UCL: 1-1 v. Spartak Moscow (A)

How did this end up a draw? It was as one-sided as it could get, with Spartak only having two shots of note (one ended up as the goal against the run of play, and the other one was on target but scarcely threatening.) But this seems to be the story of the season so far, with Liverpool dominant against "lesser" sides (though keep in mind these are the Russian champions, albeit somewhat depleted by injuries and poor form) that adopt highly defensive stances.

Once again it appeared to be the kind of game where Liverpool needed to be at their very best to get a win, and they failed to hit that level, despite playing very well. My guess is that, disregarding the fragile defending from set pieces, the mixed bag of results over the last week and a half is due to the fulcrum of our attack not playing anywhere close to his best. 

When Firmino, as the focal point of the attack, doesn’t play well, the whole offensive setup creaks. That may be the main thread running through the games (with the exception perhaps of the City game and the first half of the Sevilla one) since after the international break. This is more so than other teams that don’t use a false-9 because of Firmino’s heavier involvement in the buildup and comparatively bigger role in providing assists. Not only does the team suffer from the direct loss of goals that he would have contributed through better shooting, but from his poor passing or ball control resulting in chances not quite coming off. His movement is still first rate, which is probably why our chance creation has been pretty solid through the last two weeks, but the situations he found himself in today would likely have resulted in goals or assists on another day. 

It must be said that this happens to all players and hopefully he and Klopp sort it out soon – obviously, we need him to be at close to optimal levels. The pertinent question is whether you can slot another attacker in his place while he works his way out of  such a rut. Maybe Solanke could have done a better job, though his movement and passing don't seem to be as good yet at this point (even when compared with off-form Firmino; in any case he wasn’t in the squad). Sturridge showed a slight regression compared with the last two games, in terms of not really progressing with his sharpness - his shots seemed scuffed and hurried yet he was laboured when he needed to be quick. He displayed good movement and control on the ball but the decision-making was not optimal. 

In any case, neither player is a false-9 like Firmino. Therein lies what may be problem with Klopp’s first-choice system: it’s too dependent on one player, unlike say another system that plays a striker and you can just interchange strikers when they are lost to injury and suspension. Taking Firmino out will probably necessitate changing the system, such as going to a 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2 diamond, which Klopp may be reluctant to do.

During the game, it was a surprise to see Mané making way for Sturridge as I felt he would have stretched the opposition much more than Firmino (who was having a turgid time) as the game wore on, and who didn’t seem to be in any difficulty or particular need of a rest. It may be that Klopp felt Mané’s defensive contribution was weaker than Firmino’s and the addition of Sturridge could have left more gaps for Moscow.

Can’s displays this season have overall been very promising but performances like today’s and against Leicester show why he shouldn’t get ahead of himself (apparently, the rumour why he continues to hold out on signing a new contract is because he wants to be assured his place in the first team, and Juventus is apparently willing to make such “promises” [one wonders how credible such promises can be, since once the player signs a contract the manager can do what he likes, particularly if you’re signing a comparative unknown with no constituency amongst the fans]). He still lacks the consistency and focus that are expected of someone playing in his position or of someone that would be automatic first-choice. Granted, even Hendo was not playing at his best in the first few games of the season, but I think what seemed to help Hendo through that difficult period was keeping his focus and keeping his play tidy and simple. Can probably needs to do the same.

Having said all that, I still think the team is playing well, just not at close to their full ability yet. The frustrating thing is that the recent run of games (with the exception of Leicester away in the league) required them to be playing at their best to win, which doesn't happen all the time even with championship-winning teams that are far more experienced or have more depth than Liverpool.

EPL: 3-2 v. Leicester (A)

Finally, a win to blog about!

For a fan, there was considerable symmetry in terms of the emotion felt over the results of the last three winless games and this one. The results against Sevilla, Burnley and Leicester (EFL Cup) felt incredibly frustrating as we put in very kinetic performances and were in control the vast majority of the time, yet failed to come away with maximum points. Conversely, this game was sweetly satisfying because we were noticeably less in control for more of the game - particularly in the last 10 minutes of the first half and and for long stretches of the second - having acceded to the Leicester style of play – high balls, long clearances, almost panicked passing – yet we came away with a win, and saved a penalty to boot.

