99-05 why didn't we win the champions league again?

BringKlebersonBack

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 18, 2015
Messages
28
I don’t think we were always tactically disciplined, or sophisticated enough, to win consistently. The pre-99 side was learning and improving for 3/4 years, and each season brought a gradual improvement in the side - and even in the final, we were lucky to win it.

Post-99, I think we had to start adjusting to a new wave of tactical innovations in Europe, and Ferguson needed to try to make the team more innovative on the ball, with more technical quality - certainly his interest in the likes of Figo, his signing of Veron, demonstrated his knowledge that we needed more ball-players in the side. It’s part of his unheralded genius that despite the oft-repeated “Ferguson was no tactician”, he recognised the change in European tactics and tried to adapt our side to play well, consistently, against European rivals.

Let’s not forget the fact too that the UCL is a cup competition. Luck always plays a part. We’ve had some good, some bad.

I’d love an answer to the “why are Liverpool so good in Europe” though. Is it a cultural thing? Is it the mythos of the club?
 
  • Like
Reactions: nimic

Irwin99

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
9,124
Silvestre was fine at left back, and was pretty good at setting up chances whipping in crosses/passes out wide. The problem I had was after the defensive problems that had showed regularly from 98-00, it was obvious that a top tier defender was needed to solidify the back four and partner Stam. The likes of Berg, Brown, and Johnsen were simply crocks and could not be counted on going forward even with their quality. Ship Berg off (they actually did that coming season), keep Brown and Johnsen as backup, and bring in a top tier defender.

SAF should have signed Rio in the summer 2000 window. And if not him should have ponied up for Campbell or Thuram.
Silvestre was actually a decent and very quick player who could get a very good amount of assists but there was always a mistake in him I felt- League cup final in 03 for example, and you could argue in the tie against Bayern Munich in 2001. A bit like Smalling perhaps in the sense that for all the good he did you had more than a fair share of those 'what the hell was he doing there' moments.
 

Irwin99

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
9,124
I don’t think we were always tactically disciplined, or sophisticated enough, to win consistently. The pre-99 side was learning and improving for 3/4 years, and each season brought a gradual improvement in the side - and even in the final, we were lucky to win it.

I’d love an answer to the “why are Liverpool so good in Europe” though. Is it a cultural thing? Is it the mythos of the club?
Really REALLY hate to say it but the Anfield factor is a massive reason. Teams tend to crap their pants when visiting especially if the second leg is at Anfield, Dortmund and Barca are recent examples. Old Trafford can be like that but it's just not as often. I think Maradona said recently that OT was deafening when he went there in the 80s and Barca 08 and Chelsea in the league in 05 are good examples as well of how a rocking OT atmosphere can really help.
 

RedorDead21

Full Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2013
Messages
9,215
I still remember Keane's interview after Bayern knocked us out...'' Perhaps its the end of the road for this team im not sure''

Loved Keano so much.
How he wasn't shown the door the next day by SAF for that I'll never know. Allowing a player to say that! He's the only player he ever had who would get away with it once! He was 100% right but still it was ballsy.
 

SiRed

New Member
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
2,748
Location
Manchester
How he wasn't shown the door the next day by SAF for that I'll never know. Allowing a player to say that! He's the only player he ever had who would get away with it once! He was 100% right but still it was ballsy.
I imagine he was warned about it the day after. I miss that passion. Theres a lot of players we have now that need calling out and nobody with the cojonies to do it.
 

TheRedDevil'sAdvocate

Full Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
3,632
Location
The rainbow's end
I don’t think we were always tactically disciplined, or sophisticated enough, to win consistently. The pre-99 side was learning and improving for 3/4 years, and each season brought a gradual improvement in the side - and even in the final, we were lucky to win it.

Post-99, I think we had to start adjusting to a new wave of tactical innovations in Europe, and Ferguson needed to try to make the team more innovative on the ball, with more technical quality - certainly his interest in the likes of Figo, his signing of Veron, demonstrated his knowledge that we needed more ball-players in the side. It’s part of his unheralded genius that despite the oft-repeated “Ferguson was no tactician”, he recognised the change in European tactics and tried to adapt our side to play well, consistently, against European rivals.

