some good pieces.thought it might be handy to keep them under one thread. TOMKINS: BIG WIN, BIG WEEK Paul Tomkins 28 September 2009 So when he shakes off his supposed lethargy, just how good will this Torres fella be? His record for Liverpool almost defies belief, especially as he doesn't take the free shots at goal that are penalties, unlike many other major goalscorers. That, along with his all-round game and the nature of his goals, already elevates him above Owen, Aldridge, and dare I say it, Fowler. Only Rush and Hunt, as out-and-out centre-forwards in Liverpool's post-war history, deserve to be mentioned in the same breath – that's how good Torres has been thus far. Of course, Rush and Hunt had longevity, but you can't hold that against the Spaniard. He can only do what he can in the time he's had; and he's done it, and then some. To be on target to beat Hunt's record for the fastest Liverpool player to 50 top-flight league goals is incredible: 46 from 56 starts (plus eight as a sub) is phenomenal. But even that doesn't tell the whole story – after all, he only played an hour at the weekend. So it's not like those 56 starts all amounted to 90 minutes each. How quickly things change. Torres was jaded, Liverpool were hopeless, and the creative lynchpin was in Spain. It was all over. Even I got dragged down by the doom and gloom. You wouldn't think from the early media reactions that Liverpool, following on from last season, would so soon be able to lead the way in goals scored, would you? Lacking this, lacking that, yada yada yada. Not bad for a team whose biggest summer signing isn't even fit yet, and who, of course, are cautious (yawn). The bench, that was supposedly too weak (funny how missing five top-class players can do that!), now looks stronger, with Babel, Voronin and N'Gog all contributing in recent weeks, and the injured stars regaining fitness. Of course, defeat at Chelsea on Sunday, and the perception will be that it's all over again, but the table will clearly show that to be a lie. Liverpool's four league wins on the bounce, and Chelsea's humbling at Wigan, prove that this league can remain wide open. Crucially, the Reds can go there with confidence, while Cech-less Chelsea have their first doubts crashing in – not least in their man-marking at set-pieces. I have to admit being driven close to breaking point regarding Liverpool's zonal marking in the past few weeks: not the system (though mistakes were being made), but the almost Tourettes-like mentions of it. Are prospective pundits and summarisers required to perform an anti-zonal marking diatribe as part of their job interview? Creating The Tomkins Times, my new LFC web journal, has given me a chance to really study such topics in real depth, and counter every myth surrounding issues that are often complex. It's also somewhere I can keep an ongoing check on media hypocrisy. Criticism can obviously be fair, but double-standards are not. Just last week on one discussion show, BenÃtez was criticised for selling Peter Crouch (who rejected a new contract), criticised for selling Alonso (who wanted to play for Real Madrid, and was sold for three times his original fee), and was labelled ‘lucky' for having Fernando Torres. I kid you not. Lucky! Anyone else would be hailed as a genius for ‘risking' a large percentage of his transfer budget on a player some judges had doubts over, and helping him blossom into the best striker in the world. I tell you, some people will twist themselves in knots of illogical argument rather than say a good word about the Liverpool manager. Luck? It was judgement. Rafa was also criticised for offloading Robbie Keane, who is having a good season at Spurs. But since Keane's sale, Liverpool have doubled their goals-per-game ratio. Keane wins, Spurs win, but so do Liverpool, in finding a far better blend after getting their money back on the striker. Again, much of the criticism of Liverpool came back to an apparent lack of forwards, but Kuyt continues to score and create goals, and he is one of about five or six players who can play either in midfield or up front, in a fluid, interchangeable system. And while Torres was missed at times last season, the Reds still did extremely well in his absence. David N'Gog only looks like a weak option if you haven't really heard of him (because he's