In this context, it is not totally wrong for the media to play up the “lucky” angle, as I would also think that Klopp is probably less than satisfied with the performance. It was not exactly a "lucky" win, but it was certainly not the kind of dominance and confidence that we have seen in many of the games so far this season. But it’s satisfying that for once this season we don’t have to be playing at near 100% or completely outplaying the other side to get a win. The fact that we laboured under dodgy refereeing and “robust” (to put it charitably) physicality from the Leicester side is the extra shot of gin to my tonic.

In that regard, while the refereeing was really questionable, what was actually aggravating for a fan was that it was lopsided. While we didn’t concede a penalty through Can’s handball (which looked more like ball to arm), it only cancels out one of the many dodgy decisions that went their way: Vardy's blatant dive in the 45th minute, which earned Matip a yellow and eventually led to the first Leicester goal; Okazaki's pulling of Mignolet in the penalty box (which likely prevented him from reaching a corner) while he was offside, then coming from an offside position to nick the ball into the net; awarding a penalty to Leicester when Mignolet floored Vardy in the box even though the keeper was first to the ball and touched it. (Okazaki’s 40th minute effort was correctly ruled offside as Maguire was offside when he received the ball and crossed it.) It still has to be said that the account is deep in the deficit; more so if the season as a whole is considered.

While I think Mignolet deserves credit for the penalty save and for several good stops (particularly in the first half), this performance encapsulates the reasons why he makes fans nervous. The penalty decision, while incorrectly given, should never have materialised in the first place: most keepers would probably slide in to claim the ball with their hands, and while he may also have floored Vardy in that situation, penalties are hardly ever given when the keeper is able to claim the ball decisively. He is also likely to be quicker to the ball than when he tried to kick it. Furthermore, that poor attempted clearance (though he did touch the ball) is a reminder that one of his weaknesses is his kicking. Same with his attempt to take the ball round Vardy in the first half, which gave Okazaki the opportunity to shoot at an open goal. Yet, while he may not be a de Gea or Courtois, his ball stopping ability has helped Pool considerably over the years, and today (with the penalty save) is a case in point.

Lovren, while not conspicuously at fault for the goals, again demonstrates why fans have issues with him. The early Leicester chance in the 5th minute resulted in Mignolet saving from Vardy, but Lovren, nearest to the keeper, was guilty of ball watching as the ball flew into the air and Mahrez went for a volley that fortunately looped over the goal. Similarly, in the 44th minute,  Leicester attempt to play the ball out of their area, and Lovren does a good job intercepting the ball to Mahrez. But, possibly giddy with excitement at doing so and being in such an advanced position, and despite no Leicester player being close to him or moving towards him, he then attempts to bend the ball to Salah in the box with the outside of his right foot, which of course fell woefully short. Even a creative midfield type would probably have some hesitancy about trying a ball like that. One felt the fanbase collectively groaning loudly at that point.

These are decent players but sometimes one feels that they could do with trying to keep things simple and getting the basics right, rather than over-complicate things. The spotlight burns brighter when you already have a target on your back.

Still, these negatives and the generally wild nature of the game were offset by quite a few positives. Coutinho’s return to form is one, as he refrained from pointless shots and demonstrated lethal effectiveness when the opportunity arose. His reaction to the goal seemed cathartic for him, which hopefully puts him in a better place for the rest of the season.

Sturridge also had a good return, getting an assist and being somewhat unlucky not to get on the scoresheet himself. Many have been skeptical that he would return to his best, but hopefully this is a sign that he’s edging closer. He seems to be returning to the form that he displayed towards the end of last season: more confidence in his body, leading to better movement and positioning. One hopes that he’s just ironing out his shooting – that seems to be the last piece of the puzzle.

Henderson also put in a great shift, and appears to be on the way to returning to his best form from the last season. The goal helped, and it has to be said that it took composure to place the ball between the keeper and defender that were in his way, rather than just blasting it goalwards. (One wishes that the rest of the team did more of that in the second half than merely launching the ball forward.)

In particular, an uptick in Hendo's form may be key for the team. More than any other player, he represents a crucial part of the team's spine, knitting the defence and offense, with his stamina and physicality important elements of what made the team tick during the first half of last season. Emre Can has fantastic ability but tends to be mercurial and somewhat less conscientious defensively. Gini Wijnaldum puts in the miles but appears even less consistent. An increasingly influential and consistent Hendo could be the key to ensuring that LFC puts in more measured, controlled performances, rather than the see-sawing kickabout that we witnessed for long stretches today.