Let’s not forget the fact too that the UCL is a cup competition. Luck always plays a part. We’ve had some good, some bad.

I’d love an answer to the “why are Liverpool so good in Europe” though. Is it a cultural thing? Is it the mythos of the club?
You are absolutely right, we weren't. That first sentence nails it. We always seemed very set on our ways in a time when tactics which favoured an extra midfielder (usually at the expense of a forward) were becoming very dominant. Going into knock-out ties against sides that can match your attacking prowess with a 2v3 disadvantage in the midfield can prove costly even if these two midfielders are Keane and Scholes. You're right about the other thing too although i wouldn't call it an innovation. It was the exact opposite of what's happening now: The tendency of most big clubs to focus on the defensive aspect of the game in their half of the pitch and eventually win their matches more with the quality of their chances and less with the quantity. Just as we watch now teams that thrive with the ball at their feet, the norm (if you want to call it that) was to create a team that would feel most comfortable without the ball. These tactics helped Greece win the Euro and Liverpool the CL. It was the time when Mourinho was the undisputed number 1 manager in the world.

Fergie always knew that, he just didn't like to use such tactics and he always tried to win by producing attacking football. He started experimenting (with Veron as you mentioned) in the mid-'00s and he finally made the concession (with Carrick, Scholes/Giggs and Hargreaves we basically played with three in the midfield) in 2008 simply because he wanted to win another CL. Sadly, Barcelona happened and he didn't get the chance to add another CL trophy. I believe he even mentions it in his book that he wasn't very fond of the tactical changes he made but he thought of them as necessary at the time.

As for Liverpool, i don't believe it's a cultural thing. 5/6 times they won it, they were among the best teams in the world (both in terms of quality and tactics) and the one time they definitely didn't possess the quality they had Benitez who was a master tactician in the defensive aspect of the game and probably the only one back then who could beat Mourinho in his own game.
 

CognitiveNeuro

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 16, 2018
Messages
393
Reasons:

It's a cup competition and as such being the "better team" doesn't count for as much as in the League.

Liverpool fans are that much more passionate (at home) and are more effective at pushing their team on.

The real damage to our historical stats was done before SAF started, as since that time we have had more or less the same results.

The last two Liverpool final appearances have come during the period of one of their best ever teams.

The "United Way" is more gung-ho than the historic Liverpool way. Being gung-ho doesn't (and didn't) work as well in Europe as a more defensive/tactical approach or having a more balanced team.

Our recent peak coincided with the move to the CL format and that is harder to win.
Isn't it odd that you had more or less had the same results with SAF, your greatest manager and with your greatest teams? While it's been mostly average Liverpool teams always in transition periods?

Not sure about the gung-ho thing. United even under SAF surely weren't gung-ho, especially away from home. Maybe only in certain games they were.

Then even if your peak coincided with the move to the CL format and it's harder to win, Liverpool still equalled your record with 2 CLs and haven't won the league in 3 decades.

Basically I gather from your post, the real reasons being passionate support and a cup competition which doesn't really mean the better team has won. It's interesting though because I always thought this passionate support thing about Liverpool being bullshit. In any case, I didn't expect a team's support to make that much difference.
 

soaphroniscuss

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
388
Isn't it odd that you had more or less had the same results with SAF, your greatest manager and with your greatest teams? While it's been mostly average Liverpool teams always in transition periods?

Not sure about the gung-ho thing. United even under SAF surely weren't gung-ho, especially away from home. Maybe only in certain games they were.

Then even if your peak coincided with the move to the CL format and it's harder to win, Liverpool still equalled your record with 2 CLs and haven't won the league in 3 decades.

Basically I gather from your post, the real reasons being passionate support and a cup competition which doesn't really mean the better team has won. It's interesting though because I always thought this passionate support thing about Liverpool being bullshit. In any case, I didn't expect a team's support to make that much difference.
In which CL final years were Liverpool mostly average?
2005 W and which other ones? 2007 L?

In which EL winning years?
2001 W, 2016 L and what else?

Please list them.
 

