The 2024 Carabao Cup Final - Chelsea V Liverpool

[bosskeano]

jesus...they are acting like the kids started the match and it was a full youth side against Billion Pound Chelsea

the media knob slobbing job on Klopp is in full flow rigth now

 

[TheReligion]

I didn't watch the match but the media praise for playing kids is a bit odd? No Salah, back-up keeper and the lad at RB looks new. But was that it?

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Yeah it’s a complete and utter nonsense.

They brought a few young player’s on at the 80 minute mark, none of which stood out particularly.

They won the game and deserve credit but it was hardly some amazing performance.

 

[Andycoleno9]

Younger and with far fewer appearances for their respective club. Van Dijk and Robertson had a combined 44 more appearances for Liverpool than the entire starting 11 had for Chelsea.

Chilwell has the most Chelsea appearances at 100. Harvey Elliot has played more times for Liverpool.

Chelsea's average age at kick off was 23.36 years, whereas Liverpool's was 25.27 years, and even with the teenagers coming on for extra time, Chelsea's average at the final whistle was 22.64 years, with Liverpool's being 24.09.

Appearance-wise, Chelsea's starting 11 averaged 44.55 appearances for the club, whereas Liverpool's averaged 91.18, and at the final whistle it was 32.91 for Chelsea and 75.36 for Liverpool.

I get that Chelsea's squad was very expensively assembled, but given this whole thing seems to have stemmed from Neville's commentary, he of all people should know that paying a huge fee doesn't equate to output on the pitch, given United's woes over the last decade.

Slow down, man. Too much facts here. Go with the flow; Klopp and Virgil won LC with u18 team.

 

[TheReligion]

Younger and with far fewer appearances for their respective club. Van Dijk and Robertson had a combined 44 more appearances for Liverpool than the entire starting 11 had for Chelsea.

Chilwell has the most Chelsea appearances at 100. Harvey Elliot has played more times for Liverpool.

Chelsea's average age at kick off was 23.36 years, whereas Liverpool's was 25.27 years, and even with the teenagers coming on for extra time, Chelsea's average at the final whistle was 22.64 years, with Liverpool's being 24.09.

Appearance-wise, Chelsea's starting 11 averaged 44.55 appearances for the club, whereas Liverpool's averaged 91.18, and at the final whistle it was 32.91 for Chelsea and 75.36 for Liverpool.

I get that Chelsea's squad was very expensively assembled, but given this whole thing seems to have stemmed from Neville's commentary, he of all people should know that paying a huge fee doesn't equate to output on the pitch, given United's woes over the last decade.

@RobinLFC

 

[RobinLFC]

@RobinLFC

Can you do the average age from ET, when the game was actually won?

And not sure what point you are trying to prove either? I think it's special that we won a cup final with half of the team during ET coming from our own academy, most of them only having a few (if any) professional appearences under their belt. If you can't see how Liverpool fans think that that is a special achievement, I don't know what to tell you. And I'd feel that way regardless of the team we faced and their average age.

 

[Andycoleno9]

So your best midfielder is second choice? Interesting

Thaigo is a train wreck

So Klopp bought Szobo for 70 mil to be backup for Jones? And Gravenberch is backup for Bajcetic?
And please do tell about forwards. I am waiting to hear how Diaz and Gakpo are in fact (cheap and inexperienced) backup options.

 

[AndySmith1990]

Can you do the average age from ET, when the game was actually won?

And not sure what point you are trying to prove either? I think it's special that we won a cup final with half of the team during ET coming from our own academy, most of them only having a few (if any) professional appearences under their belt. If you can't see how Liverpool fans think that that is a special achievement, I don't know what to tell you. And I'd feel that way regardless of the team we faced and their average age.

Yeah agreed. Had it been us who'd won a trophy with several academy players I can only imagine the hype they'd currently be receiving on here

 

[TheReligion]

Can you do the average age from ET, when the game was actually won?

And not sure what point you are trying to prove either? I think it's special that we won a cup final with half of the team during ET coming from our own academy, most of them only having a few (if any) professional appearences under their belt. If you can't see how Liverpool fans think that that is a special achievement, I don't know what to tell you. And I'd feel that way regardless of the team we faced and their average age.

Its already in the post;

Chelsea's average at the final whistle was 22.64 years, with Liverpool's being 24.09

Your academy doesn’t produce much talent tbh so I should try and understand why this is such a big thing for you lot I suppose!

