After a while you need to stop putting everything down to bad luck and start analysing where you can do better.
We create more chances than Liverpool, big and small. Whether they are expected or unexpected means feck all. That's a poor point.
The outcome of games depends not only on tactics but also on luck, refereeing decisions, individual mistakes. You link too closely the latest 4 losses Pep suffered in the CL to tactics and almost completely disregard the other factors.
Bayern - Atleti 2014: Muller misses a pen when the result is 1:0 Bayern. Crucial individual mistake.
City - Monaco: it's doubtful tactics was the reason we conceded 3 goals each game, there was nothing rigid about our tactics, if anything it was too risky to play with Toure at DM and Dinho at FB.
City - Liverpool. First goal offside, a pen against Sterling not given, a Jesus goal not give due to a dubious offside decision, a legitimate goal by Sane ruled out - 4 crucial decisions went against City.
City - Spurs. Aguero misses a pen, Laporte has his worst game for City in the 2nd leg, Llorente scores after a handball, VAR strikes against City. Besides, we are after a quadruple and don't play our strongest team in the 1st leg.
If you take into account not only tactics but also luck, refereeing errors and individual mistakes, then your point becomes to crumble. You are right to point out that luck makes any sport strategy vulnerable but then completely ignore its role together with the role of individual mistakes and the referees when assessing the reasons for Pep's defeats in the CL.
That wasn't my point but that putting everything down to tactics is mistaken.
Only 1 manager has won more CL titles than Pep, Ferguson has the same amount of CL wins despite managing one of the richest clubs in the world for 25 years.
Klopp had lost something like 6 cup finals in a row before winning a big trophy in May.
This discussion is much better suited for a bar/pub because the ideas you’re bringing up have so much depth and complexity as do mine. I can’t argue with any of what you said and while your excuses are valid ones you’ve excluded the numerous games/rounds that would have needed to be won after that (16 wins short of a rough count).
I used the term tactics generically and I meant it more in terms of philosophically speaking. Klopp and Pep are both ruthless in attack but the way they create chances are on opposite ends of the spectrum. We have a left wing / right wing in politics and both styles work out equally well for what each side wants to do. That’s what’s great about football. There really isn’t a perfect way to play. However, there is an optimal way to play under certain conditions. You can say it’s subjective but I don’t think that’s the case at. We might create more chances but what we don’t do is create chances and goals from ‘chaos’ like Klopps style does and that’s why I think Pep is too rigid and gets exposed.
Klopp is much more willing to allow his players to create something out of nothing. Be it a long shot ball over the top, a low chance through ball to get behind, and what he’s done that sets him apart from everyone else is perfectly utilize the fullbacks in attack. They get their fullbacks into position to launch a ball in the box and surround it with players ready for a few lucky bounces to fall their way.
When was the last time you saw city score off of some bullshit ball bouncing around in the box for it to fall right in front of one of our players? Not only does that chaos create luck for yourself it creates panic and unsettles the defense because you can’t prepare for that. Meanwhile, you know exactly how City is going to create their chances.
They’re both masters of the game for sure. @MCBlueFan is right in that Klopp has built exactly the right squad to pull that off. Pep brought in Mendy, Walker, Stones, Rodri, and Cancelo so that’s all on Pep. He could have brought in a CB instead of wasting money on a cup playing RB. He could have bought one even early because it was obvious Stones can’t be relied on to stay fit from day one.
Klopp + Pep will be effectively equal in league points when it’s said and done but Klopp will undoubtedly have better results in the CL simply because he uses better game theory for that competition. I hated tournaments in poker and I hate them in football but it’s undeniable that the approach has to be different.
FWIW I think Pep is the superior manager but Klopp is the master of taking advantage of the random elements of the game that you can’t control. You need that element in winning round after round of 50/50 or 60/40 matchups.
Watch a Liverpool match close and late and you can feel the ruthlessness from every position. That same energy isn’t there under our system. We haven’t needed it because we’re so dominate in almost every match but that’s not going to happen in 4 rounds of CL football.
