Are you serious? They are comfortably staying up. We are getting tubbed every game. Yet they lose today and it’s somehow proof they’re no better than VK?Robbie_painter wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 4:58 pmYou said look how they’re doing so I did and they’re getting pumped,you never mentioned the table.
Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
-
- Posts: 267
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 1:38 am
- Been Liked: 74 times
- Has Liked: 142 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
The starting back four is a major positive. Much better. The VAR non-decision is poor and we need to make a big deal out of it as a club. Forest, Bournemouth, Villa, Liverpool, West Ham Luton have all seen bad decisions that have majorly cost us.
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Good summaryburnleymik wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 4:58 pmWe were competitive for 70 mins. Esteve injury was big and caution was the right thing.
We had a real mixture of performances out there individually.
Loads of positives to build on, but some thins VK absolutely has to change because they just are not working.
We did well.
Based on today, I wouldn't start Brownhill, Ramsey and Amdouni next week
But VK likely will
This user liked this post: burnleymik
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Story of our season really. Outdone in both boxes despite matching our opponent in the middle. Individual mistakes, unlucky with a VAR decision and sadly why we won’t stay up.
-
- Been Liked: 1 time
- Has Liked: 836 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Overall a decent performance away at a top side. Shame we don't turn up like that in the more winnable games. Individual errors yet again.
If only VK could bring himself to drop Trafford or Amdouni, or make subs when it's clear they are needed (not when the game is already gone).
If only VK could bring himself to drop Trafford or Amdouni, or make subs when it's clear they are needed (not when the game is already gone).
This user liked this post: cockneyclaret
-
- Posts: 7362
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2220 times
- Has Liked: 2211 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Might be a good thing.claretburns wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 4:48 pmWill be banned from the touchline next week against Arsenal.
-
- Posts: 3126
- Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:09 pm
- Been Liked: 622 times
- Has Liked: 184 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Minus the missed chances the 3 new boys and Berge played excellent today
-
- Posts: 3553
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 6:03 pm
- Been Liked: 656 times
- Has Liked: 2899 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Benson had some great moments playing against weak teams in the Championship, to imagine he’s going to rip it up against Liverpool is just childish fantasy
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Pretty good performance on the whole.
-
- Posts: 7466
- Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 7:39 pm
- Been Liked: 2258 times
- Has Liked: 2174 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Stop misappropriating people's points.Burnley Ace wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:05 pmBenson had some great moments playing against weak teams in the Championship, to imagine he’s going to rip it up against Liverpool is just childish fantasy
No one is expecting him to single handedly destroy Liverpool, more that he could have a go and cause them problems.
Berge done well today, he was in the Champ last season!
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Maybe he can’t do it against Liverpool. But how do we know?Burnley Ace wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:05 pmBenson had some great moments playing against weak teams in the Championship, to imagine he’s going to rip it up against Liverpool is just childish fantasy
-
- Posts: 1941
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 6:52 pm
- Been Liked: 745 times
- Has Liked: 463 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
I agree mostly but I think the frustration comes from the fact that yes, today we were right in it and we've had good chances spurned and yes, regardless of Trafford/Amdouni making mistakes their second goal had a blatant foul on Ramsay which it's absurd wasn't given.... but we still don't seem to learn. Trafford once again has his bizarre mix of great saves and costly mistakes while our play style remains geared more towards Muric's style- if Trafford is #1 why not play to his strengths more, which aren't passing through the lines or being on the ball. We're chasing a game with a proven impact sub on the bench, prep defensive subs instead, and stick with those even when the defecit widens. Fofana last week and City are basically the only times I can think of that a sub has positively impacted the game.
I can gladly accept putting up a valiant fight for survival but failing. I'd rather not accept resignation to relegation, but can accept that this is still WIP and provided we retain the majority of this team we should in theory comfortably bounce back and be more seasoned next time. But there's basic errors we don't learn from and a lot of issues regarding approach or decision making that feel one step forward, two steps back
That's the frustration. Just because some people feel that frustration and you don't doesn't make them anti-BFC boo boys. You'd get frustrated by 2 games without a win under Dyche, surely you can understand that criticism and frustration doesn't equal being a boo boy waiting for failure?
