It's definitely misreading the data. Just taking isolated data points to create a narrative.
It's actually reading the data literally - so no, it's not misreading. You are just adding more context to it, which is absolutely fine.
I don't agree with this, purely because context really is everything. Think of the United side who lost twice to Barca in CL finals, we would be considered the best club side of all time had we won both, maybe even just one, of those (3 CL finals in 4 years and the year we weren't in the final was when we were battering Bayern and then Rafael got sent off at OT in the QF). At that period through 06/07 to 09/10 we were playing at such an elite level, winning a competitive PL and doing well in a much stronger CL than now.
Not sure I understand what your first paragraph, which is a hypothetical that didn't happen, is trying to say?
As in 1 result (let's say we beat Barca in 10/11) can completely change how a team is talked about but it's literally just a single game. The post seemed to be saying it doesn't really matter if he got to some CL finals whereas, in my opinion, you can use a bit of context. It's not some random isolated cup run of lucky park the bus football i.e. Di Matteo at Chelsea, it's a period over a number of seasons of sustained success. Re SAF, the common (and really only) criticism that does regularly appear of him is we underperformed in Europe, which, again, is a reason to add some context like I did in the post before this; bad luck in key games, much stronger CL than now. It is much easier to win the CL now. Conversely, it's also context people ignore when they say Pep is the best ever - both CL wins with Barca they got genuinely atrocious ref decisions to get through to both finals against us + the obvious issue with celebrating a treble when cheating but, someone like yourself might say, 'he has won 3 CL finals, therefore he is better than x, y or z'.
But... That's exaclty football? World Cup finals are just 1 game. All cup competition finals are 1 game. Provide as much context, that's fine. The historically great managers are those who have won things in those fine margins, that's what football excellence is.
I'm not adding more context to it, I'm adding additional data points. the data points stated weren't wrong. using these data points as representative for the entire performance, however is.
Keep gaslighting yourself believing that a club that won the PL and CL didn't achieve much more than over the same timeframe than a club who didn't.
Ah, use of the word gaslighting in this kind of context. I'm out. Have fun!
By your logic United has done much better barely making out of the group phases. Seriously - do you really believe this? Do you really believe making it to a CL finale isn't an achievement?
It’s not misreading the data, it’s laying it out in its purist form.
Deliberately looking for data points that make Liverpool look worse than United while Liverpool objectively had greater achievements is misreading the data.
What the feck are you even going on about?
I'm not saying it goes in favour, I'm saying it's better than not getting to those finals. Case in point.
He didn't though. Winning PL titles is a matter of bottle. It's why Arsenal didn't win it last year, and why Spurs never hold together a title run. He won 1 PL and 1 CL in 9 years. That's great, it's not elite.
We've been awful over the past 10 years. So him finishing below us so often doesn't make us look great but him look inconsistent.
What a stupid post.
It’s not made to look worse, it’s fact.
5 year period? I don’t think so. Agree with everything Rooney in Paris is saying. Winning matters but klopp gets over the top praise for coming second and reaching finals.
I tried having this argument but was basically shouted down. How can it be said he consistently challenged city when he finished below United during our shittest decade for a long time 4 times in 9 years.
crying out for a statue to be built for being runners up and reaching finals. Good one17/18 to 21/22 they were in 3 of 5 CL finals winning 1. They made the k/o stages every year in that period.
They’ve won bigger trophies for sure and I’m not down playing that, we’d obviously swap the run with them. But they haven’t won a lot more trophies. Not for this so called dominance they’ve had over everyone
Aye. Utd won 4 league titles and got to 3 CL finals over 5 years? And people like to think he's up there as one of the best PL managers and compare him to SAF....
No one said they dominated European Football. But they were contenders for the CL title for many years. When was United contender for the CL title in the last decade? Heck, winning the CL alone is H U G E.
What. I didn’t say United were. You’ve clearly got a hard on for United
What's your obsession with Utd? How is comparing his performances vs Utd of the past 10 years relevant? What are you even arguing?
They didn't play the same front three in the run-in '22 though as they had at least four good players to pick from (and often played a front four rather than front three). Firmino was a fifth, but he was mostly injured. It's true that in the run-in in '19 they played pretty much the same front three in each game, but they won the Champions League and the last 9 PL games, so it wasn't like they were hurt by only having those players.
It’s not weird though. Everyone would agree they’re the two best managers in the world, and they’ve both become historical icons too.
Hairy Cane? You sick ....
It was literally the whole argument. see post #1109. The whole point was that the user wanted to find data points that implied Klopp didn't do better than United throughout the spell. I said that's kust reading the data wrong by using isolated data points.
Nah, I see Klopp more as the German national coach. I don't think his style of football suits us well. He's not a manager I am waiting for.
Then that's even worse. Soon we'll have Bundesliga crusaders coming out to defend him.