Carabao Cup: 0-2 v. Leicester (A)

Liverpool proved unable to snap out of a run of poor results despite their usual excellent start to the game. Since this is only the League Cup, more damage has been wrought by the sense of malaise intensifying rather than actual harm imposed on LFC's medal prospects. It's still worrying, as the threat of getting caught in a slump - the worst kind is to be playing well and dominating games but not getting any points - is a clear and present danger.

The result was downright deflating after an upbeat, incisive first half (albeit without the requisite finishing). If anything, one takeaway from the game is that Klopp's imprint on the team is very clear: he’s able to get a Pool reserve team to implement his ideas and play some pretty football.

The goals we conceded seemed to be the usual goof-offs. The first was partly our usual corner voodoo combined with a failure to deal with second balls; the second was a now more confident Leicester deciding to have a go for one of the few times in the game. And of course the “score against Pool with your first decent effort” is pretty axiomatic by now. What's frustrating is that teams don't seem to have to play particularly well to score against LFC, while we have to perform near optimal standards in order to get any joy in front of goal.

But it’s also the case today that we didn’t really test the Leicester keeper enough – we hardly had any clear cut chances. I think, as in the Burnley game, a sign of progress is that we are getting better penetration, but in this case the clear cut chances were paltry. Solanke sparkled but didn’t put away the half chances he had; Oxlade-Chamberlain had the best opening but his shot got deflected.

Still it was a relatively good run-out for the squad players. While promising, Grujic seemed nervous (and it usually seems to materialise in over-aggression) and not trusting enough of himself. Ox proved why he still can’t play central midfield at the moment, though he gave some good moments from the flanks. The rest of the youngsters - Gomez, Flanno, and Robertson (who has enough top-flight experience to not be considered a youngster) did pretty decent jobs. Two stood out: Solanke was eye catching, with great movement and an adroit use of physicality - a touch more sharpness and experience and he would have opened his account for the club. And Woodburn looked like a seasoned pro rather than a 17 year old: great mindfulness on the ball and skill in holding it up. He also almost got a sensational goal towards the end.

While there’s little end product from these prospects at the moment, the hard truth is that they need games to learn and progress. Hopefully they learn more from defeats than from victories that may paper over flaws. Of the youngsters that were similarly tested last season in non-league games, the likes of Woodburn, Trent and Gomez did well enough to be on the precipice of a first-team place now. Unfortunately today's result has lessened the number of games they’re going to get for their development.

EPL: 1-1 v. Burnley (H)

Start with the obvious: the result was frustrating, and a particularly poor one in the context in the race for top-four. Games at home and where you dominate as well as enjoy quite a few good chances are games that you need to put away and get points on the board, particularly this early in the season. Once the top teams peel away it's a bit more of a challenge mentally to keep up. 

Indeed, LFC were lucky towards the end to get away with a point as our "corner voodoo" nearly struck again. On another day, another team might have scored one of those chances, and the LFC would have had a much more negative narrative to deal with. (Of course it needn’t be pointed out that Burnley were also pretty lucky that we were less than clinical on most occasions, with the exception of Salah’s goal.) Then there's the glaring (and by now rather tripe) defensive error which gifted Burnley a goal on their first real attack. Come on, at least make them work for it. Or at least it has to be some rather spectacular goal like Burnley's second against Chelsea on opening day.

Having said that, I think there’s evidence of progress in one important aspect. Last season, one serious problem when playing against well-organised and more defensive-oriented teams was that Pool frequently failed to get any penetration behind defensive lines. We ended up passing sideways or punting hopeful long balls with little incision. Most of the time that resulted in some awry shot from outside the box or a pass that's easily cut out.

In contrast, this has not been the case so far against Burnley, Palace or Watford. We appear to be better able to get into good positions behind well-organised lines, mostly on the flanks. This seems down to the likes of Salah (and Mané) being able to stretch the other side and create space, but today it was Coutinho too who helped with his dribbling. That seems like relatively good progress to me.

The problem is that the finishing and decision-making haven’t been optimal. The forwards, of which Salah is culpable as well, haven’t been as ruthless as they need to be. In that regard Mané’s presence was missed. Couts still seemed rusty, as did Sturridge. The latter had in the past scored from positions less promising than some of those he found himself in today. 

Firmino’s starting position meant that he was hardly in areas he would have occupied as the lone striker/false 9, and his influence was barely felt today. This is not a new issue at all, and I think it compromises the team as a whole as it usually means there is a less effectual player on the flank. If Klopp chooses to start with Sturridge or Solanke, he might think about either resting Firmino or starting a more natural flanking player like Oxlade-Chamberlain or even Milner (whose best performances for City have come on the flanks) and putting Firmino in the no. 10 or no. 8 position.