 

[TheReligion]

Yeah agreed. Had it been us who'd won a trophy with several academy players I can only imagine the hype they'd currently be receiving on here

We’ve already done that… multiple times.

Do you actually know anything about your own club?

 

[TheReligion]

So Klopp bought Szobo for 70 mil to be backup for Jones? And Gravenberch is backup for Bajcetic?
And please do tell about forwards. I am waiting to hear how Diaz and Gakpo are in fact (cheap and inexperienced) backup options.

They talk so much shit don’t they.

Can’t just be happy to have won a trophy. They have to try and find that bit more to make it extra special.

 

[GuybrushThreepwood]

Pochettino deserves all the criticism that he has received, for the fact that Chelsea eased off, sat back, and played on the counter-attack in extra-time. He basically admitted that they had settled for penalties, and it was clear from their approach. That was quite cowardly IMO, and this feels like a big chance that Chelsea have blown.

The period before and during extra-time really highlighted the gulf in quality between the 2 managers.

 

[Andycoleno9]

Its already in the post;

Chelsea's average at the final whistle was 22.64 years, with Liverpool's being 24.09

Your academy doesn’t produce much talent tbh so I should try and understand why this is such a big thing for you lot I suppose!

. Touche.
Sad part is that you are so so wrong. Liverpool fans actually think that Klopp is promoting a lot of young players (yeah, true story).
Played once in LC. Counts as promoted.
Played once against division 2 club in 3rd round of FA cup. Promoted.

Meanwhile, in last 12 months guy bought 4 (!!) new midfielders and 2 forwards because he has so much faith in Jones, Elliot, Bajcetic and whoever.

 

[Dumbstar]

So Klopp bought Szobo for 70 mil to be backup for Jones? And Gravenberch is backup for Bajcetic?
And please do tell about forwards. I am waiting to hear how Diaz and Gakpo are in fact (cheap and inexperienced) backup options.

Not a difficult one that. Swap them both around Jones goes 2nd, Szobo 1st. Both still injured. Yes Bajcetic is better than Gravenberch, shock, horror.

You want to do the forwards, fair enough. Let's go. I'm happy to talk about LFC:

1st choice: Salah, Nunez, Jota
2nd: Elliot, Gakpo, Diaz
3rd: Gordon, Danns, Koumas

(You could argue Diaz should be above Jota but not for me. Jota every time. Clinical goalscorer!)

So, according to me(!), we played zero 1st choice, 3 second choice one of which we switched for 3rd choice.

 

[Dumbstar]

They talk so much shit don’t they.

Can’t just be happy to have won a trophy. They have to try and find that bit more to make it extra special.

You're obviously loving it here because... you're still in this thread. Welcome to stay obviously, it's nice talking about LFC rather than other things going on.

 

[DennisReynolds]

I didn't watch the match but the media praise for playing kids is a bit odd? No Salah, back-up keeper and the lad at RB looks new. But was that it?

Tell me you don't watch Liverpool games without telling me...

There were 9 or 10 regular starters missing.

 

[RobinLFC]

Meanwhile, in last 12 months guy bought 4 (!!) new midfielders and 2 forwards because he has so much faith in Jones, Elliot, Bajcetic and whoever.

Casually fails to mention that 5 (!!) left the club as well

 

[RuudTom83]

Tell me you don't watch Liverpool games without telling me...

There were 9 or 10 regular starters missing.

9 or 10 regular starters missing

So basically everyone except VVD was a back-up or reserve player yesterday at kick-off?

That makes zero sense.

 

[Andycoleno9]

Casually fails to mention that 5 (!!) left the club as well

That is a point though. If you have trust in young players then you don't go and buy new first teamer who plays on his position.
Look, i don't care how much Pool is spending because you (as us) spend your own money. I don't care also do you have 10 academy players or one.
But at least own it. Say, yes we spend big and yes, we have shit academy. This delusion about how Klopp is barely spending money and promoting kids is extremely annoying.

 

[Andycoleno9]

Tell me you don't watch Liverpool games without telling me...

There were 9 or 10 regular starters missing.

 

[erikcred]

I didn't watch the match but the media praise for playing kids is a bit odd? No Salah, back-up keeper and the lad at RB looks new. But was that it?

Tell me you don't watch Liverpool games without telling me...

There were 9 or 10 regular starters missing.

He literally said he didn't watch the match...