Last edited by spt_claret on Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: burnleymik
-
- Posts: 6978
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:25 pm
- Been Liked: 1490 times
- Has Liked: 1848 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Benny would have been a better option than Ramsey, what our scouts saw in him is a complete mystery
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Perspective works both ways. We were playing Liverpool yes, but:
We are also joint bottom of the league after 24 games.
It's not been good enough. You slagged Dyche when he was doing much better than this so can you stop with the hypocritical crap.
This user liked this post: THEWELLERNUT70
-
- Posts: 4406
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
- Been Liked: 1259 times
- Has Liked: 1368 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Young inexperienced players should not be targeted for these defeats. There has to be the big question as why so many of them have been thrown together at the same time.
That undoubtedly will be the reason we are relegated. I know there is a small number who can stomach this but I believe the majority of us are very fed up with it
That undoubtedly will be the reason we are relegated. I know there is a small number who can stomach this but I believe the majority of us are very fed up with it
This user liked this post: AGENT_CLARET
-
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 8:03 pm
- Been Liked: 728 times
- Has Liked: 515 times
- Location: Padiham
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Brownhill and Amdouni shouldn't be near the team. Theyve both been poor all season. Amdouni disappeared after a decent start to the game..as he often does. Ramsay isn't ready.
I thought we did well today in general and were a lot more competitive than I thought we would be. Missed big chances at key moments and the non VAR decision for their second changed the game at that time.
The biggest plus was the defence and how much more solid we looked with the new guys both starting. Assignon is a major upgrade from where we were and looks a good signing. Esteve looked assured and confident and I only hope his injury isn't too bad.
Last edited by Somethingfishy on Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: xxmunkyennuixx
-
- Posts: 3126
- Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:09 pm
- Been Liked: 622 times
- Has Liked: 184 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Actually thought Ramsey played well today
This user liked this post: spt_claret
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Yes, you deserve so much better.Elizabeth wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:15 pmYoung inexperienced players should not be targeted for these defeats. There has to be the big question as why so many of them have been thrown together at the same time.
That undoubtedly will be the reason we are relegated. I know there is a small number who can stomach this but I believe the majority of us are very fed up with it
-
- Posts: 6696
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1705 times
- Has Liked: 791 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
When we inevitably go down its not games like this we reflect on but some shambolic performances, mistakes and chances missed against the likes of Palace, Bournemouth, WHU, Fulham, Brentford, Luton and a few more.
Appears we have today discovered our best back four. Forget the numerous mistakes made all year, and VAR had we had two to three genuine goal scorers all season we would have been higher up the table. With goal scorers you can play badly and still win. Could easily have drawn both games v Liverpool and taken points off other teams
Appears we have today discovered our best back four. Forget the numerous mistakes made all year, and VAR had we had two to three genuine goal scorers all season we would have been higher up the table. With goal scorers you can play badly and still win. Could easily have drawn both games v Liverpool and taken points off other teams
-
- Posts: 2546
- Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 1:18 pm
- Been Liked: 723 times
- Has Liked: 2035 times
- Location: Computer matrix, IP not found- current code: 00101110100101001100100 1011101010100010101101010100100
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
If only natural proven goalscorers didn’t cost north of £50m plus…warksclaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:39 pmWhen we inevitably go down its not games like this we reflect on but some shambolic performances, mistakes and chances missed against the likes of Palace, Bournemouth, WHU, Fulham, Brentford, Luton and a few more.
Appears we have today discovered our best back four. Forget the numerous mistakes made all year, and VAR had we had two to three genuine goal scorers all season we would have been higher up the table. With goal scorers you can play badly and still win. Could easily have drawn both games v Liverpool and taken points off other teams
This user liked this post: boatshed bill
-
- Posts: 6696
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1705 times
- Has Liked: 791 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
They don't all cost £50m plus , unless you are either Chelsea or Man Utd. We could have got Tella for circa £20m, and maybe even got Palmer on loan in August had VK used his influence. Archer at Sheff Utd was availble for £18m-pretty certain he would have brought more to us than both Ramsey and Tresor, and I have seen him tear Villa apart one game and play well in others for Sheffield. Where theres a will thers a way. Thats before we even started looking overseas
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
warksclaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:56 pmThey don't all cost £50m plus , unless you are either Chelsea or Man Utd. We could have got Tella for circa £20m, and maybe even got Palmer on loan in August had VK used his influence. Archer at Sheff Utd was availble for £18m-pretty certain he would have brought more to us than both Ramsey and Tresor, and I have seen him tear Villa apart one game and play well in others for Sheffield. Where theres a will thers a way. Thats before we even started looking overseas
How do you know we didn't try and those players didn't turn us down?
