Liverpool 2 West Ham United 1 (Oct 31 2020)

[tlw content]

 

 

 

Report by

Dave Usher

 

I could just post last weekend’s report and change a few minor details, because this was eerily similar. We fell behind, we equalised shortly before half time (in the same minute, I believe), we had a goal disallowed by VAR and then we scored the winner soon after.

 

It’s a great win. Not one that any of us will be reminiscing about (unless you’re Nat Phillips, obviously) but despite that, it feels like a big one to me. They all are I suppose, but this feels like it was really important. This whole week has been. It’s ben a big test and we’ve passed it.

 

We lost Virg and all eyes were on how we’d cope. It’s been a bit of a struggle at times but the lads have dug in and won three games in a week. And guess what, we’re back to the top of the league again. Not bad considering some of the mad shit we’ve had happen.

 

West Ham have been in good form but the loss of Antonio hurt them even more than us not having Virg. West Ham lost 75% of their goal threat with him being out. It’s not just the goals he scores, it’s the threat he provides when he’s on the pitch. They’re as close to being a one man team as there is in the league (along with Palace) so this was massive for them. Basically, they can’t replace what he brings and it feels like the first break we’ve had all season that he was missing.

 

In Antonio’s place was Haller, a player who started his West Ham career well but has struggled since. Still, he was being marked by a lad making his Premier League debut, so it’s only natural that we’d have some concerns and West Ham might fancy their chances.

 

As it turned out, the Hammers got absolutely no change whatsoever out of big Nat Phillips. He was tremendous and by the end of the first half Haller had more or less given up. Phillips just battered him into submission by winning header after header until eventually Haller just stopped challenging for them.

 

Surprisingly, the weak link was alongside Phillips where Gomez made an error that allowed Fornals to give the visitors the lead.

 

Let’s be fair here though. The goal wasn’t completely down to Gomez as it was a bad goal all around in terms of positioning and being alert. We allowed them to get a cross in too easily and there was no-one anywhere near Fornals when the ball dropped to him.

 

The header from Joe was shite though. I don’t know why he didn’t just head it back where it came from instead of heading it to the edge of our own box. Get it away from danger. That’s just basic stuff.

 

That one error probably puts an overly negative slant on what was otherwise a decent enough performance from him. We actually defended well throughout the game although West Ham had two or three decent chances. I think we often read too much into things like that though. 

 

How often do you go through a game against Premier League opposition where you prevent them from creating ANY chances? Hardly ever happens, and I don’t care how good you are. You’re always going to give up two or three chances a game even when you defend well.

 

We occasionally look a little vulnerable but in general terms we’re defending pretty well most games. It’s not been perfect by any means but no-one is keeping clean sheets in lockdown footy. 

 

It’s quite funny really. That Villa debacle means that we’ve got the worst defensive record in the league (even worse than fucking FULHAM!!!), yet guess what? We’re still top. Funny old game.

 

 

This is just a teaser, click here to view the full report

 

Please note that Match Reports are only available to website subscribers. Subscriptions cost just £2 a month (you need to register first) and can be purchased here. 

 

[CrownPaints]

Top top arse in a bucket analysis there Dave.

[Kurt]

Does anyone believes Matip will be back. The last two times he has returned he lasted 1 match before going out again. He seems broken.

[Josef Svejk]

Got to say, disagree strongly about Gomez. West Ham had three real chances, very avoidable goal included. Gomez was exposed as an aerial weakness in all three instances...

[s(k)aturation]

 

Thanks Dave.

 

If we come away with something from City, I think we'll win the League again.

[alles ist gut]

Top, TOP "It's coming to something when Kevin Friend is the least incompetent official involved" analysis there, Dave.

[Spy Bee]

Quote

Thing is, it was disallowed for a foul on the defender though, which I don’t get at all. I watched the replay five or six times and not once did I think there was a foul on the defender. Maybe I was too fixated on looking at the challenge on the keeper that I missed something, so I’ve gone back and looked again and I still don’t see it. There is no foul on the defender. Not even close.

It couldn't have been given against the keeper, as neither he or Mane touched the ball. So the only way to disallow the goal was a foul on the defender.

[Baresi]

Is there anything better than a Dave U 'I'll get to that/him in a minute' on a Monday morning?

[Barnesey]

We are approaching a non contact sport though. Moaninho said he misses the game he loves plus Goaline technology and I agree with him. However, if the pen is'nt a pen then the Mane foul is not a foul either.

 

Our play has seemed slow and laboured of late. Thiago will improve it but I wonder whether we are deliberately conserving energy because of the schedule?

 

But more should be made of these "Mentality Monsters". Lost in Kiev, win it the following season. Lost the league by the odd point in 195, win it the following year. Last 3 home games, go a goal down, come back and win late after a goal has been disallowed. And only a VAR cheat depriving us of another late winner at the Pit. Brilliant stuff.

[Scott_M]

On Moyes...

 

”He’s Everton to his rotten little dour miserable fucking wrinkled core”

 

...never a truer sentence written. 

[Kevin D]

I support Newcastle FC, not Nathan Phillips FC.

[Mark M]

1 hour ago, Barnesey said:

We are approaching a non contact sport though. Moaninho said he misses the game he loves plus Goaline technology and I agree with him. However, if the pen is'nt a pen then the Mane foul is not a foul either.