not yet a household name, at just 20, and is therefore easy to dismiss), or if you compare him to Torres, against whom any up-and-coming striker would suffer by contrast. Watch him closely in midweek, however, and suddenly the view might change. Also, his goals-per-minute ratio in a Liverpool shirt is nothing short of incredible. He hasn't played many vital minutes, admittedly, but as with Torres, he can only do what he's asked to do, and thus far that is to score five goals at an average of one every 138 minutes of football; or in other words, quicker than both Torres or Gerrard managed throughout last season – or one every 1.5 games'-worth of playing time. You could argue that the two players BenÃtez is lucky to have are Carragher and Gerrard, both of whom he inherited. But even that pair have had their roles changed and their play developed in the past five years. I've always maintained that on the whole BenÃtez has bought extremely well, but all managers have their flops. A 50% success rate is about the best any can hope for. It's also true that at any one time, by the very nature of only eleven getting to start, several of any manager's signings will be questioned; the better Yossi Benayoun and Dirk Kuyt play, for instance, the harder it is for Ryan Babel and Albert Riera to look as effective. Having said that, against Hull all four of those players made massive contributions, with Babel's coming as a sub. Again, so much for the squad being weak. (I know the opposition weren't of the highest calibre, but these are the teams Liverpool struggled to beat at home.) Goal Involvement, a measurement I devised for ‘Red Race', is another area I aim to regularly monitor on The Tomkins Times. It's my version of assists, which counts all meaningful passes in the build-up to a goal, not just the final one, which are then added to the goals themselves, to give an indication of who is supplying the cutting edge. It's not 100% foolproof (I devised it, after all), but it is a more all-encompassing gauge for who plays important roles in the creation and execution of goals. This is then looked at as totals, and as per-minute contributions. I also try to rate the quality of the contribution, although this is clearly subjective. For a team that supposedly relies so heavily on two players, since February Liverpool have been a sublime attacking unit. And while Kuyt and Benayoun continue their excellent form from last season, Glen Johnson has already added a whole new dimension; far and away eclipsing Alvaro Arbeloa in this regard. Johnson may get forward no more than his predecessor, but he in more incisive. Not only are the goals being shared around, but the supposed reliance on Gerrard and Torres also stretches to how the team as a whole are creating chances; it's not just the biggest two names feeding each other or creating goals out of nothing. So far, Glen Johnson has been involved in more Liverpool goals than his captain, as has Dirk Kuyt. With the goals flowing, more players are getting assists and ‘involvements'. The left-back slot highlights this trend. With Johnson kept relatively quiet against Hull, that allowed Emiliano Insua space, as the left flank became the avenue to exploit. He richly deserves his call up for Argentina (although I'd have preferred him wrapped in cotton wool at Melwood!) One of the flaws of any system that ranks assists is that the supplier is only rewarded if the ball is turned into the net; last year Insua's overlapping runs were excellent, but his crosses were not converted; he didn't feature in a single goal in his ten league games. This season he has already been involved in five goals, in just seven matches. Despite the loss of Alonso, there are improvements all over the pitch at Liverpool this season. And this is before Agger and Aquilani have even kicked a ball. There will clearly be a number of teams contesting the title, but after a poor start, Liverpool now look capable of being one of them; and this with another gear or two to find.
+1, positively can only do the team good, aswell as us. He has the right idea, Back the team before they kick a ball, back the team when in good form but even more so, back the boys when things aren't Rosey. Great bunch a lads representing us show them your support and let them hear it at games. Come on Redmen. 19 is comin.