Ooge_

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
175
Supports
Werder
I can´t judge ManUtd but Bayern. They had a phase between 2010 and 2016 where they should have won the cl one more time. Especially in 2016 when they dropped out in the semifinal against Atlético. Simeone said afterwards that this Bayern team was the strongest opponent he faced as a coach. In hindsight Bayern won the CL as often as Inter and Chelsea since 2010. Pretty disappointing if you ask me.
 

Irwin99

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
9,124
I imagine he was warned about it the day after. I miss that passion. There's a lot of players we have now that need calling out and nobody with the cojonies to do it.
His aggression really intensified at times after the Treble. I think it was against Middlesborough away in 2000 (not the home game where he chased the referee) where he went absolutely ballistic at his teammates on the pitch. The next year he said after the Bayern defeat that 'it was the end of the road for this team, we've tried but we're just not good enough' and the following year he threatens to quit football after a 4-3 loss against Newcastle after being sent off. The guy had massive standards and issues with failure and SAF tolerated it for as long as he was still useful.

I kind of miss that in a way too. You're never quite sure if players hurt as much as the fans or if they're just happy to pick up their pay at the end of the week. With Keane it was all there to see.
 

MrMarcello

In a well-ordered universe...
Joined
Dec 26, 2000
Messages
52,592
Location
On a pale blue dot in space
Mhh let me see..

1999-2000 - Madrid were stronger. Though looking back, we shouldn't have been 3-0 down at home.
2000-2001 - Bayern were better than us
2001-2002 - An absolute travesty that we lost that tie.
2002-2003 - Everyone goes on about Ronaldo hat trick. Barthez should not have let in 2 of those goals.
2003-2004 - Howard gifts Jose his biggest gift of his career.
2004-2005 - Milan were just better than us.

so looking back, maybe 2 of those years you can the team we faced was clearly better than us. The other times we kept shooting ourselves on the foot. Also interestingly, we were at home in the second leg for 4 of these ties and lost them all.
2000 - agreed
2001 - had United not slipped in the second group stage they would have drawn the other bracket - Galatasary and Leeds - and most likely into the Final against Bayern.
2002 - couldn't finish
2003 - Brown was just as much at fault
2004 - officiating as well, and had O'Shea/et al not been sleeping that dropped ball could have been cleared
2005 - inches from a shock Fortune goal (think it was him off the post), may have turned the tide
 

CognitiveNeuro

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 16, 2018
Messages
393
In which CL final years were Liverpool mostly average?
2005 W and which other ones? 2007 L?

In which EL winning years?
2001 W, 2016 L and what else?

Please list them.
I said it's it's been mostly average Liverpool teams always in transition periods.
Liverpool were in transition in 2005 as it was Benitez's first season he just brought a group of players. 2007 was another sort of transition period as Hicks and Gillette bought the club this season.

I don't even have to explain how average they were in 2005

In 2007, they finished 21 points behind you yet still made the Champions League Final. Imagine finishing 21 points behind the leaders and making the CL final.

In 2016, they finished 8th in the table, just above Stoke but made the Europa League Final. So yes, they had average teams in those seasons. If you want to dispute this then I'd really like to hear it.
 

CognitiveNeuro

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 16, 2018
Messages
393
Really REALLY hate to say it but the Anfield factor is a massive reason. Teams tend to crap their pants when visiting especially if the second leg is at Anfield, Dortmund and Barca are recent examples. Old Trafford can be like that but it's just not as often. I think Maradona said recently that OT was deafening when he went there in the 80s and Barca 08 and Chelsea in the league in 05 are good examples as well of how a rocking OT atmosphere can really help.
Is Anfield really that loud and intimidating? I think it's really exaggerated. People used to say that it's so loud you can't ever hear the CL anthem but that's just not true. Do you really believe that is the major factor to them reaching so many finals?
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
30,003
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
I don’t think we were always tactically disciplined, or sophisticated enough, to win consistently. The pre-99 side was learning and improving for 3/4 years, and each season brought a gradual improvement in the side - and even in the final, we were lucky to win it.