 

[DennisReynolds]

9 or 10 regular starters missing

So basically everyone except VVD was a back-up or reserve player yesterday at kick-off?

That makes zero sense.

This isn't the 1980s, team's don't have a guaranteed 11 anymore.

Alisson*, Trent Alexander Arnold, Szoboszlai, Jones, Salah would start every cup final if fit.

Matip, Thiago, Jota, Darwin would all be in contention to play, as they're regular starters when available.

*Alisson wouldn't have started a league cup final ahead of Kelleher in fairness.

He literally said he didn't watch the match...

And clearly no other games if he can't identify missing regular starters.

 

[RobinLFC]

That is a point though. If you have trust in young players then you don't go and buy new first teamer who plays on his position.

But at least own it. Say, yes we spend big and yes, we have shit academy. This delusion about how Klopp is barely spending money and promoting kids is extremely annoying.

That's a load of bullshit. If the young players are not good enough you go and buy players who are, that's what a top club does. There is no glory in playing with your own academy players if they're not up to standard, there's glory in winning trophies. There's a good chance that none of the young players who made minutes yesterday get to 50 senior appearances for our club, we don't have a clue yet whether they are good enough or not. Makes it all the more special that we won it with them on the pitch though.

I've never argued that we have a top academy, but we don't have a shit one either. Just a regular one. You are arguing against yourself when talking about Klopp barely spending money and promoting kids, we aren't on a shoestring budget at all but no sane Liverpool fan (cue incoming jokes, ha ha) will try to convince anyone that we are.

 

[Andycoleno9]

I am starting to think that our Pool posters are just trolling us now.

 

[Alex99]

Can you do the average age from ET, when the game was actually won?

And not sure what point you are trying to prove either? I think it's special that we won a cup final with half of the team during ET coming from our own academy, most of them only having a few (if any) professional appearences under their belt. If you can't see how Liverpool fans think that that is a special achievement, I don't know what to tell you. And I'd feel that way regardless of the team we faced and their average age.

Average age at full time was 22.64 for Chelsea and 24.09 for Liverpool.

Liverpool finished the match with one player more than Chelsea aged 21 or younger, but one of theirs was Elliot who's played more than 100 times for the club (Chelsea's have 115 combined appearances for them).

This was a title-challenging Liverpool side up against a Chelsea side currently sat 11th in the league, having finished 12th the season before, and who are on their fourth manager since the beginning of last season. I'd argue that, despite the lack of first team experience for those few teenagers, it's much better for those few youngsters to be playing in Liverpool's side, full of players used to playing for Klopp, than Chelsea's slightly older, slightly more experienced players, to be in a side fairly recently cobbled together (especially when a fair few have massive price tags to live up to).

Your final 11 had:

Kelleher, who's in his fifth season as back-up.
van Dijk, who's in his seventh season at the club.
Elliot, who's in his fifth season as part of the senior set-up.
Diaz, who's in his third season at the club.
Gomez, who's in his ninth season at the club.
Tsimikas, who's in his fourth season at the club.

Of the others:

Endo is a seasoned pro, Clark made his debut last season, and Quansah has 20 appearances this season, which leaves McConnell and Danns as the really fresh faces.

Chelsea's longest serving player in the 11 that finished the game was Chalobah, in his third season, and had made only one appearance this season before the final. After him it's Fernandez, Mudryk and Madueke, who all joined last January, with everyone else making their debuts this season.

I don't think anyone has an issue with Liverpool fans celebrating, but surely you have to admit that Klopp saying shit like it's his "most special" win is a bit much? The media love-in is nauseating and is absolutely being framed like a struggling Liverpool started the U21s while a high-flying Chelsea had a team full of 25+ year old seasoned pros, despite this categorically not being the case.

 

[RobinLFC]

This was a title-challenging Liverpool side up against a Chelsea side currently sat 11th in the league, having finished 12th the season before, and who are on their fourth manager since the beginning of last season. I'd argue that, despite the lack of first team experience for those few teenagers, it's much better for those few youngsters to be playing in Liverpool's side, full of players used to playing for Klopp, than Chelsea's slightly older, slightly more experienced players, to be in a side fairly recently cobbled together (especially when a fair few have massive price tags to live up to).

