Premier League 2020-2021 (Part II)

[robertmac43]

At this stage it’s only the bottom clubs trying to spite the big clubs. That’s literally all it is. Along with what you said. They don’t care about player health.

Is the way the clubs voted public?

 

[Jersey Fresh]

Wrote this yesterday. You are welcome to answer because the other guy didn’t.

Tied 1-1 against the second place team and needing to protect Rhys Williams with the midfield. With LFC’s injury list - who are you putting on? They still need to win the game. Here is LFC’s bench
62 Kelleher (GK)
8 Keita (not fully fit)
15 Chamberlain (has not played a minute this season)
18 Minamino (no form)
27 Origi (no form, worst player this season)
47 Phillips (CB only, can’t run)
76 N. Williams (RB only)
What sub are you doing with those options? For example, Diogo Jota, Thiago or Milner probably would have played in a game like this if they were healthy. But with LFC’s bench in a vital game, who are you taking off and who are you putting on?
-
it is a lot different to have to go to your 12th best guy than your 20th best guy especially chasing a win.

I don't care who he put on or what their relationship is to Liverpool's depth chart. Klopp is the one who positioned himself as the ultimate players' altruist, so if he truly cared about player safety and that was his singular priority, he'd find a way to get some players on regardless of form. It's not like this is the first game we've had this conversation about the lack of subs, either.

If one of the players he didn't sub off got injured, he'd be complaining about the subs rule, when not taking them off would have been the culprit. None of it squares.

 

[Savant]

Is the way the clubs voted public?

Haven’t seen it yet, but heard it was the same as the last go around where that happened. Man City was also pro 5 subs and already released a statement on the stupidity of it.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

I think the managers have lashed out more about the schedule. The fans more harp on the subs. But it doesn’t matter. 75 mins or 90 mins in this congested schedule isn’t gonna make much of a different re injuries.

it makes a big difference in being able to impact the game. Which is a different point.

The schedule is the schedule and everyone agrees it's too much this year, but Klopp has certainly over a consistent period of weeks complained about the subs rule. He's also complained multiple times about European mid-week games and then having 12:30 starts, so if you're going to whine about two/three hours of rest time and point to that as an injury risk, I don't see how you can't apply that same standard to 15/20 minutes of exertion in a match also mattering.

 

[Blender]

Wrote this yesterday. You are welcome to answer because the other guy didn’t.

Tied 1-1 against the second place team and needing to protect Rhys Williams with the midfield. With LFC’s injury list - who are you putting on? They still need to win the game. Here is LFC’s bench
62 Kelleher (GK)
8 Keita (not fully fit)
15 Chamberlain (has not played a minute this season)
18 Minamino (no form)
27 Origi (no form, worst player this season)
47 Phillips (CB only, can’t run)
76 N. Williams (RB only)
What sub are you doing with those options? For example, Diogo Jota, Thiago or Milner probably would have played in a game like this if they were healthy. But with LFC’s bench in a vital game, who are you taking off and who are you putting on?
-
it is a lot different to have to go to your 12th best guy than your 20th best guy especially chasing a win. And also let’s not neglect to mention that Klopp used all five subs in all but one of the Champions League Group games.

I wasn't following the thread at that point.

"They still need to win the game" and "who are you putting on?" is not an excuse when you have been preaching squad rotation and altruism towards player health/safety. I have absolutely no problem with someone who is prioritizing winning games, but the concern trolling about player safety in the media when you don't even practice what you preach is tiring. You don't get to have it both ways here, but you seem to want to.

 

[Savant]

I don't care who he put on or what their relationship is to Liverpool's depth chart. Klopp is the one who positioned himself as the ultimate players' altruist, so if he truly cared about player safety and that was his singular priority, he'd find a way to get some players on regardless of form. It's not like this is the first game we've had this conversation about the lack of subs, either.

If one of the players he didn't sub off got injured, he'd be complaining about the subs rule, when not taking them off would have been the culprit. None of it squares.

Yes and no. He still has to win games.

Klopp could have risked Matip yesterday but played Rhys Williams instead. As I said at the time, the team he picked at Midtjylland was inexcusable, but the players that got hurt were also the ones who played the least minutes. Anyone can get hurt. Diogo Jota was rested the PL game before so he could have played that game. Not sure how Klopp could have protected Virgil and Thiago from injuries caused by red card worthy tackles. Gomez was definitely overplayed (because no Virgil or Matip at the time) and he got hurt on England duty. Klopp has been consistent on wanted five subs and there is no good reason that the PL is putting itself at a disadvantage when every other European league is allowing this.

 

[The Abusement Park]

Wrote this yesterday. You are welcome to answer because the other guy didn’t.

Tied 1-1 against the second place team and needing to protect Rhys Williams with the midfield. With LFC’s injury list - who are you putting on? They still need to win the game. Here is LFC’s bench
62 Kelleher (GK)
8 Keita (not fully fit)
15 Chamberlain (has not played a minute this season)
18 Minamino (no form)
27 Origi (no form, worst player this season)
47 Phillips (CB only, can’t run)
76 N. Williams (RB only)
What sub are you doing with those options? For example, Diogo Jota, Thiago or Milner probably would have played in a game like this if they were healthy. But with LFC’s bench in a vital game, who are you taking off and who are you putting on?
-
it is a lot different to have to go to your 12th best guy than your 20th best guy especially chasing a win. And also let’s not neglect to mention that Klopp used all five subs in all but one of the Champions League Group games.

I see 3 players who could be subbed on there.

 

[Blender]

In comparison, Lampard has not said anything about 5 subs from what I recall, and I was still furious with his squad selection on Tuesday because he didn't rotate. If he had been preaching player rest and safety in the media and then pulled that, I'd have absolutely no tolerance for it. Klopp does it almost every week and you guys are in here making excuses for it.

 

[Savant]

I wasn't following the thread at that point.

"They still need to win the game" and "who are you putting on?" is not an excuse when you have been preaching squad rotation and altruism towards player health/safety. I have absolutely no problem with someone who is prioritizing winning games, but the concern trolling about player safety in the media when you don't even practice what you preach is tiring. You don't get to have it both ways here, but you seem to want to.

I don’t agree with that. He still has to win those games. What manager in the PL is going to worsen their chances to win due to “altruism” ? Nobody. Klopp utilized five subs in 5 of the 6 games he was allowed to do so. So yeah, in mid week games against European opposition, he has done this. He hasn’t done this in 1 goal margin PL games but no one has. Find me a team that was either winning by a goal or tied, that voluntarily took off players and made the team worse. Only example I can think of is Klopp taking Trent and Salah off against Fulham tied 1-1. When else has this happened?

 

[Savant]

I see 3 players who could be subbed on there.

That would have helped Liverpool win the game?

please explain.

 

[Blender]

I don’t agree with that. He still has to win those games. What manager in the PL is going to worsen their chances to win due to “altruism” ? Nobody. Klopp utilized five subs in 5 of the 6 games he was allowed to do so. So yeah, in mid week games against European opposition, he has done this. He hasn’t done this in 1 goal margin PL games but no one has. Find me a team that was either winning by a goal or tied, that voluntarily took off players and made the team worse. Only example I can think of is Klopp taking Trent and Salah off against Fulham tied 1-1. When else has this happened?

If he's not going to even use the 3 subs he has available to him but then go out after the game and complain that what he really needs is 5 subs, Klopp absolutely has to "worsen his chances" because that is what he is preaching. That is the standard he is setting for himself, no one else put this on him, he did this to himself. He publicly declared that he was concerned with player safety and that he needed 5 subs to help address that, but he doesn't even attempt to follow it himself. If he just wants to focus on winning games, he should shut the f*** up and do so.

 

[YNWA14]

The reality is that most of us as fans probably agree with the 5 sub rule, and that the schedule is too congested.

That said Klopp prioritizes winning over adhering to his own warnings about player safety due to congestion/lack of substitutions. I think most people see where he is coming from with what he's saying, but he also isn't putting his money where his mouth is in trying to protect his players as best he can (with rotation and substitutions). Not that what he's doing is unexpected as his job is to win and give the team the best chance of winning. I can also see where people are coming from in criticizing him for it though with the game he talks up off the pitch.

I wonder what his position would be were he a broadcaster faced with deciding to make more money for his company (which would be his job) and giving up money for the player safety argument.

 

[robertmac43]

If 5 subs had been available for the whole season, Klopp probably wouldn't be in a situation where he has a bench on injured players and kids. With that in mind I get why he is still going on about the sub rule.

 

[Savant]

If he's not going to even use the 3 subs he has available to him but then go out after the game and complain that what he really needs is 5 subs, Klopp absolutely has to "worsen his chances" because that is what he is preaching. That is the standard he is setting for himself, no one else put this on him, he did this to himself. He publicly declared that he was concerned with player safety and that he needed 5 subs to help address that, but he doesn't even attempt to follow it himself. If he just wants to focus on winning games, he should shut the f*** up and do so.

If 5 subs had been available for the whole season, Klopp probably wouldn't be in a situation where he has a bench on injured players and kids. With that in mind I get why he is still going on about the sub rule.

I am saying that if LFC had his full assortment of players, Klopp would be using more subs. Players still need to earn minutes. Here is an alternate bench. What’s better?

Keita - Thiago
Chamberlain - Milner
Minamino - Diogo Jota
Origi - Shaqiri
Phillips - Virgil
N. Williams - Gomez

Klopp makes (at least) three subs if he could have picked from column B. I don’t think it’s as black and white as you are stating. Liverpool are still title contenders, and they are the only team that I have seen intentionally make themselves worse in a one goal margin game

 

[Blender]

I am saying that if LFC had his full assortment of players, Klopp would be using more subs. Players still need to earn minutes. Here is an alternate bench. What’s better?

Keita - Thiago
Chamberlain - Milner
Minamino - Diogo Jota
Origi - Shaqiri
Phillips - Virgil
N. Williams - Gomez

Klopp makes (at least) three subs if he could have picked from column B. I don’t think it’s as black and white as you are stating. Liverpool are still title contenders, and they are the only team that I have seen intentionally make themselves worse in a one goal margin game

It does not matter "who is better", that is what you don't get, because he's clearly been disingenuous and continues to argue in bad faith.

 

[Blender]

You are also severely underestimating the value of fresh legs in any kind of high tempo game, even if the player is of lesser quality.

 

[The Abusement Park]

That would have helped Liverpool win the game?

please explain.

Do you want subs to rotate players or win the game? What is it?

You don’t get to complain about not having enough subs and then use 0 when you have 3 players who could come on.

 

[Evilo]

I personally totally disagree with the 5 sub rule.
So I'm surprised "most of you" guys agree with it.
It's a rule made for teams with depth, thus richer teams.
Part of the hope of a small team in order to beat a big team is that their main players will be benched to get som rest or that at least the big teams playing Europe will be tired.
If even THAT is taken out of the balance, what's the hope of smaller teams?

 

[Evilo]

Do you want subs to rotate players or win the game? What is it?

You don’t get to complain about not having enough subs and then use 0 when you have 3 players who could come on.

Mind boggling.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

Yes and no. He still has to win games.

Klopp could have risked Matip yesterday but played Rhys Williams instead. As I said at the time, the team he picked at Midtjylland was inexcusable, but the players that got hurt were also the ones who played the least minutes. Anyone can get hurt. Diogo Jota was rested the PL game before so he could have played that game. Not sure how Klopp could have protected Virgil and Thiago from injuries caused by red card worthy tackles. Gomez was definitely overplayed (because no Virgil or Matip at the time) and he got hurt on England duty. Klopp has been consistent on wanted five subs and there is no good reason that the PL is putting itself at a disadvantage when every other European league is allowing this.

I totally agree with this, but you realize this undercuts Klopp's entire stance, right?

Like if we took Klopp's arguments at face value, wouldn't he have taken players off because that would have been the move that benefits him in the long run? He's contended that the schedule/minutes players are playing are putting them at risk and five subs would address that, so taking that to its logical end and with the holiday period coming up, if he really believed what he's shouted at every press conference making subs would have been the smart play regardless of how the game's going. Mind you, we're talking about a game yesterday that was a 1-1 draw with 80% of the ball at the 60-minute mark or whatever.

People might not like hearing this, but I think Klopp and Mourinho are more alike than most would like to admit. He's made this substitution boogeyman as a deflecting tool that he can yell about rather than his players or performance. Mourinho is just more caustic and douchey about it.

 

[Savant]

Do you want subs to rotate players or win the game? What is it?

You don’t get to complain about not having enough subs and then use 0 when you have 3 players who could come on.

I mean at the top of the table it’s both, isn’t it?

 

[Savant]

I personally totally disagree with the 5 sub rule.
So I'm surprised "most of you" guys agree with it.
It's a rule made for teams with depth, thus richer teams.
Part of the hope of a small team in order to beat a big team is that their main players will be benched to get som rest or that at least the big teams playing Europe will be tired.
If even THAT is taken out of the balance, what's the hope of smaller teams?

Every other league is doing it.

 

[The Abusement Park]

I personally totally disagree with the 5 sub rule.
So I'm surprised "most of you" guys agree with it.
It's a rule made for teams with depth, thus richer teams.
Part of the hope of a small team in order to beat a big team is that their main players will be benched to get som rest or that at least the big teams playing Europe will be tired.
If even THAT is taken out of the balance, what's the hope of smaller teams?

I absolutely get why it’s getting rejected and I think it puts teams like WBA and Fulham at a huge disadvantage. I think a temporary rule change for the condensed season might work. But I don’t think it’d be right to do outside of this season.


But then again if teams aren’t going to sub anyway what’s the point.

 

[The Abusement Park]

I mean at the top of the table it’s both, isn’t it?

So you’ve sided with the winning side. You don’t get to complain when you fail to make any subs in a game.

 

[Savant]

I totally agree with this, but you realize this undercuts Klopp's entire stance, right?

Like if we took Klopp's arguments at face value, wouldn't he have taken players off because that would have been the move that benefits him in the long run? He's contended that the schedule/minutes players are playing are putting them at risk and five subs would address that, so taking that to its logical end and with the holiday period coming up, if he really believed was he's shouted at every press conference making subs would have been the smart play regardless of how the game's going. Mind you, we're talking about a game yesterday that was a 1-1 draw with 80% of the ball at the 60-minute mark or whatever.

People might not like hearing this, but I think Klopp and Mourinho are more alike than most would like to admit. He's made this substitution boogeyman as a deflecting tool that he can yell about rather than his players or performance. Mourinho is just more caustic and douchey about it.

I don’t disagree with much of this. I think it’s different in a title race and I think it’s different with 9 first team players already out. Klopp has done a fair bit of rotating this season as well.