Post-99, I think we had to start adjusting to a new wave of tactical innovations in Europe, and Ferguson needed to try to make the team more innovative on the ball, with more technical quality - certainly his interest in the likes of Figo, his signing of Veron, demonstrated his knowledge that we needed more ball-players in the side. It’s part of his unheralded genius that despite the oft-repeated “Ferguson was no tactician”, he recognised the change in European tactics and tried to adapt our side to play well, consistently, against European rivals.

Let’s not forget the fact too that the UCL is a cup competition. Luck always plays a part. We’ve had some good, some bad.

I’d love an answer to the “why are Liverpool so good in Europe” though. Is it a cultural thing? Is it the mythos of the club?
That year in 99 we traded our luck for the next 10 years for the treble.

But feck it. It's worth it.
 

Infordin

Full Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2016
Messages
3,897
Supports
Barcelona
I can´t judge ManUtd but Bayern. They had a phase between 2010 and 2016 where they should have won the cl one more time. Especially in 2016 when they dropped out in the semifinal against Atlético. Simeone said afterwards that this Bayern team was the strongest opponent he faced as a coach. In hindsight Bayern won the CL as often as Inter and Chelsea since 2010. Pretty disappointing if you ask me.
Even in 2017 and 2018 they would have probably won it if they had gone through against Madrid. 2017 was controversial but Madrid was probably better. In 2018 Bayern was better but shat the bed.
 

VorZakone

What would Kenny G do?
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
32,623
Is Anfield really that loud and intimidating? I think it's really exaggerated. People used to say that it's so loud you can't ever hear the CL anthem but that's just not true. Do you really believe that is the major factor to them reaching so many finals?
I mean, noise or no noise, the results speak for themselves. Liverpool are a different beast at home compared to away.
 

JDoe

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
441
Supports
Bayern
Even in 2017 and 2018 they would have probably won it if they had gone through against Madrid. 2017 was controversial but Madrid was probably better. In 2018 Bayern was better but shat the bed.
We were the better cup team in 16/17 and 17/18 than under Pep despite having way worse squads. Atletico was by far the "worst" big club we played against and we still lost deservedly. At least in 16/17 and especially 17/18 we were competitive against the best in the world.

I can´t judge ManUtd but Bayern. They had a phase between 2010 and 2016 where they should have won the cl one more time. Especially in 2016 when they dropped out in the semifinal against Atlético. Simeone said afterwards that this Bayern team was the strongest opponent he faced as a coach. In hindsight Bayern won the CL as often as Inter and Chelsea since 2010. Pretty disappointing if you ask me.
Those were pretty much empty phrases to talk the opponent up which you've defeated. It's not like we battered them and lost due to some minor miracle like against Chelsea in 11/12. That was an even match chances-wise.
 

Ooge_

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
175
Supports
Werder
Those were pretty much empty phrases to talk the opponent up which you've defeated. It's not like we battered them and lost due to some minor miracle like against Chelsea in 11/12. That was an even match chances-wise.
Empty phrases? Even match chance-wise? I disagree.

Shots
Bayern: 33
Atletico: 7

Shots on Target
Bayern: 11
Atletico: 4

Shot Zones
Bayern: 6 % (6 Yards Box), 45 % (18 Yard Box), 49 % (Outside of the box)
Atletico: 0 % (6 Yards Box), 29 % (18 Yard Box), 71 % (Outside of the box)

Passes
Bayern: 693
Atletico: 261

Pass Success
Bayern: 85 %
Atletico: 56 %

Action Zones
Home Third: 15 %
Middle Third: 42 %
Away Third: 43 %

https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/1...eague-2015-2016-Bayern-Munich-Atletico-Madrid
 

Gio

★★★★★★★★
Joined
Jan 25, 2001
Messages
20,300
Location
Bonnie Scotland
Supports
Rangers
I don’t think we were always tactically disciplined, or sophisticated enough, to win consistently. The pre-99 side was learning and improving for 3/4 years, and each season brought a gradual improvement in the side - and even in the final, we were lucky to win it.

Post-99, I think we had to start adjusting to a new wave of tactical innovations in Europe, and Ferguson needed to try to make the team more innovative on the ball, with more technical quality - certainly his interest in the likes of Figo, his signing of Veron, demonstrated his knowledge that we needed more ball-players in the side. It’s part of his unheralded genius that despite the oft-repeated “Ferguson was no tactician”, he recognised the change in European tactics and tried to adapt our side to play well, consistently, against European rivals.

