Most people seem to think that Fabianski; Senderos and Beanhead did well last night.

...but Liverpool had far more clear cut chances than we did, and really could have won 4-2. At times it looked to me a knife through butter stuff (and despite being a Big Phil fan - personally I thought he looked a tad shaky).

...and this was against a Liverpool attack that was second string.

Reason to be concerned

A result of the Arsenal style of play that keeps a high line and is vulnerable to the long ball just like the first team

...or simply the result of an inexperienced DM and full-backs?

Didn't think the defence was good at all, nor the tracking back....if Liverpool had Torres last night he's had scored a hatful.

Senderos started well but in the 2nd half didn't play as well, the full backs were awful defensively, Silvestre was OK but his positional play at times was awful (which is one of his big problems) though it was one of his better games.

Fabiansky did well I thought. All in all I thought it was a great game offensively, but best not to look at the defending too closely as that was poor.

IMO it's not our system, it's more the fact our players (full back in particular) seem to be chosen on the basis that they can attack with defending coming 2nd. It should be the other way round IMO.

Fullbacks.

Gilbert moreso kept zooming up the pitch and Senderos had to cover the quick counter. Meaning he was dragged out of position.

Same happened on the other side but with Gibbs in situe. They doubled up on our Kieran, and Silvestre had to decide whether to come or go.....basically, we didn't have our midfielder helping out.

Carbon copy of the first team, but worse positioning. The first team are a bit better at keeping the shape.....but we still get caught in the same way.

I honestly don't know the answer. Other than to stop the fullbacks venturing forwards.

EDIT: Should also say that the first team are more capable with the long ball now. We sit deeper at CB, and that ball over the top is not so much of an issue. It always will be with Senderos though. As mentioned before, his turning circle is worse than a jumbo jet.

...thats kinda the conclusion I came to as well.

And its something that is nagging at me with the first team too. Its a tired saying that defences wiin Championships, but a true one! For all our sparkle - had last nights game goone into extra time would we have outscored them.

That said - that team showed far more maturity than the first team in closing the game down!

You re probably right (and that explains the conundrum).

General point - with all this playing on the deck - the problem is that a ball in flight is quicker than any player/quick one-two - and so I do think that AW's style of play does deny us this advantage. But then again, we have a team of midgets, so perhaps its an advantage that we are never going to be able to enjoy with this team, and will always be relatively vulnerable to.

Ah but Sub, a ball across the ground is easier to control or hit first time, so whilst it might reach its destination quicker in the air, bringing it down and playing it would probably level it out anyway.

Insua and especially Degan kept bombing up the pitch and most of Liverpools best moments came from the wide area's, I don't think Gibbs and Gilbert helped our cause by playing so deep, neither of them ventured forward themselves.

Senderos and Silvestre got some good interceptions and I think gernally they played well.

"I know I'm right, because to the best of my knowledge, I have never been wrong"

I get to use the Catch 22 quote again :woohoo:

I liked that Deggen/Degan (sp?). Best player for LFC last night :good:

You need a good defence to win titles simply because on off days the defence can still defend a hard earned lead when you might be lacklustre going forward..or even grab a crucial point.

I think if Liverpool had equalised we would have probably lost as they'd brought on Bennayoun and Aquilani who were beginning to dictate and we were stuck in our own half quite a lot.

We got the win in the end which was great and very pleasing indeed though!

The problem is not that they did or didn't ventrue forward..the problem was firslty that Gibbs can't really defend because as we saw last night he's an attacking player and plays much better when he does attack. Secondly Gibbs is pretty small and positionally he got caught out quite a lot.

The midfield didn't help either but if you play players who can't defend at the back you can expect to give away chances, defending needs to be done as a unit and we certainly don't defend as a unit.

I thought Gibbs actually made 2 or 3 vital tackles deep in our own half.

He made the odd tackle, one after a mistake from him but his defending isn't up to scratch...but then I don't expect it to be as he's a winger by trade.

This defence in the cup will get smashed by a better attacking tam. Looking at Chelsea and Man City who play strong line ups, I'd hope we avoid them.

Then again, I think we'd stand a better chance if we got a home draw first and foremost next round and took one out sooner or later as 2 legs we'd lose.

Chelsea and Manc play through their midfield, but I do think we struggle a bit against Citeh and Spuds :coffee:

Fullbacks looked shaky.

CBs looked good though

:lol: at the player scores posted in the reaction thread!

Says completely the opposite. I'm with you, but does make you wonder who gives out these player points.

Didn't think Senderos was good at all tbh, Gilbert didn't help but between them the entire right side of our defence was pretty susceptible to attack.

Gibbs got forward a fair bit which left us kinda exposed on the left but Silvestre did well and Giibbs did get back in the end, usually.

All in all, there's going to be problems in defence the way we play but there's no point changing, we're an attacking team and if we tried to tone it down we'd be less effective.

4-2 to liverpool, did you actually go to the game last night!

From where I was sitting bendtner missed two very good chances in the first half. Overall we deserved to win.

Nope - missed this one, as I'm going on Saturday and its a bit pricey 2 in one week.

Wasn't talking about our attacking as much as our defending, and watching it on TV, the stats were that Liverpool had more chances than we did. When I said 'could have won', I didn't mean 'should have won' and I'd agree that on balance the result was fair.

As for the reference to 4-2, for a start, they should have had a pen. Second, how Babel missed that shot accross our goal I don't know, third, Voronin should have tucked in that chance that went just wide.

For their chances, their players were often in acres of space, we scored from far tighter positions. This might mean that we are better in attack - but we know that in attack we're a match for anyone, don't we?

Anyways, my intention wasn't so much to look at the relative merits of the 2 teams, but to illustrate that defensively this team was much like our first team - too error prone and in some senses an accident waiting to happen. Aren't you a bit concerned about it?

I am very concerned about our defence issue, if god forbid one of TV5 or WG10
happen to get injured then we will be up shit streak as big Phil or silvestre are not good enough for PL, both are to slow

I don't think we would to be honest. And anyway, it could depend on how the fixtures run out at that particular time.

It might not even be a problem you have to be worried about.

More optomistic then me I suppose

Well, more that it isn't a problem I can be bothered worrying about until it happens.