disappointing that Arsenal doesn't get a clean sheet there, esp being a man up...none since before intl break
And turtle in every one.If Grealish was a hockey player he’d be in three fights a game
Leeds would need seven points to jump them. I don’t see it happening.I’m not convinced that Southampton are safe, especially since they only have two games left to Leeds/Burnley 3 and Everton 4.
Credit to Newcastle for choosing a suicidal gameplan? That may be good for the neutrals - and Manchester City fans - but certainly not for Liverpool.Credit to Newcastle they didn’t just show up and play a back 9.
If Burnley could get a result against Spurs they could get 7/9.Leeds would need seven points to jump them. I don’t see it happening.
Im not sure when/if Liam Cooperreturns from injury but losing him and Dallas to injury and now Ayling to red card suspension is a body blow. That Is likely the three best defenders on a team that isn’t good defensively to begin with.
Disagree. Newcastle aren’t going to learn anything about their level just turtling and trying to limit damage. They’re safe from relegation and won’t make a European place. This is precisely when they should really push their players to try to take it to one of the leagues standard bearers and see which players hold up. I understand that that sucks for Liverpool but I earnestly think they did what was best for NewcastleCredit to Newcastle for choosing a suicidal gameplan? That may be good for the neutrals - and Manchester City fans - but certainly not for Liverpool.
All he said was he thinks Spurs have a good enough team to have a go instead of parking the bus. He complimented them.
This is such a dumb thing to complain about. If Hoj properly squares the ball to Kane in the final moments, Tottenham win the game. Would it have been "playing for a draw" at that point? What constitutes playing for a draw, and going for the win? This has been Tottenham's best strategy for taking points off of top, possession-heavy sides for a number of years and it has worked out pretty well, given the issues the team has had over that time span.Klopp was definitely being a bit salty.
I think he was genuinely surprised that Conte closed up shop and played for a point after the equalizer. He likely figured both teams would be going for the win in that situation and that it would be more of an end to end scramble.
Honestly both Pep and Klopp have been doing this for a while now and it's so tiresome. If they beat a team 4-1 they'll compliment that team on how courageous they are and how good they are. If they can't beat them, they complain about how they play. It's not like Tottenham didn't play this exact way when they took 6 points off City.This is such a dumb thing to complain about. If Hoj properly squares the ball to Kane in the final moments, Tottenham win the game. Would it have been "playing for a draw" at that point? What constitutes playing for a draw, and going for the win? This has been Tottenham's best strategy for taking points off of top, possession-heavy sides for a number of years and it has worked out pretty well, given the issues the team has had over that time span.
I can't like this post enough. Ye olde "defensive Spurs" almost took all 3 points, and probably should have. Even if Hoj just takes a good header shot it either goes in or is a potential rebound for Kane, and the center for Kane was also open, Hoj just missed it. Which is a real shame too, because he had a terrific match. Betancur continues to lag behind him in terms of recent form IMO.This is such a dumb thing to complain about. If Hoj properly squares the ball to Kane in the final moments, Tottenham win the game. Would it have been "playing for a draw" at that point? What constitutes playing for a draw, and going for the win? This has been Tottenham's best strategy for taking points off of top, possession-heavy sides for a number of years and it has worked out pretty well, given the issues the team has had over that time span.
I would say that Conte's substitutions after the equalizer were clearly geared toward protecting the point rather than increasing his odds of winning. Sanchez for Sessegnon and Winks for Kulu were both pretty defensive changes - the team that ended the game included four CBs, a defensively oriented wingback in Emerson, and three defensive midfielders. They ended up getting a good chance right at the end but the strategy was clearly to defend the point first and foremost.This is such a dumb thing to complain about. If Hoj properly squares the ball to Kane in the final moments, Tottenham win the game. Would it have been "playing for a draw" at that point? What constitutes playing for a draw, and going for the win? This has been Tottenham's best strategy for taking points off of top, possession-heavy sides for a number of years and it has worked out pretty well, given the issues the team has had over that time span.