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
It might help us.claretburns wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 4:48 pmWill be banned from the touchline next week against Arsenal.
This user liked this post: Wokingclaret
-
- Posts: 6696
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1705 times
- Has Liked: 791 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
I think we did with Tella but clearly would not go to a certain value. And I am pretty certain before a ball was kicked this season that Archer given the choice would have preferred us to Sheff Utd. But lets face it neither of us know. My point being that you dont need £50m a player when acquiring good forwardsboatshed bill wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:59 pmHow do you know we didn't try and those players didn't turn us down?
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Not sure there's any evidence that either would have signed for burnley.warksclaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 6:04 pmI think we did with Tella but clearly would not go to a certain value. And I am pretty certain before a ball was kicked this season that Archer given the choice would have preferred us to Sheff Utd. But lets face it neither of us know. My point being that you dont need £50m a player when acquiring good forwards
Not sure how many strikers at under £25m would be any better than what we have.
-
- Posts: 4406
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
- Been Liked: 1259 times
- Has Liked: 1368 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Better than you bill
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
-
- Posts: 11541
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:33 pm
- Been Liked: 3193 times
- Has Liked: 1873 times
- Contact:
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
warksclaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:56 pmThey don't all cost £50m plus , unless you are either Chelsea or Man Utd. We could have got Tella for circa £20m, and maybe even got Palmer on loan in August had VK used his influence. Archer at Sheff Utd was availble for £18m-pretty certain he would have brought more to us than both Ramsey and Tresor, and I have seen him tear Villa apart one game and play well in others for Sheffield. Where theres a will thers a way. Thats before we even started looking overseas
You honesty think we’d have got Palmer on loan when City knew they could sell him and get £40m?
-
- Posts: 6978
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:25 pm
- Been Liked: 1490 times
- Has Liked: 1848 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
We missed Foster so why didn't he play Jay upfront and move Amoundi in mf behind the front two.
-
- Been Liked: 1 time
- Has Liked: 836 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Because Amdouni has to play every weekWoodleyclaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 6:21 pmWe missed Foster so why didn't he play Jay upfront and move Amoundi in mf behind the front two.
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Is it possible that VK is contractually bound to play Fofana ?
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Anything is possible contractually providing the two parties agree. Very unlikely though I'd have thought.boatshed bill wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 6:49 pmIs it possible that VK is contractually bound to play Fofana ?
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Much more likely than us being contractually bound.boatshed bill wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 6:53 pmThe other possibility is that 2 changes, Fofana and Rodriguez for Foster and Amdouni, is too much.
-
- Posts: 4406
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
- Been Liked: 1259 times
- Has Liked: 1368 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Whatever you want , hope it's more than I'm getting from this season
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
I don't know how old you are, but I started going to league football matches at 11 years old. There wasn't much live football on TV in 1962, getting to a real match was the "reward", the result was a bonus.
I guess I'm still a bit like that now.
-
- Posts: 4406
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
- Been Liked: 1259 times
- Has Liked: 1368 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Just so you know , I'm of a similar age not that it should matter.boatshed bill wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 7:02 pmI don't know how old you are, but I started going to league football matches at 11 years old. There wasn't much live football on TV in 1962, getting to a real match was the "reward", the result was a bonus.
I guess I'm still a bit like that now.
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
-
- Posts: 4406
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
- Been Liked: 1259 times
- Has Liked: 1368 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
I think you have summed up our club under it's present management and ownership very wellboatshed bill wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 7:26 pmThen perhaps you can remember the joy of just getting to a league match.
It's all about money now, and far too analytical for it's own good.
