Is it safe to come out yet? - by John Brennan

[stringvest]

John's not written that piece for himself.  He's written it to get a reaction.  And it's working.

[s(k)aturation]

Because someone wrote an article you disagree with? 

 

"Opposite" views don't go down well with some on TLW nowadays, Dave.

[Bobby Hundreds]

Better opposing views than Rawk Korea lockdowns. They cant even name a transfer thread without it being condescending and beneath them.

[Brownie]

It's the tone and the fact there's clearly a bit of an agenda of wanting him gone in the piece. That's what I took from it. He does make some good points but it's then surrounded by some complete shite. I don't think anybody is happy with not improving the defenceAnd I do think agree with him that we signed Chamberlain because we had t signed Van Dijk or Lemar in the end and needed something to stop the fans going mental.

 

Klopp does get criticised and plenty of people on here and at the ground will generally agree with his faults. I haven't heard one person say "well would you prefer to go back the 6-1 v Stoke." I also haven't heard anyone talk about going back to the drab days under Rafa or Ged either but let's go there. The fellas won trophies and some pretty big ones but both in the end went backwards. Every fan wants to win trophies but if you aren't winning trophies then you at least want to enjoy the match. In the years we didn't win anything under those 2 and there were plenty of them we played some pretty dour stuff.

 

When you read stuff like that it just seems to be written as WUM material for the fans who enjoy the fact we play attacking football and can batter the best teams around instead of just nullifying them. That's not to say nullifying them isn't great when you win stuff but there's just something better about going toe to toe with these teams who spend a lot more and attract better players and beating them at their own game.

 

No manager is perfect and some criticisms of Klopp are clearly justified. Some of the things in this piece though are laughable for me.

The tone didn't really register with me to be honest because that's John's style of writing; always has been!

 

I guess it may have been a bit jarring for people who haven't read his stuff before.

[johnb]

Snarky? Cynical? Sassy? "That's football!"

 

I'll try to be more deferential to Our Great Leader in future. No, really.

 

You know, the one who's said the following in the last 24 hours (while speaking of our "defence"):

 

"It’s not a quality [issue]. It’s a little bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Everybody concedes goals. We’ve had a lot of games with a decent defensive performances. It would be easy to look at this team and say how exciting they play, but we’re always looking for one thing we can be angry about, not happy with."

 

"Not a quality issue"? Matip, Lovren, Klavan? I think it is a quality issue.

"Self-fulfilling prophecy"? NINETY conceded in 72 League games. 13 in seven games this season. "Prophecy"? Seriously?

"Decent defensive performances in a lot of games"? Can somebody think of just three off the top of their head?

"Always looking to be angry"? Deal with it! You've still got 90% of the support with you (cf. this forum!).

[an tha]

I loved Klopp when he arrived. I suspect most of the fans did.

 

Honeymoons are like that.

 

Then he did that weird curtain call to the Kop after a 2-2 draw with WBA I think.

 

Then I think he had a dig at fans for that leave-early protest against outrageous ticket prices, and was annoyed they left early when we gave up a lead to Sunderland (was that the same game?)

 

Then he didn't like the fans chanting his name - it was about the players he said - when he is clearly the club's best asset and the fans know and want to acknowledge it.

 

And yet when he orgasmically turns to them and pumps his fist during the game, they are meant to orgasmically respond. And on the promo on LFC TV last year, his voice-over says his job and the team's job is to make "fans' lives better".

 

I'd love him to succeed as manager, hopefully he will. And I like him fine.

 

But (and Paul's point 7 might be right)... if it is about "knobheadery", that can always cut both ways. Jurgen is not above it himself.

 

And unlike the fans, who have to pay to be knobheads, he gets paid for the privilege.

I think you have to cut him some slack when it comes to the fans stuff.

 

He is from a place with a totally different fan culture and he would have beem fed the myth of the Anfield atmosphere as well.

 

All those years at Dortmund and in Germany generally and it must take a while to get used to how different it is here and be quite a shock to come here and experience something so far removed from what he had in Dortmund.

[s(k)aturation]

Snark on, John.  It's all good fun.

[s(k)aturation]

I think you have to cut him some slack when it comes to the fans stuff.

 

He is from a place with a totally different fan culture and he would have beem fed the myth of the Anfield atmosphere as well.

 

All those years at Dortmund and in Germany generally and it must take a while to get used to how different it is here and be quite a shock to come here and experience something so far removed from what he had in Dortmund.

 

 

I'm cutting him plenty of slack.  I'm saying it works both ways.  That's fair.

[an tha]

I'm cutting him plenty of slack. I'm saying it works both ways. That's fair.

Furry muff!

[Numero Veinticinco]

I didn’t read the article, because I already know what it says. I’m not really sure why one sided views are given quite so much prevalence, but it has nothing to do with me what gets put up.

 

I can’t remember seeing an article before the City match when we looked particularly strong. Maybe I’m wrong about that, as I normally give the OP’s articles a swerve. If not, it smacks of kicking while their down and hiding when they’re up.

[s(k)aturation]

It's a good piece of writing.

 

I think my favourite pieces of Dave's are when we've lost.

 

Doesn't mean I have to agree.  

 

Doesn't mean I like us losing either.