Edit: just to state the obvious...of course Pep can win a CL and win it at City. The argument I’m making is that his approach is flawed and is prone to upsets.
I'm afraid to say that last season and this, Klopp has proven himself beyond doubt a far better manager than Pep. He's got a weaker side to win a champs league , after getting to the final the year before, and will win the league this year, quite possibly breaking our 100pts record, earliest win record, number of wins on a season record, and who knows, maybe another champs league.
If pep wins the CL this season it becomes more of an argument but who has any real confidence in that. His record suggests he won't get near it. Again.
Isn’t success measured in trophies? Currently the almighty Klopp has one. One major trophy.I'm afraid to say that last season and this, Klopp has proven himself beyond doubt a far better manager than Pep. He's got a weaker side to win a champs league , after getting to the final the year before, and will win the league this year, quite possibly breaking our 100pts record, earliest win record, number of wins on a season record, and who knows, maybe another champs league.
If pep wins the CL this season it becomes more of an argument but who has any real confidence in that. His record suggests he won't get near it. Again.
He could have brought in a CB instead of wasting money on a cup playing RB. He could have bought one even early because it was obvious Stones can’t be relied on to stay fit from day one.
If you're going to have proper discussions at least try to stick to the truth.
He couldn't have bought a starting quality CB with the ~20m cash we spent on Cancelo, and we couldn't sell our only back up to Walker without replacing him or we could be in just as much trouble if Walker got a 6 month injury instead of Laporte - maybe more as he's the only proper pace we have at the back to defend counter attacks.
It really undercuts the "I'm just trying to have a fair and balanced discussion" schtick when you throw in bollocks like that.
I agree to an extent with what you say, but I wouldn't say the approach is flawed. It's just that luck plays a much bigger role in cup competitions and is more difficult to control.
Liverpool needed luck to win the CL last season. They finished 2nd in their group and were close to being thrown out by Napoli, Alisson made a fantastic save seconds before the end in the game with Napoli. Van Dijk could/should have seen a red card for a brutal challenge on Mertens. Then Barca are leading 3:0 and Dembele misses a clear cut chance to make it 4:0, etc. If Klopp was that good at exploiting the random elements of cup completions he would have won more and not have plenty of losses in cup finals.
If you take more risks in the CL, then the outcome might be several CL titles or none at all. There is something to the point about the difference between league and cup competitions but taking more risks works both ways and might leave a brilliant team without a CL win. And it's not true we didn't take enough risks under Pep. We started with just 3 defenders against Liverpool at home and had them on the ropes but the referee ruled out the 2nd goal by Sane and didn't give us a chance to make a come back. We started well the 1st leg but several refereeing mistakes helped Liverpool win big. We took many risks against Monaco and Spurs but individual mistakes in defence let us down.
I see the points you’re making and to an extent I agree with some of them as well. We definitely agree that it takes an incredible amount of luck both for you and dodging unlucky ones against you as well. I don’t get caught up worrying about all those errors in referring decisions or missed sitters that benefited Pool because all of that should even out in the end. You create your own luck. Yes, I do think there’s a small bias against City but nothing made me happier at the tables when people thought I was lucky.
I suppose it’s all about perspective though and for me the approach is definitely going for several titles or none at all! You talked about taking risks in individual moments or certain games which kind of misses my point. I’m saying to take them all the time. That’s a fine line but it’s also the most optimal. I think we can all agree that Klopp and Pep are effectively pretty equal right now.
I’m old enough to be able to appreciate both but I’m convinced that Klopps style has the higher ceiling and we’ll just have to see how it plays out.
I just don’t understand the bullshit notion that Klopp was a flop in tournaments. His second CL at Dortmund they upset real in the semis and lost in the finals. The next they lost in the quarters vs Real. The one after they lost to Juve. His first one in Liverpool that made the finals and the second one they won. That’s three finals in what 6 years? He’s not lucky and his system thrives in tournaments. That’s all I’m trying to say here! Not only that they’re going to beat our points record this season.