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
-
- Posts: 1394
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:51 am
- Been Liked: 238 times
- Has Liked: 443 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Maybe it will give him chance to see a game in a proper light, and realise where he's gone wrong, oh well we can hope.claretburns wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 4:48 pmWill be banned from the touchline next week against Arsenal.
-
- Posts: 15275
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3166 times
- Has Liked: 6770 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Perhaps he'll get to sit next to one of our resident experts who can put him right on just about everything he's doing wrong.alwaysaclaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 8:15 pmMaybe it will give him chance to see a game in a proper light, and realise where he's gone wrong, oh well we can hope.
What a bonus!!
-
- Posts: 6696
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1705 times
- Has Liked: 791 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
They got £40m because it was Chelsea who are absolutely mugs when you look at what they play for players without any negotiation. Yes I think it was possible in Summer to have got him on loan. A good loan with us could have really pushed up his value and City would have benefitted. There was even a lot of talk in us being interested in him at the time
-
- Posts: 13518
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3115 times
- Has Liked: 3836 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Do you think he’d have wanted to join us with Chelsea interested?warksclaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 8:38 pmThey got £40m because it was Chelsea who are absolutely mugs when you look at what they play for players without any negotiation. Yes I think it was possible in Summer to have got him on loan. A good loan with us could have really pushed up his value and City would have benefitted. There was even a lot of talk in us being interested in him at the time
-
- Posts: 6696
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1705 times
- Has Liked: 791 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
NO and you know that. Chelsea showed interest in him, but only 6 months later than when we should have tried to get him.They showed no interest in him last Summer that we know of. My point is there are strikers about and we should have gone for goal scorers rater than have a collection of around 8 wide players and 6 centre halves if you include Charlie Taylor who played there last season and Egan Riley who was still with us.As I have said before you can play bad and still win with goal scorers. To start with Foster and Rodriguez only is criminal, and Obefomi was injured and ended up getting about 30 minutes game time all season
-
- Posts: 13518
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3115 times
- Has Liked: 3836 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
So you’re saying we should’ve tried to sign Cole Palmer 6 months earlier than the summer, so last January? To play in the championship?warksclaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 9:02 pmNO and you know that. Chelsea showed interest in him, but only 6 months later than when we should have tried to get him.They showed no interest in him last Summer that we know of. My point is there are strikers about and we should have gone for goal scorers rater than have a collection of around 8 wide players and 6 centre halves if you include Charlie Taylor who played there last season and Egan Riley who was still with us.As I have said before you can play bad and still win with goal scorers. To start with Foster and Rodriguez only is criminal, and Obefomi was injured and ended up getting about 30 minutes game time all season
This user liked this post: boatshed bill
-
- Posts: 6696
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1705 times
- Has Liked: 791 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
No not at all-not sure why you said that. I am saying last Summer, following our promotion, we should have tried to strengthen our strikers, rather than being obsessed with recruiting wide payers, and centre halves.Chelsea only went for Palmer 6 months later. Palmer is simply a striker we could have looked at, and I gave earlier, several other options which we may or may not have looked at . Surely you cannot have been happy coming into the PL relying on Foster (who has only come good this season, with no guarrantee that he would), and the ageing Rodriguez,who hardly played in the second half of our Championship season.
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
Our best player in the cup at Old Trafford last season plus was decent at BournemouthBurnley Ace wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 5:05 pmBenson had some great moments playing against weak teams in the Championship, to imagine he’s going to rip it up against Liverpool is just childish fantasy
-
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:17 pm
- Been Liked: 38 times
- Has Liked: 113 times
Re: Today’s thread - Liverpool v Burnley
This from the match thread yesterday. Whether you want him gone or not, you're quite clearly not a fan of his this season (fickle?). I know things aren't going great this season, but you're definitely putting the boot in and being very critical of certain young players (Trafford, Amdouni for example), rather than thinking about giving the manager and some players time to adapt to the Premier League and supporting them instead.CoolClaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 2:07 pm**** off VK
This season, and this ******* team selection is a joke and I'm sick of it.
This team simply CANNOT HAVE BEEN selected for footballing reasons.
However, you never answered my last question on my post?