Let’s not forget the fact too that the UCL is a cup competition. Luck always plays a part. We’ve had some good, some bad.

I’d love an answer to the “why are Liverpool so good in Europe” though. Is it a cultural thing? Is it the mythos of the club?
Solid points. I'd draw a parallel between mid-to-late 90s United and mid-to-late 10s City in their approach to Europe - overflowing, relentless attacking football which by its nature contained periods of exposed vulnerability that the top players punished at the business end of the Champions League.

Post the Madrid awakening in 2000, the only one that stands out for me would be Leverkusen in 2001/02. That looked like a missed opportunity as the final appeared to be a collision course between Real and United at Hampden. But fundamentally that back line - young Brown/Silvestre, old Johnsen and Blanc, backed up by Barthez - wasn't strong enough to be guaranteeing CL final appearances. After then I don't think United were good enough to be genuine contenders and the one CL over the 1999-2005 period seems a fair reflection. Valencia reached 2 finals and were trophyless, while Deportivo, Leverkusen and Juventus all came away with zero too, yet have similar or stronger cases to feel hard done by.
 

Irwin99

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
9,124
Is Anfield really that loud and intimidating? I think it's really exaggerated. People used to say that it's so loud you can't ever hear the CL anthem but that's just not true. Do you really believe that is the major factor to them reaching so many finals?
Sadly, it really is a factor I think, not at all in the league but definitely in Europe. It's not just the noise but when you see all the flags and banners and that odious anthem it does feel special even when you hear/see it on the telly. Home players react better, referees feel under pressure, away players get nervous. Far better teams in Europe have gone there down the years and crapped their pants in a second leg at Anfield.
 

Skills

Snitch
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
42,010
After the treble winning season we signed Fortune, Taibi, Bosnich and Silvestre.

That's a pretty poor summer. Should've invested big time that summer to consolidate our spot at the top. Should've bought a top quality keeper that summer & another great CB.

We then bought feck all the season after as well, when we probably should've started rethinking the attack (tbf we would've signed RVN if it weren't for his injury) and maybe another CM. We tried to correct this the next summer by buying Veron and Ruud.

The worst thing you can do is stand still once you've reached the top. You need to refresh, inject some change.
 

Schneckerl

Full Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2016
Messages
2,704
I’d love an answer to the “why are Liverpool so good in Europe” though. Is it a cultural thing? Is it the mythos of the club?
They happened to be the best club in England at the right time, different competition back then. English teams won it 7 times in 8 years from '77 - '84. In the modern CL it's 2-2 in terms of wins.
 

Amir

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2000
Messages
24,831
Location
Rehovot, Israel
After the treble winning season we signed Fortune, Taibi, Bosnich and Silvestre.

That's a pretty poor summer. Should've invested big time that summer to consolidate our spot at the top. Should've bought a top quality keeper that summer & another great CB.
Fergie himself mentioned over the years to how important it is to strengthen from a position of power. Thing is, it might have been a PLC budget thing. I remember Fergie writing that in the summer of 1998 we only had money for the Stam and Blomqvist deals. We got Yorke by getting it done late and putting it onto next year's budget. Then next year arrived...
 

JDoe

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
441
Supports
Bayern
Empty phrases? Even match chance-wise? I disagree.

Shots
Bayern: 33
Atletico: 7

Shots on Target
Bayern: 11
Atletico: 4

Shot Zones
Bayern: 6 % (6 Yards Box), 45 % (18 Yard Box), 49 % (Outside of the box)
Atletico: 0 % (6 Yards Box), 29 % (18 Yard Box), 71 % (Outside of the box)

Passes
Bayern: 693
Atletico: 261

Pass Success
Bayern: 85 %
Atletico: 56 %

Action Zones
Home Third: 15 %
Middle Third: 42 %
Away Third: 43 %

https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/1...eague-2015-2016-Bayern-Munich-Atletico-Madrid
Stats, especially shots and possession mean relatively little without context when you are a team that is trimmed for possession. As far as I can remember, the xG stats were very even if you include the missed pen for us and the two missed pens for Atletico. I'm not denying that we were the better team and probably should have advanced, but it definitely wasn't as clear cut and we certainly weren't the best team they ever faced. PSG against United was much, much more of a freak result for instance. But we digress.
 