TOMKINS' CHELSEA REVIEW Paul Tomkins 05 October 2009 While I admit to feeling like Liverpool's hopes were over after three games, I actually feel the opposite now, after a third defeat. Those first two defeats really bothered me; this latest one didn't. The key was to get some wins under the belt after losing two out of the opening three, and that happened; otherwise the hole could have got quite deep. But now, the table is still so tight that a couple more wins in quick succession can easily change things. I do get sick of the “yes they canâ€/â€No they can't†guff that surrounds every big team after a win or a defeat. It's a manic depressive state of analysis. Viewed dispassionately, it's ludicrous. Six points off the pace at this stage is not ideal, but equally it's nothing to panic about, particularly with Chelsea and United able to drop points cheaply, as they have at places like Wigan and Burnley; and with United's squad looking weaker than last season, and Chelsea due to lose almost half a team to the African Nations. I'm also curious to see how Chelsea's ageing team copes come the spring, especially as they have for once escaped injury problems to their major players (which helps them very much for now, but could lead to burnout for the thirtysomethings.) Of course, the Reds will still need to be in the mix, but I think that's easily possible. I felt that Liverpool were marginally the better team at Stamford Bridge, but Chelsea were more clinical in front of goal. On that score, they will argue that they deserved the points, and that argument always carries water, but they didn't impress me as much as they have in the past. I felt they had all the luck. Unlike the Fiorentina game, this was a match BenÃtez's men didn't deserve to lose, and had a penalty been awarded at 0-0 for a foul by the unusually upright Drogba (sorry, I slipped and fell over while typing that) on Skrtel, the table might look very different now. Unusually wayward misses from Torres and Benayoun summed up the day in the final third, but on the whole there was much to be encouraged by, particularly from some of the less-heralded players, and the return to form of both centre-backs (even if Carragher did get beaten for the second goal). All last season we were told that draws cost the Reds. Draws draws draws. Doesn't matter if you gamble and lose, but avoid the draws. Well, there have been no draws this season. We were told that it's not beating the big teams that counts, it's beating the little ‘uns. So is that no longer true? Going into the Chelsea game, the Reds were actually a point up on the corresponding fixtures from 2008/09. That's fairly remarkable given the criticism that's been aimed at Liverpool since the summer. The Chelsea game shows that season-to-season comparisions cannot be totally trusted, mainly because the order of the games affects the momentum, and run of the ball can affect any single result. But Liverpool still have plenty of 2008/09 draws to turn into wins, to get back on course for more than 86 points, if such a high tally is needed this year. And take a team like Arsenal: Liverpool could afford to lose against them this season, but if they win the other they'll end up with more points than from the two draws last time. And anyway, how many teams win at Chelsea two years running? For the last 20 years, any kind of victory there has been a rare event. Defeat in Italy and defeat at Chelsea are a million miles away from the results that unduly bother me. And October was always going to be a hellishly difficult month. Remember, Liverpool have gone to two of the current top three sides in the country. That is far from a balanced fixture list, and that provides me with a calming optimism. There are far tougher games still to be played at Anfield, but it was the supposedly easy ones that caused problems last time around. There's no denying that Liverpool have contributed to some of their own reversals this season, but there are other issues, too. I have to say that I haven't been too impressed with the refereeing this season, and had mentioned the timekeeping issue even before United got their inexplicable never-ending injury time to avoid what should have been two more dropped points, in the Manchester derby. Liverpool just don't get those unfathomable decisions in their favour. Liverpool failed to get even the allotted added time at Spurs to claw back a point, and conceded the crucial second against Villa when there was no earthly reason to go beyond the one added minute. Penalty decisions aren't going the Reds' way either, with about four stonewallers waved away, and lesser offences, like Carragher's shoulder barge on Zavon Hines less of a foul than the clattering of Voronin at Spurs, where the Reds were poor but could have scraped the kind of lucky draw United got at the weekend. Meanwhile, Skrtel was pushed over by Drogba and nothing was given, yet the Chelsea striker has an air ambulance on standby every time he sneezes. While I don't believe that these things even themselves out (after all, that would need a conscious decision by some omniscient being), you have to hope that the Reds' luck improves in line with that of their rivals. While on the subject of luck and fairness, I have total sympathy for Lucas Leiva in terms of the press he gets. The whole team plays poorly in Italy, yet he gets singled out. While I felt he really struggled in the first half of last season, I see no such problems this time around. But still the stigma remains attached. There are probably reasons for this. If he was English, he'd be lauded for his workrate, feverish closing down and generally very good (if unspectacular) use of the ball. Because he's Brazilian, he has to fit a stereotype. That doesn't sit easily with people with no imagination. I've seen some idiotic comments in the press like he's “the most un-South American player I've ever seenâ€; as if, as a Brazilian, you have no worth unless you're a stepover king. At Stamford Bridge, Liverpool actually won the battle of the midfield, and Lucas played a massive part in that. The Reds lost largely because Chelsea's strikers had a better day in front of goal, and not because of the balance of play (dictated by Lucas and Mascherano) or chances created. As a psychology student helpfully pointed out to me during a discussion on my new website: “The ‘truth effect' comes when a message is repeated enough, then the receiver of the message will accept it as fact.