I thought that Solanke actually seemed the sharpest of the bunch and maybe we would have benefited had he been brought on earlier. He seemed driven, quick and blessed with good positional sense. 

In games against the likes of Burnley, it might be interesting to experiment with a traditional striking partnership (of which it seems to be that Sturridge/Solanke or Ings is the natural fit) with the intention of maximising striking efficiency. The premise is that strikers tend to be more clinical in front and goal and are better able to strike in a wider variety of situations, such as headers or from just outside the box or positionally being better able to react to saves or blocks. Width can be still be provided by a roving no. 10 of the likes of Mané or Salah. This might be an option especially in cases when one of the pair of Mané/Salah isn't available.

The lack of finishing isn’t a new issue and hopefully will diminish as the season goes on as players get sharper. Sometimes you also need the rub of the green, and we haven’t really had that all week, or indeed much this season. The contrast with City is palpable: a rather lucky equaliser against Everton when down to ten men, then a winning goal against Bournemouth that came more than two minutes after the five minutes added on had been exhausted, then benefiting from a controversial sending off against Pool when the game was still in the balance. Now, as evident from the Watford game, their confidence is high and the team is clicking into gear. On the other hand, Pool conceded a last-minute offside (amongst other issues, such as pushing the keeper) goal against Watford, had its best player sent off against City and unavailable for three games, as well as suffering rather bad brain farts in front of goal against both Sevilla and Burnley. The only thing to do is to keep grinding on and work to change those fortunes.

Command and control

Klopp's LFC have been justifiably criticised for at times not controlling games better. This is particularly glaring in cases where the team has been dominant and is usually sitting on a lead, only to lose control of the match and eventually the scoreline. Prime examples include the 2016 reversals against Southampton and Bournemouth, or the stalemates against United and City in 2017.  Add to that the latest case, against Sevilla in the Champions' League.

Would a dedicated defensive midfielder (DM) improve matters? While I think this could be the case, it does not seem to be an idea favoured by Klopp. He hasn't really signed anyone for such a task: of those who come closest to specialising in that position for LFC, Kevin Stewart was sold last summer and Lucas was played more often in defence than in the midfield. It may be that Klopp resists the inclusion of such a player in favour of a more fluid midfield, with players that are drilled to run into space and support the press by the forwards. Indeed, even Henderson - in what has been called a quarterbacking role (I resist the traditionally elegant moniker of regista as I'm not sure he has shown enough flair and composure for that yet) - appears to be getting in more advanced positions much more frequently, interchanging often with the other midfielders.

While a DM might help to break up attacks and pre-empt counterattacks before they get too dangerous, there may not be a strong need for one provided the press is working well and Liverpool enjoy better possession.  In fact, these two factors are usually the case - the team gets possession back relatively quickly, and in most games - frequently those against lesser sides - enjoys the vast majority of possession. 

When these conditions are met, it seems to me what's needed is the players better knowing how to control proceedings: when to push forward and when to dampen the tempo. The latter is not simply about passing the ball amongst your own teammates: doing so invites pressure and forces your team further back into its own half. Drawing opponents in and inviting pressure is often more high risk than playing the ball forward, though the corollary is that it opens up space behind your opponents.

It would appear that LFC's default mode is simply the first approach: when possession is won, the team almost invariably tries to spring an attack, to try to get the ball to runners in advanced positions as quickly as possible. That's great to watch and goes to the heart of why LFC can be such a formidable attacking force, but it also results in a frustratingly high number of turnovers which leave spaces that encourage the opposition to come forth again. Doing well over the course of a season and in multiple competitions requires adroit game management.

I suspect that the team is frequently only executing Klopp's instructions. Being attack-minded, his gut probably says that pursuing turnovers is the key to discombobulating the opposition and putting the game out of their reach. He's not wrong when it works, but when it doesn't - and the spotlight always burns a bit more uncomfortably when it doesn't - it raises questions about his tactics.