CognitiveNeuro

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 16, 2018
Messages
393
Sadly, it really is a factor I think, not at all in the league but definitely in Europe. It's not just the noise but when you see all the flags and banners and that odious anthem it does feel special even when you hear/see it on the telly. Home players react better, referees feel under pressure, away players get nervous. Far better teams in Europe have gone there down the years and crapped their pants in a second leg at Anfield.
So doesn't United have flags and banners? Can't other teams get an anthem? I'm shocked that even United fans are admitting Anfield is special.
 

Charlie Foley

Full Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
18,308
Lost Schmeichel, struggled to replace him. As good as we were in the treble season, in some ways that final week was our perfect storm of matches - we weren't easy winners of anything, we were last ditch winners of it all, that's a tough act to follow.
not to be a pedant, but we won the FA Cup Final handily enough if I recall correctly (though the semi final was mental)
 

Inter Yer Nan

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
6,380
Location
Los Angeles, CA (from UK)
A number of things. I think we were often a little too attacking at times in those days. Maybe if Fergie took his 2007-2011 champions league approach to certain games we'd have won another one. We were probably too open in some of the away games and arguably too complacent in certain homes games.

I also think the competition was stronger and it was much harder to repeat back then. Bayern had a golden generation, Barca were excellent, Real Madrid were great and the Italian sides were brilliant, all of them. Then you had teams like Valencia and Deportivo who were brilliant sides that won major titles and picked big scalps in Europe.
 

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
30,003
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
Really REALLY hate to say it but the Anfield factor is a massive reason. Teams tend to crap their pants when visiting especially if the second leg is at Anfield, Dortmund and Barca are recent examples. Old Trafford can be like that but it's just not as often. I think Maradona said recently that OT was deafening when he went there in the 80s and Barca 08 and Chelsea in the league in 05 are good examples as well of how a rocking OT atmosphere can really help.
Support and atmosphere probably is only 5 percent extra. You need the beef of the skills and players before atmosphere matters. Probably that tiny little extra bit to get you to the finish line
 

ryansgirl

Full Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2001
Messages
2,914
Location
where the sun rises
Really REALLY hate to say it but the Anfield factor is a massive reason. Teams tend to crap their pants when visiting especially if the second leg is at Anfield, Dortmund and Barca are recent examples. Old Trafford can be like that but it's just not as often. I think Maradona said recently that OT was deafening when he went there in the 80s and Barca 08 and Chelsea in the league in 05 are good examples as well of how a rocking OT atmosphere can really help.
Sorry, while Anfield undoubtedly is a special place and Liverpool one of the iconic football clubs in Britain and the world, saying 'teams crap their pants' there is silly.

In the days of the great Emlyn Hughes and later with their other European Cup winning sides, the atmosphere was far more intense especially given the huge number of bodies that used to be packed on the terraces of football clubs. Fans could also be intimidating in Britain as in other countries - that hasn't been permitted for some time in the Premier League.

Ask Sir Alex which ground was intimidating and he would tell you about Leeds where United under him ran the gauntlet of some threatening Leeds fans and a wife of one of United's Directors, I think, had a cup of tea thrown over her.

I know we're talking about the Champions League but no, teams from Europe wouldn't feel scared as you suggest by Liverpool's home ground. Flags and chants are normal in football especially on the European nights.

Many European grounds are far more intense and intimidating especially at the Italian clubs like Roma and Lazzio, and the Spanish grounds. Liverpool also haven't won an English title for years and while they're clearly ahead in terms of winning the European Cup, it is more down to the foreign managers they've had and the type of players they've bought.

Until recently those kinds of foreign players weren't exactly setting the Premier League alight with a few exceptions and their lack of titles shows. They are more suited to European games.

As for the noise factor - I remember watching European ties under Sir Alex, especially the key games, on big screens at pubs. You couldn't hear the commentary very well and the noise invaded the room. I forget which commentator one time but the awe in his voice remains as he raised his voice, 'And Old Trafford IS ROCKING!'.
 