 

Our play has seemed slow and laboured of late. Thiago will improve it but I wonder whether we are deliberately conserving energy because of the schedule?

 

But more should be made of these "Mentality Monsters". Lost in Kiev, win it the following season. Lost the league by the odd point in 195, win it the following year. Last 3 home games, go a goal down, come back and win late after a goal has been disallowed. And only a VAR cheat depriving us of another late winner at the Pit. Brilliant stuff.

Have to say that still really grates on me now also the fact we played them off the park that day as well

[Colt Seavers]

1 hour ago, Barnesey said:

We are approaching a non contact sport though. Moaninho said he misses the game he loves plus Goaline technology and I agree with him. However, if the pen is'nt a pen then the Mane foul is not a foul either.

 

Our play has seemed slow and laboured of late. Thiago will improve it but I wonder whether we are deliberately conserving energy because of the schedule?

 

But more should be made of these "Mentality Monsters". Lost in Kiev, win it the following season. Lost the league by the odd point in 195, win it the following year. Last 3 home games, go a goal down, come back and win late after a goal has been disallowed. And only a VAR cheat depriving us of another late winner at the Pit. Brilliant stuff.

I think we do this a lot more, I was saying to my mate who is a Leeds fan it's hard to keep up the intensity they play with all season in the premier league.

Our first full season with Klopp we played similar to that all game, and was top at Christmas but badly faded; I do think we manage games a lot more energy wise now.

[Anubis]

If you’re upset about Souness and Murphy, wait until you see Cascarino in The Times today...

[dave u]

4 hours ago, Spy Bee said:

It couldn't have been given against the keeper, as neither he or Mane touched the ball. So the only way to disallow the goal was a foul on the defender.

 

That surely can't be right? 

 

You can commit a foul when neither player touches the ball. What if you're chasing a through ball and get pulled back?

 

I've watched it so many times now and I just can't see any foul on the defender. It's reached a point where I think there must be something wrong with me as how can others see it but I can't?

 

I mean, sometimes you see a decision where you totally disagree with how it's interpreted, but you can see why it was given. Like the Kane / Lallana one. Completely wrong decision but if you want to interpret that as a foul on Kane you can at least make a case, albeit a totally flawed one.

 

This one is mad. You can argue it's a foul on the keeper as Sadio challenges him. He doesn't do anything to the defender though, he's making no play at him at all.

[dave u]

15 hours ago, Kurt said:

Does anyone believes Matip will be back. The last two times he has returned he lasted 1 match before going out again. He seems broken.

 

He's got Sturridge DNA.

[dave u]

50 minutes ago, Anubis said:

If you’re upset about Souness and Murphy, wait until you see Cascarino in The Times today...

 

Didn't know what this was but just seen it on Twitter.

 

For those who havent seen, the headline of the article reads "Mohamed Salah dive was insult to Nobby Stiles and the game he loved".

 

At least Mo hasn't frauded himself an international career based on fucking lies. Wonder how insulted 'Nobby' was by that? 

 

Millwall cunt.

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

24 minutes ago, dave u said:

 

Didn't know what this was but just seen it on Twitter.

 

For those who havent seen, the headline of the article reads "Mohamed Salah dive was insult to Nobby Stiles and the game he loved".

 

At least Mo hasn't frauded himself an international career based on fucking lies. Wonder how insulted 'Nobby' was by that? 

 

Millwall cunt.

Liverpool fan my arse. 

[Spy Bee]

29 minutes ago, dave u said:

 

That surely can't be right? 

 

You can commit a foul when neither player touches the ball. What if you're chasing a through ball and get pulled back?

But the ball wasn't in the keepers control, so any contact between the two players couldn't really go in favour of the keeper. What's to say the keeper didn't foul Mane?

[Marcas]

Couldn’t agree more about Bobby Dave. It’s sad but the reality is he’s been bang average for a while - I know we don’t ditch our own, but the truth is he’s a one goal in ten games striker at the mo and that’s not what we need

[rubble-rouser]

11 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

But the ball wasn't in the keepers control, so any contact between the two players couldn't really go in favour of the keeper. What's to say the keeper didn't foul Mane?

Mane moved towards the keeper, not vice versa. And the issue of the keeper's  control is irrelevant. The contact made it more difficult for Fabianski to get up and save the follow up, 

[aws]

You could argue that it was a dangerous studs-up challenge on the keeper but there was no foul on the defender. 

 

And as for Kane, he would have been sent off in rugby. The rugby refs/linesmen/VAR officials have no difficulty whatsoever in working out who's challenging for a ball in the air and who's barging/blocking in a dangerous fashion. 

[index1000]

I thought it was a foul on the keeper as soon as it happened to be honest. The attacks on Mo are only to be expected by the shower of shit that passes for pundits in this country. I am pretty sure that if he was  Mike from Essex and not Mo the Egyptian King it would be a different story.

Up Vote for the last line as well, Brilliantnt.

[Arnaud]

Great last sentence! Best ever you have written ! I guess you stole it from your mum ?

[Spy Bee]

1 hour ago, rubble-rouser said:

Mane moved towards the keeper, not vice versa. And the issue of the keeper's  control is irrelevant. The contact made it more difficult for Fabianski to get up and save the follow up, 

It also made it more difficult for Mane to get up. I'd say it was incidental, and nobody could be blamed.