Just go..........

[AlexC83]

I keep having this argument on here this week.

We went for Liverpool as soon as the whistle went for the second half. We won the game then threw it away.

I don't believe Hughes can be faulted at all. He picked the right personnel and we played well. Both goals were stupid ones to give away and there was an element of luck about the second.

He's been at fault with team selection for the last 4 or 5 games for me, and his substitutions have been questionable on several occasions. Not this weekend, though. It should have been the win that kick-started our season.

Is it just me or are you a bit nervous about how we're gonna line up this weekend too? Tevez played well when he came on, he was that impact we'd said he could be, but I've got a feeling he'll be straight back in on saturday: 4-4-2, with possibly Robinho on the left wing...

 

[AlexC83]

No, we went for Liverpool after going a goal down 5 minutes into the second half. As has been more eloquently posted above I believe Hughes lacks the imagination to be a top 4 manager, the best managers will act from instinct in certain situations and one look at Liverpool's form and line-up on Saturday should have been enough to persuade Hughes that a more attacking approach from the start would pay off. We didn't have to be gung-ho in the first half, just get someone up in support of Ade instead of pinging long balls at him when he had nobody to lay them off to.

Liverpool were even more for the taking a few weeks ago when the current champions of this league went there and got beat 2-0. They might not be on the best of form or in the best of health but they're still dangerous.

There seems to be more criticism about being defensive/patient at Anfield (in a game which finished 2-2) than there was after the Birmingham game. Liverpool needed to win the game more than we did (their manager repeatedly said they needed a win before the game) and should be more disappointed than we are with a draw. But all the coverage afterwards seems to be about how we missed an opportunity.

And I wouldn't get too bogged down over when we started to open up - no one can prove it as the argument's over a 5 minute period!

 

[m27]

AlexC83, I'm sorry, I just don't agree. The first half tactics are imperative as they set the tone for the whole game. Hughes made the substitution because we were losing. Having equalised, that team played the way it did because of the momentum created by the goal and the freedom the revised tactics had given our attack minded players on the pitch. Credit for Hughes for this but don't herald it as some kind of masterstroke. Question, do you honestly think Hughes would have made such an attack minded substitution at 0-0? I don't. He was forced into it.

If we had gone for the jugular from the off and taken a lead he could have gone more defensive in the second half if necessary.

If you think Hughes's tactics have anything to do with SWP drifitng over you are mistaken. That's merely instinct in my book, and the sooner he gives Ireland freedom to act on his instinct the sooner we will start to win football games. Let the other side worry about our talent rather than give our players defensive jobs to do on the opposing side's inferior talent.

I agree the first half tactics are imperative and I thought the stability was impressive because regardless of how Liverpool are at the minute it's well documented what sort of run we've been on. I'd call it a patient and mature first half performance given our current position.

If we'd gone for the jugular from the off we could've just as easily left ourselves overexposed and created space for Gerrard to do what he does best - inspire Liverpool to victory - but he wasn't able to inspire other than occasionally (like from his excellent set piece delivery for their opening goal).

My point wasn't all about how Hughes played a masterstroke by bringing on Tevez, it was that if we really were so defensive minded for the whole game we wouldn't have given the players any freedom to search out that second goal when the score was 1-1. That fact cannot be ignored as it has by too many on here. And you can't just credit the players and say it was instinct from SWP and Ireland for that but then lay all the blame on Hughes for a defensive approach. It's a contradiction.

First and foremost, I don't agree with you but I can't argue against what you say as your view is very sensible and based on facts. The bottom line is Hughes's tactics got us 2-1 up and we should have won the game. For that he should be applauded.

My argument is based on "what ifs" and "maybes", but the point you make about Gerrard is the crux of it for me. We had De Jong in our midfield and everyone knew Gerrard wasn't fully fit. It's a gamble but let De Jong deal with Gerrard and then let our natural attacking flair try and get a grip of the game early doors. You have to gamble sometimes, a cautious approach will potentially lead to progress of sorts for us, but it won't make Hughes a top class manager.

Didsbury Dave, it's very rare that I disagree with you but I honestly don't think we attacked from the start of the 2nd half, it was after the goal that Hughes was forced to change things, but like Alex says, I can't argue the point too much as they scored so early in the 2nd half it's impossible to know what Hughes would have done. However, you would have thought the change would have been made at half time if that was always the plan.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I keep having this argument on here this week.

We went for Liverpool as soon as the whistle went for the second half. We won the game then threw it away.

I don't believe Hughes can be faulted at all. He picked the right personnel and we played well. Both goals were stupid ones to give away and there was an element of luck about the second.

He's been at fault with team selection for the last 4 or 5 games for me, and his substitutions have been questionable on several occasions. Not this weekend, though. It should have been the win that kick-started our season.

Is it just me or are you a bit nervous about how we're gonna line up this weekend too? Tevez played well when he came on, he was that impact we'd said he could be, but I've got a feeling he'll be straight back in on saturday: 4-4-2, with possibly Robinho on the left wing...

I've just posted this in another thread. Yes, I think he'll go back to 4-4-2, I think he'll start with the 11 he finished with on Saturday, with the possible exception of Richards in for Zableta. I think Robinho will be on the bench.

 

[levets]

Is it just me or are you a bit nervous about how we're gonna line up this weekend too? Tevez played well when he came on, he was that impact we'd said he could be, but I've got a feeling he'll be straight back in on saturday: 4-4-2, with possibly Robinho on the left wing...

I've just posted this in another thread. Yes, I think he'll go back to 4-4-2, I think he'll start with the 11 he finished with on Saturday, with the possible exception of Richards in for Zableta. I think Robinho will be on the bench.

Richards for his heading ability... I think the only change will be richards for Zab. Tevez will be on the bench with Robbie.