But the thing is that this wasn't quite our title-challenging side. Alisson, TAA, Szoboszlai, Salah, Nunez and Jota not in the selection who have been our backbone in the league. During ET we had Clark, McConnell, Danns, Endo, Elliott and Diaz as our front six, hardly a well-oiled selection used to playing with each other or to Klopp's playing style. If someone had told you we'd win a cup final with those six in front of our defense for the entirety of ET, you'd have said that that's quite the achievement or at least remarkable, wouldn't you?

You are basically just saying "look how inexperienced and shite this Chelsea team was" to downplay Liverpool's achievement. But I have already said that I'd consider it remarkable even if it was against a Championship side. It wasn't David vs Goliath by any stretch of the imagination, especially if you consider our back 4 was almost at full strength, but it is one that will stick with me longer than the previous two Cup wins against Chelsea because of how it unfolded and who we had to bring on to win us the game, yes.

I don't think anyone has an issue with Liverpool fans celebrating, but surely you have to admit that Klopp saying shit like it's his "most special" win is a bit much? The media love-in is nauseating and is absolutely being framed like a struggling Liverpool started the U21s while a high-flying Chelsea had a team full of 25+ year old seasoned pros, despite this categorically not being the case.

I can't comment on media as I'm not based in the UK. Klopp's comment did raise my eyebrows as it's quite obviously nowhere near the PL or CL wins, but it's his last season, and it was achieved while we were up against it - I wouldn't say against all odds, but going by how we looked halfway through the second half and who we had left on the bench, I certainly didn't see us winning the game anymore. You say some daft shit in the elation after a cup win, I guess.

It certainly wasn't "Liverpool overcame all odds and adversity to beat an elite Chelsea side with their academy", so if that's the line in UK media I can understand why most Utd fans would be annoyed.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[RuudTom83]

And clearly no other games if he can't identify missing regular starters.

Yeah I wouldn't waste my time watching Liverpool or posting on a Liverpool forum either tbh.

But thanks for clearing up my question asking if the 'Klopp played the kids' remarks all over social was correct.

Like you said, he just played the squad players who are rotated because Liverpool don't have a set first eleven. Which is fair enough.

Congrats on the Cup Win! not hating.

 

[Alex99]

But the thing is that this wasn't quite our title-challenging side. Alisson, TAA, Szoboszlai, Salah, Nunez and Jota not in the selection who have been our backbone in the league. During ET we had Clark, McConnell, Danns, Endo, Elliott and Diaz as our front six, hardly a well-oiled selection used to playing with each other or to Klopp's playing style. If someone had told you we'd win a cup final with those six in front of our defense for the entirety of ET, you'd have said that that's quite the achievement or at least remarkable, wouldn't you?

You are basically just saying "look how inexperienced and shite this Chelsea team was" to downplay Liverpool's achievement. But I have already said that I'd consider it remarkable even if it was against a Championship side. It wasn't David vs Goliath by any stretch of the imagination, especially if you consider our back 4 was almost at full strength, but it is one that will stick with me longer than the previous two Cup wins against Chelsea because of how it unfolded and who we had to bring on to win us the game, yes.


I can't comment on media as I'm not based in the UK. Klopp's comment did raise my eyebrows as it's quite obviously nowhere near the PL or CL wins, but it's his last season, and it was achieved while we were up against it - I wouldn't say against all odds, but going by how we looked halfway through the second half and who we had left on the bench, I certainly didn't see us winning the game anymore. You say some daft shit in the elation after a cup win, I guess.

It certainly wasn't "Liverpool overcame all odds and adversity to beat an elite Chelsea side with their academy", so if that's the line in UK media I can understand why most Utd fans would be annoyed.

You had some first choice players missing, yes, but teams generally don't win titles by playing the same players week-in, week-out. You were hardly scraping the barrel having to play Endo, Gravenberch, Gakpo, Diaz and Elliot, or indeed having to bring Tsimikas and Gomez off the bench.

As I highlighted, you finished the game with six established senior players (even if one was the back-up GK) and a seventh was a veteran midfielder. This wasn't a squad full of inexperienced kids, it was a few brought on late on to put some fresh legs on the pitch. I'd argue it was far better to have those fresh legs running around in front of a (largely) settled, senior defense, than to have had a patched up defense full of kids behind a senior but tired midfield.

I get your point about how "well-oiled" your line-up was by full-time, but it's not like you won the game with a goal from some free-flowing, attacking football. I've only seen a three minute highlights package, but the extra-time highlights was one chance for Chelsea in the third minute of extra-time, and then the winning goal. I've just done a quick scan of the BBC live text and the only chance it mentions from one of your youngsters was Danns from a corner, so, given that your goal was a van Dijk header after a Tsimikas corner, I'm not really sure that you "had to bring on" the teenagers to "win [you] the game", but more that you brought them on and they put a shift in to see out extra-time, and you happened to take advantage of a set-piece to win it and avoid penalties.