†Lucas made many positive contributions to the Hull thrashing, with two forceful, direct forward passes leading to goals two and five, as well as getting to the byline for the sixth. But along with not being stereotypically Brazilian, he is criticised for not being Xabi Alonso. Which, to me, seems grossly unfair. Liverpool had their best-ever scoring start to the season, so how can Lucas, a league ever-present, be to blame for a “lack of creativity†that clearly isn't there? I thought Liverpool were creative against Chelsea, too, without ever tearing through them, but then this is a world-renowned defensive set-up, at home, and by the end, forced to defend in great numbers. Liverpool were no worse than in the fixture a year ago, but crucially, Chelsea were much improved, and the Reds didn't have that crucial slice of luck. I therefore believe that the ‘truth effect' to be very much in evidence with Lucas, as it so clearly is with zonal marking. Watch Liverpool defend a set-piece, and count the times ‘zonal marking' is discussed in negative terms. Watch a team defend man-marking, and you'll only get “great run/great cross/great header†if the ball goes in. I've been saying this very thing for years, but almost collapsed when Gordon Strachan pointed this out after the Sunderland vs Wolves game. Then again, he's managed at the top level using both man-marking and zonal, and he said that both work equally well, and that it just depends on what your players are comfortable with. How dare he talk such sense? Against Chelsea, I noticed that after every excellent Mascherano challenge or even just harrying, there was a positive mention from the commentators, but Lucas, who made loads of excellent contributions was only mentioned after mistakes. Go and watch the game again, and you'll see this to be true. The truth effect: bear it in mind next time you find yourself being told something time and again, its message driven into your brain like a hypnotist's mantra.
Unless we go on a run of 25 games without conceeding and Lucas scores in all of those, it won't stop the idiots like Andy Gray from spouting the same old shyte over and over again, and then all the random plebs from agreeing with them.
TOMKINS: WIN TOGETHER, LOSE TOGETHER Paul Tomkins 19 October 2009 Earlier in the week I'd promised to take my son to see the new Disney Pixar film, 'Up', on Saturday evening. Shortly after getting seated, any hopes I harboured that my mind would be taken off the defeat at Sunderland were swept away; typical, then, that this particular film should be based on the amazing powers of inflatable spheres. There are definitely grounds for concern with four defeats in nine league games. But I thought Rafa BenÃtez's post-match comments were very honest, and unlike the ploy of some managers, not at all diversionary. The league is very open this year, and no side is without its problems. But clearly Rafa was disappointed with the performance, and didn't hide from that fact, even though the winning (and game-changing) goal was both a fluke and against the laws of the game. I write this piece with the disappointment of this performance as a given. I am not glossing over that disappointment. Liverpool need to play better in the next two games (and, I feel, almost certainly will play better.) But this is not the time or place to throw in the towel. A win next weekend, in another tough game, will alter both the chances of the league title and everyone's mood. Liverpool's woes have been slightly exaggerated by the nature of the fixture list; it's been an incredibly tough start away from home. The Reds have already gone to three of the current top seven (as I write). So that skews things. However, that's the way football works; sometimes you get a good fixture list, other times it's more demanding. This was always a pig of a fixture, even before the freak goal gave the home side the boost to end all boosts. Any side going away from home to face buoyant opposition needs a good start to quieten the noisy crowd; that certainly wasn't the case here. It's hard to say how much that changed the game, but the beach ball certainly didn't help an under-strength Liverpool settle into proceedings. BenÃtez had just seen his players jetting all over the world, and in the case of two attacking players, for a friendly in Australia of all places (I mean, come on!). It's a bit catch-22 when you buy such quality, as you know they can potentially struggle after international break, especially those who have to travel outside of Europe, like the South Americans. Also, Liverpool's two best players came back crocked after representing their respective countries, and if that isn't a leveller, I don't know what is. Sunderland have gone down another route: quite an expensive team, but mostly with not-quite-internationals; a collection of strong Premiership players rather than outstanding ones, and a dogged attitude. So they were always going to be ten times fresher. On occasions like this, Liverpool's disruption suited their host's fast-pressing game, where freshness was always going to be a factor. BenÃtez, who was facing the manager who has caused him more problems in the league than any other, had to weigh up whether it was better to go with a stronger but more jet-lagged side, or hope to get more from some squad players. Either way there was an element of a gamble, and neither way is ever ideal. It didn't work out, but then Sunderland should have had all three points away at Man United last time out, after a quite brilliant display. So anyone who thought this was an easy fixture is living in dreamland, even before the international break was taken into consideration. The