But if that's not the case in some games, the other question is whether LFC have the personnel to carry out such controlled play. There haven't been many examples of it under the attack-minded Klopp. It takes players who are very comfortable in possession and under pressure, particularly in midfield, as those are the players that are called upon most frequently to circulate the ball or to compensate for their counterparts flitting in and out of position. With Lallana out with injury, Can seems the best bet at the moment, though he's still rather mercurial. Henderson's mobility has seemed crimped this season compared with seasons past, and he's too in favour of one-touch plays rather than ruminating with the ball on his feet to try to draw opponents in and to open up spaces for his mates. Overall, the midfield is built for feeding a lightning offensive than for a footballing cul de sac.

This is probably where Naby Keita will fill a big gap, with his mobility, silkiness and composure on the ball. His inclusion might see Liverpool finally improving on that aspect of game management, which I believe is what separates good teams from great ones.

UCL: 2-2 v. Sevilla (H)

Before saying anything about the game, one should set the overarching context for LFC. Coming off a 0-5 hammering at City, it was vital to shake off any sense of trauma and get some points on the board. LFC had to do this against a team that brought back bad memories for Pool and which is, despite some depletions, still a strong La Liga outfit. Moreover, LFC had been absent from the UCL for three years (and few in their squad have much UCL experience, with the exception of new signing Oxlade-Chamberlain), while Sevilla is a seasoned practitioner, especially when their unprecedented Europa League success is taken into account.

In this context, the outcome of the game was a mild success for Pool. Even after a conceding a silly opener early in the game, which, in light of the trauma of the last league game might have torched nerves and deflated confidence, they attacked in a way that suggested genuine will and self-belief. It was Klopp-vintage LFC attacking football - relentless and remorseless. Well, it would have been really remorseless had they put the game out of reach by half-time, which they were capable of doing. Moreno's sparkling performance, which perhaps for him came with some personal vindication after how many blamed him for Pool's capitulation in the Europa League final against the same opposition a year ago, is also indicative of Klopp's ability to improve players, even those that have been long written off (oh how one wishes that would rub off soon on the centerbacks).

But it also turns out that the game was a Klopp-vintage LFC performance in another manner, this time not in a positive way: conceding a late goal when leading and in firm control. Psychologically, for fans at least, it's one of those cases where at ten minutes in, one goal down and with the memory of a five-goal surrender painfully fresh, you would have taken a draw at the end. Being dominant and having Sevilla on the ropes, only to once again blow it because of a not-especially mesmerising goal (and thankfully Sevilla put a late chance wide with the goal gaping) feels somewhat like a letdown. That the goals were down to the usual culprits - individual error (for the first one) and a collective lapse of concentration (for the second) - won't do much to dispel the gloom.

It increasingly seems like Pool's form towards the end of the last season - where they scored fewer goals but were also much tighter defensive - was an aberration. That's not necessarily a bad thing: I thought that those outcomes flattered Pool somewhat, as they were certainly weaker in attack but defensively seemed to be getting away with more. Moreover, they were frequently up against teams with much less to play for.

Having said all that, I think it's still too early to pass judgment on how the next few months will turn out. There is a possibility that the relatively tough early games have helped Klopp iron out his team a little more and perhaps motivated them better after the recent mixed results. It also has to be noted that LFC are still playing without Coutinho.  We can't really be sure till October.  In the meantime, next up is Burnley, the kind of physical, well-organised side that typically thrives against Pool.  It may not be platform for bouncing back from the City game that fans hope for.

Transfer tidings

Much angst and bile about LFC's summer transfer dealings have already been spilled on social media.  Yet the context that is missing from most comments is the near total lack of verifiable information from clubs about the exact goings on during these dealings, meaning that complaints about clubs not doing this or that or having one motive or another are probably close to being pure speculation, usually in accordance with one's pre-conceived notions about the club.

Having said that, I do want to wade into the Virgil van Dijk affair, specifically to address the insistence of many on a moral equivalence between Pool's approach to VVD and Barcelona's courting of Coutinho (which was accompanied by what could only be construed as rather severe harassment of LFC).

While I have no first-hand knowledge, most public accounts point to several important differences between the two courtships. First, Southampton were initially unopposed to selling, while Pool have maintained their opposition throughout. By pulling the plug after at first signalling to VVD that he could move, it is probably not surprising that the player's relations with management soured after that (especially with reports that Pool was willing to pay £60-70 mil, a ridiculous amount for a player even in this day and age, much less a defender).

Second, Pool did not make an approach after that alleged tapping up incident (as per its statement after the incident and supposedly because it had made a promise to the Saints) and also went radio silent in the media, quite unlike Barcelona who not only tried using the media to unsettle Coutinho and the club but also, by coincidence surely, submitted its bids just before LFC games.