Ooge_

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
175
Supports
Werder
Stats, especially shots and possession mean relatively little without context when you are a team that is trimmed for possession. As far as I can remember, the xG stats were very even if you include the missed pen for us and the two missed pens for Atletico. I'm not denying that we were the better team and probably should have advanced, but it definitely wasn't as clear cut and we certainly weren't the best team they ever faced. PSG against United was much, much more of a freak result for instance. But we digress.
Sadly the Tweet about the xG stats i remember is not longer available (see at the end of the article https://spielverlagerung.com/2016/0...ing_wp_cron=1560417589.0526120662689208984375), but here is the conclusion from spielverlagerung:

"Despite getting a goal back, Bayern were unable to find the winner as Atlético held on impressively. Whilst Simeone’s team were extremely stable in the quarter final match against Barcelona, their stability was not seen at similar levels in the semi-finals. Quite often relying on poor finishing from Bayern and some heroics by Oblak, the Spanish side rode their luck on a number of occasions. They controlled the first half of the match at the Calderon, which was in many ways a result of Bayern’s poor possession game, whilst they were dominated for large spells of the second leg. Expected goals is a strong barometer of performances and in every model, Bayern were shown to be the superior team over the two legs."

But nevertheless the more important question is: Why are xG Stats so hard to find? whoscored does not show them in their match reports as far as i could figure out.

Does somebody know a free database for xG Stats?
 

Schmeichel's Cartwheel

Correctly predicted Italy to win Euro 2020
Joined
Dec 21, 2014
Messages
11,420
Location
Manchester
99-00 - Beaten by the better team in Madrid
00-01 - Beaten by the better team in Bayern
01-02 - Should have made the final against Madrid
02-03 - Beaten by the better team in Madrid
03-04 - Should have won the competition
04-05 - Beaten by the better team in Milan
 

BringKlebersonBack

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 18, 2015
Messages
28
You are absolutely right, we weren't. That first sentence nails it. We always seemed very set on our ways in a time when tactics which favoured an extra midfielder (usually at the expense of a forward) were becoming very dominant. Going into knock-out ties against sides that can match your attacking prowess with a 2v3 disadvantage in the midfield can prove costly even if these two midfielders are Keane and Scholes. You're right about the other thing too although i wouldn't call it an innovation. It was the exact opposite of what's happening now: The tendency of most big clubs to focus on the defensive aspect of the game in their half of the pitch and eventually win their matches more with the quality of their chances and less with the quantity. Just as we watch now teams that thrive with the ball at their feet, the norm (if you want to call it that) was to create a team that would feel most comfortable without the ball. These tactics helped Greece win the Euro and Liverpool the CL. It was the time when Mourinho was the undisputed number 1 manager in the world.

Fergie always knew that, he just didn't like to use such tactics and he always tried to win by producing attacking football. He started experimenting (with Veron as you mentioned) in the mid-'00s and he finally made the concession (with Carrick, Scholes/Giggs and Hargreaves we basically played with three in the midfield) in 2008 simply because he wanted to win another CL. Sadly, Barcelona happened and he didn't get the chance to add another CL trophy. I believe he even mentions it in his book that he wasn't very fond of the tactical changes he made but he thought of them as necessary at the time.

As for Liverpool, i don't believe it's a cultural thing. 5/6 times they won it, they were among the best teams in the world (both in terms of quality and tactics) and the one time they definitely didn't possess the quality they had Benitez who was a master tactician in the defensive aspect of the game and probably the only one back then who could beat Mourinho in his own game.

Absolutely spot on about the change into the 2v3 midfield issue, and the movement into teams that “camped” if you like, and then hit hard on the counter-attack. In fact, this was a reaction to the possession-heavy and ultimately inefficient style that teams were trying to play - and Ferguson ended up adjusting his tactics as his growing European experience taught him that his own tactical sophistication was limited. I still believe that Lippi, Van Gaal and Heyneckes were the absolute best.

It is somewhat of a concern when you consider that our current manager has not evidenced any really insight into tactical principles.