problem with playing tired players is that it then carries over into the next game; and then the game after, especially when in a run of unenviable fixtures. This is a horrible week in that sense: a manager will want to start with a win to take into each successive game, but he knows something will give. In the book "Why England Lose", Simon Kuper notes what the head of AC Milan's 'Milan Lab', which is 'probably the most sophisticated medical outfit in football', says about playing 50 tough games a year: "The performance is not optimal. The risk of injury is very high. We can say the risk of injury after one game, after one week's training, is 10%. If you play after two days, the risk rises by 30 or 40%. If you are playing four or five games consecutively without the right recovery, the risk of injury is incredible. The probability of having one lesser performance is very high." And of course, this does not take into account the additional strain of long distance travel, or the emotional drain of, for example, captaining your country in two must-win World Cup qualifiers amid a backdrop of feverish hysteria. So picking a Liverpool side this weekend must have been an incredibly difficult process. There are further extenuating circumstances (rather than excuses). Only last week I said that the Reds weren't having any luck with referees this season. This latest technically incorrect decision is yet another example of the officials getting it wrong to the probable cost of Liverpool points. I'm not sure I can remember a run of fixtures when there hasn't at least been a hint of decisions evening up. The Reds, playing exactly the same way, could easily have five extra points now just from poor judgement calls or a failure to implement the correct rules. Plenty of other big teams have played as poorly this season as Liverpool did at Sunderland or Spurs, but got fortuitous own goals or generous refereeing decisions; when, rather than make their own luck, they've been handed it. I agree that if can often go both ways, but this season that hasn't happened. I accept that it always seems slightly pathetic to talk about the officials, as if you have to accept whatever comes your way. The same applies when blaming the fixture list, or injuries. These are all real factors that affect the result on any given week, and then affect the confidence going into the next game. Some managers heap intolerable pressure onto officials, and that's not the BenÃtez way. Given the situation going into a very tricky fixture, and the worst of luck in the 4th minute, this is when football management seems a thankless task. For instance, while Liverpool have proven time and again in the recent past (just last season!) that they can win without Gerrard and Torres, it stands to reason that the team will be more likely to do so with them present. It also means that those playing in their place, who are the next-strongest players, will not be on the bench to come on and change things. So that lessens a manager's options, no matter how strong his squad. Of course, Liverpool no longer possess Alonso, nor (quite yet) his ‘replacement', Alberto Aquilani. So that's one further potential match-winner absent. Gerrard, Torres and Aquilani may well be the main attacking unit for the rest of the season. I fully respect Rafa's decision to buy a player he believes in for the long-term, rather than compromise by getting someone less gifted who would be ready for August. I don't think anyone expected at least four games to have been lost before the Italian even makes his bow. Also, Liverpool haven't had quite the Jamie Carragher of old; the defender has been very candid in admitting he's not been at his best this season. However, if anyone has done enough to deserve a bit of slack being cut, it's Carra. It's almost automatic to write off anyone over the age of 30 if their form dips, but if you can read the game (and he can!) then you can play centre-half until your mid-30s, if not beyond. And you can't buy the kind of leadership and kinship with the club that he offers. But as a team, and as an individual, whether you play brilliantly or indifferently, you usually need a bit of luck at the right time. You probably make your own luck more often when your play merits it, and there's a case for saying that the Reds haven't deserved it on occasions this season. But equally, they haven't deserved the really bad breaks, and the lack of any fortunate ones. It's only part of the story, of course, but it's an important part, all the same. In the first nine games last season, the Reds, while far from lucky (disallowed goal against Stoke?) had better fortune, and it helped build the foundations of a title challenge, even though the form was equally patchy. The truth is that a few wins will quickly change the complexion of the table. If people don't believe those wins will come, that's up to them; just as people have the right to believe that they can. And it's almost certain that the biggest clubs will drop a greater number points against the next tier of teams, as seen with Aston Villa already scalping Liverpool and Chelsea, and with Sunderland taking points off the Reds and Man United. Spurs are also more of a threat, and of course, Manchester City now have the costliest squad in the country, and have already hammered Arsenal 4-1. Ultimately, the amount of defeats a team suffers will never be the defining factor; points on the board will decide everyone's fate, once each side has faced one another home and away. Never before in 120 years of league football history had a team lost just two games and not won the league. Rarely, if ever, can the team that won the league have lost twice as many games as the team that finished runners-up. Records are broken all the time. By pulling together, the Reds can break another. It's only a few months since the Reds racked up their best points tally in 20 years. Without any draws to date, there's still a chance that Liverpool could lose three times as many games as in 2008/09 and still end up even closer to the title.