Again, no one has anything against Liverpool fans celebrating a trophy win, but the bolded is exactly the sort of exaggerated nonsense that people are finding nauseating. You can't simultaneously go "it wasn't David vs Goliath" and then go "we'd have been underdogs against a Championship side". Were you a sub-Championshp line-up against an expensively assembled Premier League side, or were you a slightly weakened, title-challenging Premier League side against an expensively assembled, mid-table Premier League side?

 

[Klopper76]

First time ever a team of embryos won a cup.
Vomit!

Hey! According to the great state of Alabama, embryo's are people too. Show some respect.

 

[TheReligion]

You had some first choice players missing, yes, but teams generally don't win titles by playing the same players week-in, week-out. You were hardly scraping the barrel having to play Endo, Gravenberch, Gakpo, Diaz and Elliot, or indeed having to bring Tsimikas and Gomez off the bench.

As I highlighted, you finished the game with six established senior players (even if one was the back-up GK) and a seventh was a veteran midfielder. This wasn't a squad full of inexperienced kids, it was a few brought on late on to put some fresh legs on the pitch. I'd argue it was far better to have those fresh legs running around in front of a (largely) settled, senior defense, than to have had a patched up defense full of kids behind a senior but tired midfield.

I get your point about how "well-oiled" your line-up was by full-time, but it's not like you won the game with a goal from some free-flowing, attacking football. I've only seen a three minute highlights package, but the extra-time highlights was one chance for Chelsea in the third minute of extra-time, and then the winning goal. I've just done a quick scan of the BBC live text and the only chance it mentions from one of your youngsters was Danns from a corner, so, given that your goal was a van Dijk header after a Tsimikas corner, I'm not really sure that you "had to bring on" the teenagers to "win [you] the game", but more that you brought them on and they put a shift in to see out extra-time, and you happened to take advantage of a set-piece to win it and avoid penalties.

Again, no one has anything against Liverpool fans celebrating a trophy win, but the bolded is exactly the sort of exaggerated nonsense that people are finding nauseating. You can't simultaneously go "it wasn't David vs Goliath" and then go "we'd have been underdogs against a Championship side". Were you a sub-Championshp line-up against an expensively assembled Premier League side, or were you a slightly weakened, title-challenging Premier League side against an expensively assembled, mid-table Premier League side?

Good post.

You’ll not get a response though.

 

[Klopper76]

Yeah it’s a complete and utter nonsense.

They brought a few young player’s on at the 80 minute mark, none of which stood out particularly.

They won the game and deserve credit but it was hardly some amazing performance.

That's a bit harsh. Danns led the line well enough and Clark was fairly good when he came on. McConnell I wasn't as impressed with.

Quansah looks like a good CB in the making.

Extra time was a big surprise yesterday. Fully expected Chelsea to come on strong but it ended up being us who looked more likely in that 30 minute period.

 

[TheReligion]

That's a bit harsh. Danns led the line well enough and Clark was fairly good when he came on. McConnell I wasn't as impressed with.

Quansah looks like a good CB in the making.

Extra time was a big surprise yesterday. Fully expected Chelsea to come on strong but it ended up being us who looked more likely in that 30 minute period.

That was more in response to the suggestion the young players came on to win the game for you.

Ultimately you subbed on a few young players at the death and now we somehow have this narrative that Klopp’s won it with the kids against all odds.

It’s utterly mind blowing if I’m honest.

 

[HappyCamper]

I don't even understand what's being discussed.

Klopp will always say whatever he believe will be more benefitial for the team. That's his job.

Millions was wagered on the match yesterday. Liverpool were favourites prematch, and that includes the "weak" bench.
In big games and finals the bookies 1x2-prediction is always close to correct. It might be slightly off, but that's a good rule to go by at least.

Random tweets stating that Liverpool won with kids or whatever is just lazy work, and mixed up with Liverpool won with a less expensive available team.

I do understand Chelsea supporters frustration regarding the "injury-agenda" though. They've been missing 6-10 potential starters for over a year straight. That certainly won't help a young team struggling in the first place and will certainly be annoying to get that "card" thrown in their faces prematch, as an excuse if Liverpool would have lost the game.

