into the moyes love in that the pundits were fawning over Easiest thing in the world is to sit in with 7 defenders and play on the break when the opposition attack
I thought they looked well disciplined, dangerous on the attack, with some talented individuals. Sitting deep playing counter was understandable when they went 1-0 up against one of the best teams in the world. They played more open when it was level and they still looked impressive to me. Yes we were shit and individual errors cost us but WHam looked more than just Allardyce/Dyche-type long ball merchants. Was reading this morning they've amassed the 3rd most points in this calendar year, behind City and Chelsea. It's an extremely rare thing that I get something right when it comes to football so I'm going out on my shield on this one. Slightly disappointed they didn't beat us 3-0 as that would have helped hammer home my point. (pun intended)
Had another little chuckle this morning when I remembered Jack Wilsheres reasoning for why the Cresswell tackle wasn't a red card. There might be a reasonable explanation as to why the VAR didn't think it was(although I can't think of one) but "it was early in the game,Cresswell is a tough player and wanted to show Henderson he was in a tough match" definitely isn't one. The way I see it is, going to ground an smashing your studs into somebody's kneecap is a red card,no question. Intent doesn't matter in deciding whether it's a red or not because if it happens accidentally,it means the player wasn't in control of the tackle.
The official explanation is the VAR didn't think there was enough intensity to warrant a red, which is stupid in a few different ways. Stuart Atwell, same guy who was involved the day Pickford seriously injured Van Dijk.
But it’s not incredibly unlike us , we’ve a soft centre at times defensively and sloppy passing and lack of control in midfield compounds it. When you look at us scoring 2 v Brighton at home , Chelsea down to 10men 3 v Brentford , it has to be looked at 6 points dropped by Klopp. You can see the tactical change with Trent cutting in more and midfield supporting the attack more Suppose it’s a blue print in progress but defensively it needs looking at and soon , if we’re and we are genuine title contenders both home and in the champions league . Obviously Klopp won’t just stick with it without tweaking it , it will also see players moved on and in to make it work Probably not in January though .So it maybe just altered to get the best out of our current very good squad .
I haven't checked but I'm 99% certain it was David Cootes in the derby last year. Atwell is famous for the ghost goal at Watford a few years back and probably having USB stick with serious incriminating evidence against the high ups.
Sorry lads, I actually did a deal with the devil before the match to avoid the stress of a long season. Basically if we won against West Ham we win the league and if we didn't we won't. That will save you having to watch the rest of the season. My bad, I probably should have consulted with you guys first...
We seem to have developed a soft under belly ,as they say, this season. The first goal is frustrating because 9 times out of 10 that is given as a free out but I still feel Alisson needs to be better in that situation. Like last week we never came out in the second half and it has cost us. All good runs come to an end and it is how react is the most important thing. Last time we lost we won 8 out of our next 10 games and went on a club record unbeaten run. Important do to the same now.
Felt like a performance throwback to the day Of Mignolet, Lovren and Moreno. Also thought it was a bit like that mad game against Villa that ended 7-2. If West Ham had went for it a bit more, I could have seen more goals from them. Antonio had two through balls that he lost control, Fornals had another. Lucky to only concede 3 in my opinion. West Ham are a good side but signs have been there with Brentford, A Madrid away and Brighton. Definitely not looking solid enough and could be tiredness on part of VVD and Robbo in particular. I can’t understand how VVD isn’t near the scene for any of their corners. They let all the West Ham players crowd the keeper. Gini used to be good for spotting that and standing in way of players attempting to block Alisson. Usually hate international breaks and as long as lads come back injury free, it’s come at a good time. Jurgen and his staff can analysis where some of this defensive fragility is coming from. All the main me.are there.
We mark zonally mate, Van Dijk will be in his zone and I'd be pretty sure in this day and age that our ability to deal with players crowding the goalkeeper didn't walk out the door with Gini Wijnaldum. These things are coached to the minutest detail and its not a very unique skill. If nobody was getting between Alisson and Antonio it's most likely because he/we didn't want anybody there.
I've heard coaches giving differing reasons for the protecting keeper point of view ranging from the traditional get between the forward amd keeper to marking from in front. To doing nothing at all. If there was a perfect way everyone would be doing it
Sure, I get that it was zonal and it’s that age old argument about the pros and cons and stats show over the season it’s effective however it was a clear from the start it was going to be a tactic. Had a feeling when they setup for the first corner it was going to be a goal and then to line up like that for remaining corners in the match was obvious. Still mark zonal however make one of those zones extra protection for the keeper. Anyway it’s not the main issue in the match, West Ham deserved the win and just need to suck it up.
The pros and cons of our tactics for dealing with corners is a different argument mate. I was responding to you saying you couldn't understand why Van Dijk was nowhere near the scene of any of their corners. I'm also pretty certain their approach wasn't surprising to us, it's what they've been doing all season. We just didn't defend it well enough.
I know it's old school, But what happened to putting a man on back post. Both corners goals likely to be stopped if man on the post. And wtf was Man doing for 2nd corner goal? Look at it again. Jumps for ball when it's in the net ffs. And the first goal? 3 at near post ...... none of them jumped at all..........at all at all
I'm not necessarily saying there is in this case mate, but things generally only become old school when some people think there's a better way of doing it. A lot of coaches think the negatives of having players on the post outweigh the benefits.
Well to me there is or was NO COACHING how to defend corners, Particularly when the world and its mother know the other team depends on set pieces