This is the most telling bit for me. When even super-optimistic Paul Tompkins is talking about being closer and not still capable of winning the title in October you know our confidence is low.
TOMKINS: BOUNCEBACKABILITY Paul Tomkins 26 October 2009 Usually after a game, I can write about the issues surrounding what took place as soon as it's finished, or if I've been present, once I've got home. At the very least, I can make notes, even if only in my head. Yet well over an hour after the United game finished, I still have the shakes, although thankfully they've abated to the point where I can type. I've done a lot of travelling this week, as well as more intensive writing than probably at any point in my life. It all culminated this weekend, in the fixture you love to win but loathe to lose. Feeling exhausted, this match probably meant more to me than any in the league in recent memory (and I'm sure it was similar for a lot of others). First, because of the unenviable run that defeat would have created, which would have seen Rafa judged on five games, not five years, over which time (first 200 in the league) the manager has won more games than either Ferguson or Wenger did, and indeed, Liverpool's two greatest managers, Shankly and Paisley. Indeed, BenÃtez is 27 wins better off than Ferguson over the first 200 fixtures. (I know times have changed, but you still need to be top class to post 114 wins in your first 200 league matches.) Second, because even thinking of challenging for the title would have been written off, causing even greater criticism and further sniping. Liverpool have a long season ahead, and this victory does not win any trophies; but it's a step in the right direction. It draws to an end a bad run of results, with one of the best possible in any given season. Third, because a defeat would have further crushed confidence, and once you start sliding, it takes on a momentum of its own; just as winning becomes a habit, so does losing, or failing to win. Fourth, because of the bile and unpleasant sarcasm from some of the press, some of which went more over the top than a Roy Keane tackle on Alfie Inge Haaland. Fifth, the opposition. Enough said. Sixth, Michael Owen. While I don't blame him choosing United over his alternatives (such as Hull), and bear him no personal ill-will, nothing hurts more than a former favourite coming back to haunt you; and the sight of him in a United shirt is not a pleasant one. He deserved more respect during his time at Anfield, but of course, no-one forced him to leave. And finally seventh, because in the build-up to the game I was afforded the hospitality of the manager, and saw in his eyes how much success at Liverpool means to him. Although of course I am not, I felt part of the team, part of the club, for that day. From one very brief conversation between the two in my presence, I could see just how much this game meant to Rafa and Sammy Lee, and how unbelievably thorough their preparations were; nothing was going to distract them from the task ahead. I'm now just a normal fan again (albeit one who writes books, blogs and columns about the club), but I got a taste of life at the sharp end. I saw the inner workings. And it came just days before the visit of United. The fact is, United could have had 1,000 beach balls on the pitch and they'd never have scored with the form of Carragher and Agger (how wonderful that he's fit again – what a player!), or kept out Torres and N'Gog, whose finishes were inch-perfect. Every Red was a giant (which is kinda ironic for a side lacking exceptional height). And it was achieved without both Gerrard and Aquilani, who, in theory, are two of the main attacking threats at the club. Also, Torres wasn't even fully fit. What a player! (And if Aquilani had wondered for even a split second what he had done by joining Liverpool, given the recent results and his own longer-than-expected injury – which can only make settling in harder – he will have discovered what the club is all about this weekend. I can only imagine the amazement he experienced. He must be champing at the bit now. We can't expect too much too soon, but his return to action could be timely.) While losing this fixture, especially in such circumstances, would have been too painful to bear, in