One of the reasons its quite different is shown up in match stats (specifically running) - its obviously a hot topic in terms of can we sustain it over a season.
Also true of Liverpool when United had the ball, especially first half. Every man behind the ball sometimes look like that.
Yeah I'd say based on the first half the final third was where you fell short. You did well to expose where we're weakest in possession. Karius, Lovren and Matip between them didn't seem to know what to do with it. I'm not really sure what the fix is for that but we need to find one because we seem to concede possession from that area of the pitch more than anywhere else. It's a huge difference from United who had De Gea with his kicking ability finding targets like Ibrahimovic, Pogba and Fellaini when he needed to. You had an option beyond the back line which we lacked.
Yeah we've been struggling with putting chances away for a few matches now unfortunately. That said under Van Gaal we'd make about 1 a match against the lower sides so there's a big improvement there. It's just a shame Martial and Mkhy have had injury hit starts to the season, I think we'd be higher in the league otherwise. That said, it's not a Manchester United season if we don't get an ever growing list of injuries.
You guys ran about 112Km, we did about 10km less. I don't disagree that pressing is different, heck you may very well have the better way and be better at it. I'm just pointing out we did it successfully to you guys, where it was expected we would sit back from minute 1. Instead we were the ones applying the pressure (for the first half at least) and some of your players wilted under it.
I'd say forcing a save from the keeper is as clear cut as chances get personally. You probably needed to do more with your opening 20 minutes. That was where United could have won the game. Contrary to the general consensus, we don't actually start quickly. We've started a fair few games slowly this season and then grown into them.
Its strange how that wasn't pointed out during the analysis after the game. Sky clearly showed times when Rashford and Young were part of back 6 and the ball wasn't that close to Utd's area. There is a difference between that and having your players behind the ball but in their own positions.
We did, but it is quite common these days. You need something to cover the narrow winger.
Tbh I don't think any team can handle a good press (whatever type) from a quality well organised team. Thats why more and more teams are doing it to a higher degree. Of course the "can they handle it fro the whole season" debate comes up but football is evolving and this is rapidly becoming an integral part of the game.
So you had your eyes closed when the stat after 35 mins was double the amount of play being in your half than ours?
I don't really see the difference. United probably had a more disciplined shape which made an interesting observation that's all. Pundits love drawing lines and all that.
One screenshot without context doesn't really tell the story of the match.
Perhaps not the best example as the ball is quite far forward, but look how tucked in Utds fullbacks are - its not like your "wingers" are doubling up on a Liverpool attacker. Its virtually a flat back 6.
Anyway you got a point, so the end justifies the means.
Its up to you whether you want to believe me that Sky showed this happening a few times last night - you not believing it doesn't change the fact that it happened.
You're wording it like Klopp sent us out there to be negative. The reality is that we were poor in the first half, couldn't keep the ball and couldn't build up any attacks because United did a very good job of stopping us in the right area's. Klopp was quite clearly frustrated at half time and you don't really believe that he sent his players out there to contain United do you?
You're putting a brave face on it but it was a negative shit-show from a home team. Not sure how you think it wasn't intentional either. You barely wanted to come out of your half for most of the game. That's tactical not accidental.
Gary Neville :
Thats right Klopp said to his side "listen boys, you're great going forward, score loads of goals, and never mind the fact that we're at home and could go top of the league, I want you to change everything you've done this seasons so far - in fact go against the ethos I;ve tried to build in this team"
That is the intention though, being able to use both a CB/CM and FB against a player like Coutinho without leaving a highway for Clyne/Milner.
Klopp's also not stupid and was wary of losing a home game to a big rival sitting close behind in the league.
Of course I agree when the attacking team is wide ideally you need your winger helping your full back - but as you see from the quote from Neville above it was at times a back 6.
There is a difference tho between failing to perform positively because of circumstances in the game and being set up negatively.
I think it's more bemusement that the Liverpool fans are trying to make out we were under the cosh or had to play like this to nullify the non-existent threat from your team.
I suppose it's a nicer easier-to-swallow way of saying "we played negatively".
I don't think Ive seen any LFC fans in this thread suggest those things - certainly not to the extent you imply.
I wasn't really trying to. We definitely played 6-3-1 for periods of that game.
Apologies - my misunderstanding.
It does when you see that the possession was totally unambitious and sterile, often because you were penned in your own half.
In the first half (especially the first half hour) its fair to say that a lot of our possession was in our half. But I would hazard a guess that a large chunk of our possession in the second half was in your half, and we cut thru your defence twice (not much in fairness for us, compared to other games recently, but most of those teams didn't play 6 at the back).
Yeah because Neville was the only one watching the game while the rest of us were hearing it on radio or reading it off texts or something.
There's no 'negative conspiracy' you were just negative last night for a home side. No great shame in it given the circumstances. I'm not labelling Klopp a negative manager, he's clearly not.
Difference being it's not a common occurrence under Klopp. If it was then we'd be up in arms over it as well (dependent on results I suppose). I'm sure some heads will be turned if we have a similar performance against West Brom, but something tells me we'll have a fair few shots in that one. Whether we win or not is another question.
That us not domination in my eyes. I said in the in game thread United have us sussed but its not total domination which is what I quoted.
Because he is streets .. nay worlds ... ahead of you in his ability to analysis a match (as everyone on here knows).
Is the correct assessment.
That stat is a total fabrication (either by you or you picking up someone else's stat and perpetuating the falsehood). Simple check .. look at the Sky running commentary, we had more than that many excursions into your half in the first 45 mins (naturally since, even as Neville said, the match changed after 20 mins, with United becoming far more defensive as we pressed forward). Do you think each excursion was one touch ? Logic alone tells you 9 touches is simply impossible, but then logic isn't your strong point is it.
6 touches in our penalty area in the whole match. Yep, domination it is.
Anthony Taylor
replaced by Luke Shaw
replaced by Wayne Rooney