I'm not located in the UK and don't read or watch skysports much, but usually evidence is found to support its own case. In that regard United-fans will probably find the media overly annoying. If United won it I'm sure RAWK posters would come to the same conclusion.

 

[Klopper76]

That was more in response to the suggestion the young players came on to win the game for you.

Ultimately you subbed on a few young players at the death and now we somehow have this narrative that Klopp’s won it with the kids against all odds.

It’s utterly mind blowing if I’m honest.

Oh yeah I mean our starting XI was the same one that started against Luton in mid-week. Relatively strong but I think Salah, Jota, Nunez, TAA, Szoboszlai & Alisson all would've started if fit. Possibly Jones as well.

Diaz & Gakpo are expensive signings though so hardly poor options as alternatives. Diaz might've started anyway.

The Gravenberch injury messed things up a bit for us. Having to play Bradley RW and push Elliott into midfield to get Gomez into RB all due to the fact that we had no other senior midfielders available. That was probably harder to deal with than the young players coming on to play 40 minutes. I thought we dropped off a bit in the aftermath of those changes.

We were still favorites going into the game, but I think Chelsea would've expected to come on strongly and try and win the game in extra time. It ended up being the other way around. I think Klopp deserves some credit for trusting some of those younger players in a cup final. It might've been tempting to leave players like Gakpo on simply due to seniority.

As has been the case throughout my Liverpool supporting life, it wasn't comfortable or easy though. On another day Chelsea would've won. I don't think we've ever had a comfortable final win since I've been watching.

I think our senior players were our better performers overall though. Van Dijk, Konate, Endo & Diaz all had fairly good games. Elliott kept going as well. Mac Allister's passing in the final third was poor imo. Gave the ball away or tried to force it too much.

 

[erikcred]

Oh yeah I mean our starting XI was the same one that started against Luton in mid-week. Relatively strong but I think Salah, Jota, Nunez, TAA, Szoboszlai & Alisson all would've started if fit. Possibly Jones as well.

Diaz & Gakpo are expensive signings though so hardly poor options as alternatives. Diaz might've started anyway.

The Gravenberch injury messed things up a bit for us. Having to play Bradley RW and push Elliott into midfield to get Gomez into RB all due to the fact that we had no other senior midfielders available. That was probably harder to deal with than the young players coming on to play 40 minutes. I thought we dropped off a bit in the aftermath of those changes.

We were still favorites going into the game, but I think Chelsea would've expected to come on strongly and try and win the game in extra time. It ended up being the other way around. I think Klopp deserves some credit for trusting some of those younger players in a cup final. It might've been tempting to leave players like Gakpo on simply due to seniority.

As has been the case throughout my Liverpool supporting life, it wasn't comfortable or easy though. On another day Chelsea would've won. I don't think we've ever had a comfortable final win since I've been watching.

I think our senior players were our better performers overall though. Van Dijk, Konate, Endo & Diaz all had fairly good games. Elliott kept going as well. Mac Allister's passing in the final third was poor imo. Gave the ball away or tried to force it too much.

I'll give you that much. Replace Klopp with almost any other manager and this could've gone horribly wrong. He probably sent them out feeling a couple feet taller while the Chelsea players were feeling Poch's nerves and hoping for penalties.

 

[RobinLFC]

Good post.

You’ll not get a response though.

 

[RobinLFC]

You had some first choice players missing, yes, but teams generally don't win titles by playing the same players week-in, week-out. You were hardly scraping the barrel having to play Endo, Gravenberch, Gakpo, Diaz and Elliot, or indeed having to bring Tsimikas and Gomez off the bench.

As I highlighted, you finished the game with six established senior players (even if one was the back-up GK) and a seventh was a veteran midfielder. This wasn't a squad full of inexperienced kids, it was a few brought on late on to put some fresh legs on the pitch. I'd argue it was far better to have those fresh legs running around in front of a (largely) settled, senior defense, than to have had a patched up defense full of kids behind a senior but tired midfield.

I get your point about how "well-oiled" your line-up was by full-time, but it's not like you won the game with a goal from some free-flowing, attacking football. I've only seen a three minute highlights package, but the extra-time highlights was one chance for Chelsea in the third minute of extra-time, and then the winning goal. I've just done a quick scan of the BBC live text and the only chance it mentions from one of your youngsters was Danns from a corner, so, given that your goal was a van Dijk header after a Tsimikas corner, I'm not really sure that you "had to bring on" the teenagers to "win [you] the game", but more that you brought them on and they put a shift in to see out extra-time, and you happened to take advantage of a set-piece to win it and avoid penalties.