some ways the choice of match might have been the perfect tonic; the crowd can get restless more quickly if they think you should be spanking the opposition, and that is always difficult when you don't know where you next win is coming from. And if you win, instead of a mere lift, you get a rocket boost. You can't get carried away, of course, but the belief can come surging back. That very thing happened when beating Real Madrid and United last March. Liverpool showed last season, even without Gerrard some of the time, and Torres a lot of the time, that they were far better than the critics were now portraying. Now that a massive Argentine weight has been lifted from his broad shoulders, Javier Mascherano, despite his late red card, was back to his very best. Daniel Agger showed what we've been missing. And Jamie Carragher was like a man possessed. Past his best? I'd dare anyone to suggest that to his face. Any critic of Lucas or Aurelio should watch this game, and hold their hands up; irrespective of form, brought about by struggles with confidence or injuries, they showed that they have the ability to be in midfield. Both did so at Old Trafford last season, too. People keep telling me that Lucas concedes too many free-kicks, but if you want to play a fast-pressing game, and get in people's faces, that will happen, even by accident, or from the opponent diving. The key is to worry the life out of them, and Scholes and Carrick could not handle him and Mascherano snapping at them. When Mascherano was sent off in the 95th minute, it was him and Lucas chasing to close down van der Sar! While Lucas was outstanding, Aurelio showed that now he's had a few games back in the side, he's back up to speed. He is such a cultured footballer, and needs to be judged in context (ie not when lacking match fitness). Same for the (inscrutable) critics of N'Gog: 20-year-old kid, in on goal to seal the game in the biggest moment of his career by far, and as cool as a cucumber plucked from the freezer. His remarkable goals-per-minute ratio continues, and with a strike that no-one can write off as anything less than vital. (How can a £1.5m youngster be a 'flop' when he scores goals as regularly as he does, albeit in limited time on the pitch?) I hate singling out players when everyone has been so good, but Yossi Benayoun, who only twelve months ago critics, including Graeme Souness (who should know better), were saying "is never a Liverpool player", just played a supposedly world-class defence off the park. His jinking runs were mesmerising, his through-ball to Torres the pass of the season. And for a "two-man team" ("one-man team" with Gerrard out?), it was a resounding riposte to the doubters out there. How does a "one-man" team beat United? Indeed, last season a "no man" team beat them. One of the biggest changes? Luck. Liverpool were by far and away the better side, and deserved every inch of the victory, but unlike in some games this season, got the breaks when they needed them, be it Valencia hitting the bar or the possible red card for Carragher only a yellow. After the beach balls and the other howlers from referees this season, and all the injuries, it was nice to get the little slices of fortune. And this time United didn't have that late, late luck (with unfathomable added minutes, and own goals) that saved them against City and Sunderland. Finally, all credit to Arsene Wenger, for his defence of Rafa BenÃtez this week. To prove I'm not simply pro-BenÃtez (simply pro-top-class managers), I said the same about Wenger last season, arguing with Arsenal fans who wanted him out; while they knew the Gunners far better than I ever could, you don't dispense with proven quality in the hot-seat when it starts going against you. I hate knee-jerkism of any kind. Thinking has to be long-term, not short-term. Your entire squad could fall ill with swine flu, and cause you to lose five games; you'd still get no sympathy, if you were Liverpool (or Arsenal) manager. Some people will never have what it takes to win the world's biggest trophies, or even simply win more than a poor percentage of games as a manager. (These are the qualifications of critics, though.) BenÃtez and Wenger, with major league titles and in Rafa's case, a European Cup, certainly do.