[an tha]

It's a discussion forum - the whole point of articles is to generate and engage people in discussion.

 

Agreeing and disagreeing in part and/or in full is all a part of it...without differing opinions, without differing views and discussion of those differing opinions and counter points being made etc this place at best becomes an echo chamber and at worse dies.

[Moo]

I disagree with the article in the main.

I think the tone is a bit silly, a bit woe is me and self indulgent, and as a few have said it's snide.

I also think it's poorly written, for my tastes, it's too jarring and too punctuated.

But johnb has every right to write it and express his own feelings, just as people have a right to reply.

[stringvest]

There can't be many people who don't share doubts that Klopp will be able to sort the team front to back.  It's a very difficult trick he's trying to pull.  He isn't about to compromise on his high pressing, high tempo, fluid attacking game.  Which then puts the onus on the midfield to both contribute offensively by learning to play the ball forwards quickly, creatively and with accuracy, and to be mobile without the ball to cover lots of space and decisive in winning the ball back.  Pushing the fullbacks forward inevitably leaves the central defenders more exposed with a wider area to cover.  

 

The CBs really need to understand each other's game so that they can anticipate each other's role and position in defensive situations.  When we lose possession high up the pitch, it should be the central midfielders who track back supporting the CBs and covering the runners, as invariably at least one of the fullbacks will have more distance to cover. You can argue (as I do) that we don't have the players to play this sort of game, and this is exacerbated by the lack of understanding between any combination of CBs we choose to field. 

 

So, given that Klopp is reluctant to compromise,  until the player situation changes, we will be vulnerable and liable to lose games we should win.  Lallana coming back will help, in that he is incredibly hard working all over the pitch, is creative, will lead the press more effectively, and retains the ball in the midfield and in our own half under pressure better than any other player we have. But it won't fix the big problems we have in defence and midfield.

[s(k)aturation]

There can't be many people who don't share doubts that Klopp will be able to sort the team front to back.  It's a very difficult trick he's trying to pull.  He isn't about to compromise on his high pressing, high tempo, fluid attacking game.  Which then puts the onus on the midfield to both contribute offensively by learning to play the ball forwards quickly, creatively and with accuracy, and to be mobile without the ball to cover lots of space and decisive in winning the ball back.  Pushing the fullbacks forward inevitably leaves the central defenders more exposed with a wider area to cover.  

 

The CBs really need to understand each other's game so that they can anticipate each other's role and position in defensive situations.  When we lose possession high up the pitch, it should be the central midfielders who track back supporting the CBs and covering the runners, as invariably at least one of the fullbacks will have more distance to cover. You can argue (as I do) that we don't have the players to play this sort of game, and this is exacerbated by the lack of understanding between any combination of CBs we choose to field. 

 

So, given that Klopp is reluctant to compromise,  until the player situation changes, we will be vulnerable and liable to lose games we should win.  Lallana coming back will help, in that he is incredibly hard working all over the pitch, is creative, will lead the press more effectively, and retains the ball in the midfield and in our own half under pressure better than any other player we have. But it won't fix the big problems we have in defence and midfield.

 

 

Weaved Lallana in nicely there, Stringy.

[an tha]

This could almost be Klopps direct reply...

 

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/defiant-jurgen-klopp-hits-back-13628060

[s(k)aturation]

This could almost be Klopps direct reply...

 

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/defiant-jurgen-klopp-hits-back-13628060

 

 

"The Echo" chamber indeed.

[stringvest]

Weaved Lallana in nicely there, Stringy.

 

 

front and centre mate, front and centre.  Crucial.

[an tha]

"The Echo" chamber indeed.

Nicely done!

[Jairzinho]

 

 

Quality control? Well given that it was a superbly written piece regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the opinion being expressed, i can only assume by quality control you mean that I should only be publishing articles that you agree with?

 

 

If you wouldn't mind.

 

Seriously, though, I agree with Moo's post. All of it. I don't think it was a particularly well written piece at all, and it was extremely self-indulgent. But each to their own and all that.

[Ranxerox]

The concerns about the defence and the need of another signing or two are obvious points that practically everyone has made. It's the snide stuff against the manager that rankles with me, as well as the lack of fairness about the progress the team as a whole is making under Klopp, as evidenced by CL qualification when 6th-8th was becoming the norm. It seems unsporting to me, and it's cheap to say stuff like "Cheerleader in Chief."

Spot on

[KMD7]

Any updates on the length of Lallana's barnet yet?  Suspense is killing me here

[stringvest]

Any updates on the length of Lallana's barnet yet?  Suspense is killing me here

 

 

it's all fallen out.  He put Nivea on it

[Jose Jones]

If you wouldn't mind.

 

Seriously, though, I agree with Moo's post. All of it. I don't think it was a particularly well written piece at all, and it was extremely self-indulgent. But each to their own and all that.

Agreed. Terribly written, self indulgent, Jamie Kanwar-esque crap.

[billypilgrimnz]

Quality control? Well given that it was a superbly written piece.....

 

No, no it "isn't." Mainly!!! because "he" has used up a "year's" (!!!) supply of "quotation" marks and exclamation points!!!! in a single "article".

 

It's barely literate and I worry if you think it is "superbly written" (!)