Again, no one has anything against Liverpool fans celebrating a trophy win, but the bolded is exactly the sort of exaggerated nonsense that people are finding nauseating. You can't simultaneously go "it wasn't David vs Goliath" and then go "we'd have been underdogs against a Championship side". Were you a sub-Championshp line-up against an expensively assembled Premier League side, or were you a slightly weakened, title-challenging Premier League side against an expensively assembled, mid-table Premier League side?

The latter, but not “slightly” weakened, rather seriously weakened imo.

 

[TheReligion]

Oh yeah I mean our starting XI was the same one that started against Luton in mid-week. Relatively strong but I think Salah, Jota, Nunez, TAA, Szoboszlai & Alisson all would've started if fit. Possibly Jones as well.

Diaz & Gakpo are expensive signings though so hardly poor options as alternatives. Diaz might've started anyway.

The Gravenberch injury messed things up a bit for us. Having to play Bradley RW and push Elliott into midfield to get Gomez into RB all due to the fact that we had no other senior midfielders available. That was probably harder to deal with than the young players coming on to play 40 minutes. I thought we dropped off a bit in the aftermath of those changes.

We were still favorites going into the game, but I think Chelsea would've expected to come on strongly and try and win the game in extra time. It ended up being the other way around. I think Klopp deserves some credit for trusting some of those younger players in a cup final. It might've been tempting to leave players like Gakpo on simply due to seniority.

As has been the case throughout my Liverpool supporting life, it wasn't comfortable or easy though. On another day Chelsea would've won. I don't think we've ever had a comfortable final win since I've been watching.

I think our senior players were our better performers overall though. Van Dijk, Konate, Endo & Diaz all had fairly good games. Elliott kept going as well. Mac Allister's passing in the final third was poor imo. Gave the ball away or tried to force it too much.

That’s a very fair post.

Of course I agree Klopp deserves credit, as do Liverpool for winning a trophy. League Cup or not, it’s a trophy and for me that’s always a great achievement.

I just don’t get why some want to hype it up in to something that it isn’t. Just enjoy the win and beating Chelsea (again).

 

[Klopper76]

That’s a very fair post.

Of course I agree Klopp deserves credit, as do Liverpool for winning a trophy. League Cup or not, it’s a trophy and for me that’s always a great achievement.

I just don’t get why some want to hype it up in to something that it isn’t. Just enjoy the win and beating Chelsea (again).

I'm just happy we scored in a final at last. 21/22 three finals, 0 goals after two 120 minutes vs Chelsea and 90 vs Madrid.

 

[TheReligion]

I'm just happy we scored in a final at last. 21/22 three finals, 0 goals after two 120 minutes vs Chelsea and 90 vs Madrid.

You always try to be objective and tend not to be a bellend like the others.

Enjoy.

 

[LochGormanAbú]

All the comments on here regards Chelsea being younger, media agendas etc.

Three things,

1 - Chelsea did have a slightly younger side, mainly very expensive experienced players aged early to mid/late 20's, Liverpool as utd fans on here have pointed out had some experienced players on, VVD, Enzo, 30+, Robertson almost 30, pushing the average up. Chelsea with young players that they have spent 100's millions on. Liverpool did finish the game with Danns, McConnell and Clark, very few will have heard of outside of Liverpool or footballing nerds, most Liverpool fans wouldn't have heard of these a month ago, likewise Bradley, unknown 2 months ago.

2 - Liverpool first team injuries, Salah, Nunez, Jota, Szoboszlai, Arnold, Curtis, Becker. Possibly now Enzo, also injured is Matip, Gravenberg, Thiago (7 genuine first team starters)

3 - Interesting if you have a look at the Chelsea 'The Shed' football forum for the match, completely different to on here. 99% accept they were beaten by a far weakened side with plenty of very young inexperienced players. There isn't the bias that you'll get on here which is convinced that Liverpool are being carried by only Klopp and once he goes it is just an average side that will be found out. This isn't like Utd when Fergie left, an aging team with what turned out to be some poor young signings. Of course Klopp will be hugely missed, but plenty for Liverpool fans to be optimistic about with the current squad of experienced players and young talent coming through.