Third, VVD told his club months ago (as early as April, according to some accounts, but certainly by the beginning of summer) that he wanted to move. Coutinho handed in a transfer request the day before the season's first game, having not given any indication before that until perhaps a few days prior to the request. Obviously, Coutinho's actions were clearly something much more difficult for any club to accept.

Whether the above comparison proves to be accurate, what does seem certain is that comments about transfers inexorably reduce players to property or assets (which is disturbing on one level), failing to consider the intangible aspects that managers and club officials, who work closely with players, inevitably have to take into account. Things like social bonds, player comfort, loyalty or morale.

That is particularly the case when fans talk about outgoings at a club. Ultimately, football is a team sport and such intangibles count. I believe that's the case for LFC, especially under the intense, team focused Klopp, and also since when we've never been a club that could go out and drop £100-£200mil at the tip of a hat.

EPL: 0-5 v. City (A)

It was the searing indignity of this result that finally precipitated the creation of this blog so as to vent my frustrations online!

A few things of note.  Let's start with the Mané sending off. While I can see why he's been sent off, it's not necessarily a clear-cut case and I would like to take issue with some of the sentiments expressed about how it was a stone-cold red.

First, to those who say that it's a literal application of the rulebook, it should be noted that refereeing is to a large degree about interpretation and context. A literal application of the rulebook would probably see far more players in the book or sent off. Somebody on Twitter noted how in LFC's last game against Arsenal, Salah scored the third goal after nicking the ball with his head from Bellerin as the latter's foot went high. Should Bellerin have been sent off as well for "endangering" a fellow player? In that case, Bellerin missed and Salah came away with the ball, which leads to the conclusion that, in Mané's case, the circumstances that prompted the red were that he did catch a player in the face with his foot and that player happened to be the keeper. If that's the case, it would seem that he was sent off due to sheer bad luck: he actually hit his opponent (despite not meaning to, just as Bellerin probably had no intention of kicking Salah), and keepers are protected more than outfield players. That's patently unfair then. It's not to say that football isn't unfair at times, but I think it rather undercuts the case for a literal interpretation of the rulebook all the time.

Second, the question of intent. There are some who say that though Mané's eyes were firmly on the ball, he probably could have seen the keeper coming with his peripheral vision. Even if true, one is taking a big leap in implying that the quality of one's peripheral vision is as good as when one is firmly concentrating on looking ahead. In other words, when you are focused on something immediately ahead of you, it's unlikely that you will be able to see as well using your peripheral vision, in terms of judging distance, speed or direction of movement of an oncoming object. In Mané's case, what this means is that even if he did see the keeper coming from the corner of his eyes, he might not have gotten as clear a sense of whether that keeper would reach the ball before he got to it than in a situation where he is looking directly at the keeper.

So this could go some way to explaining why his leg was raised. While he probably saw the keeper coming, he may have thought that he could reach the ball ahead of the keeper if he stretched for it. It turned out to be a tragic mistake, but it does not necessarily fall into the ambit of endangering his opponent.

The Mané issue aside, it was a poor performance from LFC. It has to be said that Klopp may be tactically culpable here, in that he didn't adjust Pool's approach when down to 10-men. That failure greviously negated LFC's pressing and opened up too much space between the lines for City, turning a one-goal contest into a goal-fest. Someone on Twitter said that it's probably because LFC didn't know how else to play or didn't have the personnel for it. If that's the case, then it reflects poorly on Klopp. Over the last two seasons Pool had repeatedly paid the price for not knowing how to close out games, when moving from their fluid, expansive play to a more compact, disciplined shape might help to see out games where they had the lead. The same kind of switch would have come in handy here.

The irony of this result is that, just two weeks earlier, Arsenal were being criticised for many of the same perceived failings as Pool are now: lack of leaders on the pitch when things go south, tactical naiveté in the wake of the opponents playing between the lines and players just lost on the pitch or giving up. Hopefully, it'll serve as a big wake-up call, as the back-to-back defeats to Pool and Arsenal did for Chelsea last season.

The only problem is that it is difficult to see Klopp doing anything but persisting with the same tactics and personnel. Manager and players may be much more inclined to write-off the result as a one-off. One can only hope they are similarly seared by that experience and play with more fire in their belly in the next few months. In the EPL, that's the kind of mentality that intimidates and could prove the edge in tight contests.

First post!

Hello world!