Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Andrew Beasley's avatar

I've just posted this on the Distance Covered article about the game (https://distancecovered.substack.com/p/liverpool-and-the-heel-of-achilles/), so makes sense to share here too:

The end of the game was a mess. What concerns me is that there was no improvement after half time, never mind following the substitutions.

Quiet first halves were more common under Klopp than collective memory probably recalls. In eight home league games last season, Liverpool had no more than one big chance in the first half, which is what they had on Saturday.

But they then averaged 14.5 shots, 4.5 on target and 2.3 big chances in the second halves of those games in 2023/24. Those respective figures against Forest? Eight, three and zero. The occasions they didn't beat those numbers from Saturday after poor first halves last term? One, two and zero.

There should've been more of a response after the break and it wasn't there.

Expand full comment
Sean's avatar

Excellent thoughts. I think we all knew that this new approach would be tested in a 0-0 on 65’. And this was it.

We failed. I wondered what the plan was and was full of optimism when the three subs came on. “What does Slot have up his sleeve for this inevitable type of match?”

It was pretty awful. The players, as you pointed out, really didn’t hit their passes. But it was a real come down from the emotional highs and lows under Klopp.

Let’s hope we can muster more of a response against Bournemouth if it is 0-0 on the hour.

I must say that I didnt feel great about the Palace loss either: we just conceded too many chances. But we did make more. I found both losses concerning in their own way.

I hope there is a way forward that doesn’t just open us up.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts