1 minute ago, just said:

He was dreadful.

He'd only had 19 touches in 66 minutes.

Unlucky to have a good goal chalked off, but other than that it was pretty anonymous fare. He was certainly the obvious player up front at that stage to take off to make a change.

The goal rubbed off was harsh, of course I didn't have the 10 slow motion relays. However, judging by the shot when the line was drawn, there was no conclusive evidence it was offside. We have a history of getting the close offside calls against us, it's just not funny anymore. I think the number of touches is always irrelevant had he scored a goal, and if an attacking player get 100 touches around the corner flag and  half way line, he's doing the wrong job too.

I' m sick of analyzing individual performance by now, what clear is we got NO match winner despite a huge investment. A prime ( or even aging) Lampard, Drogba, Hazard would not let this kind of game slip by.

1 minute ago, icecoolguy22 said:

The goal rubbed off was harsh, of course I didn't have the 10 slow motion relays. However, judging by the shot when the line was drawn, there was no conclusive evidence it was offside. We have a history of getting the close offside calls against us, it's just not funny anymore. I think the number of touches is always irrelevant had he scored a goal, and if an attacking player get 100 touches around the corner flag and  half way line, he's doing the wrong job too.

I' m sick of analyzing individual performance by now, what clear is we got NO match winner despite a huge investment. A prime ( or even aging) Lampard, Drogba, Hazard would not let this kind of game slip by.

Hazard, Lampard, Drogba, they all score those chances Gallagher had.

The chance that fell to Palmer too, and just before that, when Sterling took a touch instead of shooting, no chance Lampard, Drogba or Hazard at their worst don't take that shot on first time. We seem to have hit an era in our club where players choke when they get into the box. You see it all of the time. Another example was Enzo's control of the ball where he got stuck under his feet in the box and eventually back heeled it to the keeper. Every single player we have is panicking as soon as they get into the box. Every player we have is playing with fear.

Nice guy, but he’s only good one in every five games. Was a squad player at City, and can see why. 

Off the top of my head EPL wingers / wide players who are better than Sterling;

Salah, Diaz, Gordon, Son, Mitoma, Martinelli, Saka, Foden, Kulusevski, Olise, Bailey, Eze, Paqueta.....

Have I missed anyone?

 

35 minutes ago, just said:

Off the top of my head EPL wingers / wide players who are better than Sterling;

Salah, Diaz, Gordon, Son, Mitoma, Martinelli, Saka, Foden, Kulusevski, Olise, Bailey, Eze, Paqueta.....

Have I missed anyone?

 

Yes, you forgot Trossard.

10 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

He'd only had 19 touches in 66 minutes.

Unlucky to have a good goal chalked off, but other than that it was pretty anonymous fare. He was certainly the obvious player up front at that stage to take off to make a change.

Chelsea 0-1 Liverpool: player ratings from the Carabao Cup final (msn.com)

11 hours ago, just said:

If only I shared your certainty on that.

Literally happened last game and was the only one who actually did put the ball in the net this game, albeit offside. 

14 hours ago, Remodez said:

You can complain about his performance all you want but simple fact is if Sterling was still on the pitch he is scoring at least one of those chances we missed.

he had a 1v1 earlier in the game and decided to take a touch and f**k it up. He's as wasteful as the rest and was absolutely dreadful in the minutes he played yesterday. 

'experienced' apparently. 

£325k PW

43 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

he had a 1v1 earlier in the game and decided to take a touch and f**k it up. He's as wasteful as the rest and was absolutely dreadful in the minutes he played yesterday. 

'experienced' apparently. 

I really hope that we are able to offload him in the summer.

But I don't know where. Unless he goes to Saudi I just don't see a club being stupid enough to buy him anymore. Maybe Arsenal. 

Edited February 26, 20242 yr by bisright1

1 hour ago, RIP Mourinho said:

he had a 1v1 earlier in the game and decided to take a touch and f**k it up. He's as wasteful as the rest and was absolutely dreadful in the minutes he played yesterday. 

'experienced' apparently. 

Mate I'm not saying he's Haaland in front of goal but he is still far better than anyone else we have apart from Palmer so you keep him on. 

12 hours ago, PhilH930 said:

Nice guy, but he’s only good one in every five games. Was a squad player at City, and can see why. 

The problem is that an Underwhelming Sterling has to be starting every game because the alternatives are clearly much worse.

1 good game ever 5 still makes him a far better player than Madueke or Mudryk have the potential to ever be.

2 minutes ago, Remodez said:

Mate I'm not saying he's Haaland in front of goal but he is still far better than anyone else we have apart from Palmer so you keep him on. 

No one should be staying on the pitch with a performance like this against a 20 year old full back with less than 20 appearances for Liverpool. 

53 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

No one should be staying on the pitch with a performance like this against a 20 year old full back with less than 20 appearances for Liverpool. 

I couldn't care less if he had 10 touches all game. He scored the only goal of the game and scored for us v City. 

As I said before, I would have kept him on and taken off Enzo for Nukuku. 

4 minutes ago, Remodez said:

I couldn't care less if he had 10 touches all game. He scored the only goal of the game and scored for us v City. 

As I said before, I would have kept him on and taken off Enzo for Nukuku. 

I also fancied seeing him stay on with Madueke yet Poch decided differently.

49 minutes ago, Remodez said:

I couldn't care less if he had 10 touches all game. He scored the only goal of the game and scored for us v City. 

As I said before, I would have kept him on and taken off Enzo for Nukuku. 

He didn't score, it was offside.

Take off a CM for a wide player? Yeah I'm sure that would have helped with the teams shape. 

7 minutes ago, RIP Mourinho said:

He didn't score, it was offside.

Take off a CM for a wide player? Yeah I'm sure that would have helped with the teams shape. 

Let's discuss in good faith and not be pedantic. You obviously know what I meant and it should also be obvious to you that you would simply drop Connor deeper.

We seem to be discussing two different things anyway to be honest. You are mentioning his performance, I never once said he played well.

My whole point is Sterling is a better finisher than anyone else we have apart from Palmer (Nukuku hasn't played enough yet to judge) and we have seen him have plenty of games where he does nothing but ends up grabbing a goal. It literally happened in our last game. With this in mind, it would make more sense to keep him on until at least the end of regular time in the hopes he can do it again. Especially when the alternatives we have are Mudyrk and Madueke. 

I don't think this is a outrageous thing to suggest. 

I would've switched Jackson to LF, put on Nkunku for Enzo who had a shocker, drop Gallagher to the pivot, move Palmer centrally and Sterling RF. 

26 minutes ago, Remodez said:

Let's discuss in good faith and not be pedantic. You obviously know what I meant and it should also be obvious to you that you would simply drop Connor deeper.

We seem to be discussing two different things anyway to be honest. You are mentioning his performance, I never once said he played well.

My whole point is Sterling is a better finisher than anyone else we have apart from Palmer (Nukuku hasn't played enough yet to judge) and we have seen him have plenty of games where he does nothing but ends up grabbing a goal. It literally happened in our last game. With this in mind, it would make more sense to keep him on until at least the end of regular time in the hopes he can do it again. Especially when the alternatives we have are Mudyrk and Madueke. 

I don't think this is a outrageous thing to suggest. 

You drop Conor deeper and you lose his pressing from the front and we don't build up from the back anywhere near as easily. Completely changes the team dynamic that made so many chances during the 90 minutes.

Sterling may well be a better finisher but its not Enzo's job to finish. Poch wanted to keep the teams shape and energy, which makes complete sense with the change. Nkunku has scored more in the last 2 season than Sterling has in the last 4 so its not like we were weakening our attack (in theory).

I don't think its outrageous either, I'm just explaining why i think its wrong.

2 hours ago, Remodez said:

Mate I'm not saying he's Haaland in front of goal but he is still far better than anyone else we have apart from Palmer so you keep him on. 

Problem with Sterling is he doesn't track back.

3 hours ago, Remodez said:

Let's discuss in good faith and not be pedantic. You obviously know what I meant and it should also be obvious to you that you would simply drop Connor deeper.

We seem to be discussing two different things anyway to be honest. You are mentioning his performance, I never once said he played well.

My whole point is Sterling is a better finisher than anyone else we have apart from Palmer (Nukuku hasn't played enough yet to judge) and we have seen him have plenty of games where he does nothing but ends up grabbing a goal. It literally happened in our last game. With this in mind, it would make more sense to keep him on until at least the end of regular time in the hopes he can do it again. Especially when the alternatives we have are Mudyrk and Madueke. 

I don't think this is a outrageous thing to suggest. 

And my point is that Sterling needs such a high volume of chances to finish one, that all his other negatives generally out-weigh the odd chance in 6 he will convert. 

He plays so many games where his heart just doesn't seem in it. There is no intensity to his play and little high tempo to his work rate. There is a tendancy IMO to coast through games, and yes, even laziness. Contrast what we got from Sterling yesterday, compared to what Liverpool got from Diaz. There was a huge gulf in effort and influence.

Sterling, with his experience, should be delivering more. Sooooooo much more.

 

 

On 25/02/2024 at 22:00, icecoolguy22 said:

The goal rubbed off was harsh, of course I didn't have the 10 slow motion relays. However, judging by the shot when the line was drawn, there was no conclusive evidence it was offside. We have a history of getting the close offside calls against us, it's just not funny anymore. I think the number of touches is always irrelevant had he scored a goal, and if an attacking player get 100 touches around the corner flag and  half way line, he's doing the wrong job too.

I' m sick of analyzing individual performance by now, what clear is we got NO match winner despite a huge investment. A prime ( or even aging) Lampard, Drogba, Hazard would not let this kind of game slip by.

Following on-line even Palmer the ice man seemed to be affected by nerves and took a while to get involved.

On 25/02/2024 at 22:00, icecoolguy22 said:

The goal rubbed off was harsh, of course I didn't have the 10 slow motion relays. However, judging by the shot when the line was drawn, there was no conclusive evidence it was offside. We have a history of getting the close offside calls against us, it's just not funny anymore. I think the number of touches is always irrelevant had he scored a goal, and if an attacking player get 100 touches around the corner flag and  half way line, he's doing the wrong job too.

I' m sick of analyzing individual performance by now, what clear is we got NO match winner despite a huge investment. A prime ( or even aging) Lampard, Drogba, Hazard would not let this kind of game slip by.

VAR didn't give this offside, the linesman did. So the lines aren't relevant. 

It looked outside to me in real time to the extent I didn't even celebrate the goal. I just assumed it was off. 

9 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

VAR didn't give this offside, the linesman did. So the lines aren't relevant. 

It looked outside to me in real time to the extent I didn't even celebrate the goal. I just assumed it was off. 

The linesman was literally right in line, and it looked to me like he made a downward motion with his flag to indicate onside ... ?

Watch it here from 37:00 :  https://www.chelseafc.com/en/video/full-match-chelsea-0-1-liverpool