Spurs’ squad doesn’t really have many gamechanging players he could throw on to do anything other than what he did. All wingbacks who were not starting the game are hurt, as is the only other actually solid midfielder remaining in the squad.I would say that Conte's substitutions after the equalizer were clearly geared toward protecting the point rather than increasing his odds of winning. Sanchez for Sessegnon and Winks for Kulu were both pretty defensive changes - the team that ended the game included four CBs, a defensively oriented wingback in Emerson, and three defensive midfielders. They ended up getting a good chance right at the end but the strategy was clearly to defend the point first and foremost.
Of course, its Conte's right to make whatever decisions he wants in the perceived best interests of his team. I'm just pointing out that I think Klopp was genuinely surprised by the late game tactics. Spurs had a lot of incentive to try to win that game given the broader situation with the top four race. So I imagine when Klopp and his team prepared the game plan they figured that both teams would be taking a lot of risks at the end if the score was tied, and that didn't end up being the case.
I love Fab, but he made 3 or 4 bookable offenses in that match. “Tactical” is a very polite way to describe a elbow to Son’s cheek and spiking Kane’s ankle.Klopp needs to stop whining. It's not like Spurs were playing Atleti-style cynical anti-football -- they weren't overly physical, they weren't engaging in time wasting or faking injuries, etc. If anything, the most cynical player on the pitch was Fabinho, who repeatedly got away with tactical fouls to break up Tottenham counterattacks. Liverpool ended up with more fouls and bookings than Spurs did.
Isn’t it the exact same as Liverpool fans (and their media people) complaining for more than a week about Kane not being sent off? Because that very specifically happened.Spurs fans complaining about a player not getting sent off by VAR is fucking rich.
This.If anything, the most cynical player on the pitch was Fabinho
In any tight title race you rue and review lost points constantly. That was one of the most egregious calls this season- of course it comes up frequently.Isn’t it the exact same as Liverpool fans (and their media people) complaining for more than a week about Kane not being sent off? Because that very specifically happened.
I didn't miss many matches during Pep's Barca stint and I don't recall Barca complaining about opponent tactics. That's in large part because they were able to break down low blocks better than any modern side I've seen.Managers and fans complaining about tactics against them has been around forever. Pep’s Barca was the peak of it but it’s definitely carried over to Liverpool and City. I was very surprised Conte didn’t go for the win more as now they can beat Arsenal and still miss out on top 4 but that’s his prerogative. Klopp comes off as a whiner here but even as a United fan he’s been great for the league and genuinely seems like a great guy. The combination of a holier than thou fan base and a team that plays delicious football is never a recipe for humility. See Peps Barca and Klopps Liverpool.
the whole sequence started with an offside chance which resulted in the first save . Does that nullify the offside?1-0 Villa on the third great chance in the first three minutes.
Liverpool look they haven't showed up mentally ready to play after the weekend. They need to get it together quick.
In fairness, the Villa goal started with a clear offside that wasn’t called and they scored on the recycle. If you’re not going to flag offsides, you can’t reset the offsides off a save that never was cleared.Lol equalizer after a total mess in the Villa box. 1-1
Probably should have been called back for a foul but it stands.
As I understand it, the referee should have blown for the offside once the shot rebounded and Villa recovered the ball on the side of the box (Villa shouldn't be able to benefit from the offside by getting possession). Once he didn't blow for offside, however, its a new phase of play so the goal couldn't be taken back.the whole sequence started with an offside chance which resulted in the first save . Does that nullify the offside?
Jon Moss least of all.Nobody covering themselves in glory this game
Legitimately one of the worst refereed halves of football I can remember. Neither goal should have counted/occurred and there were easily 4-5 bookable offenses that went unpunished and another 6-7 instances of a clear foul that weren't called at all.Came here to join the Moss chorus. PMGOL needs to make this his last match (if not half). He was never even competent but now that the decision has been made he looks like the worst type of checked out employee. Absolute embarrassment.