Once, Twice, Five Times a Winner

Written by Keith Perkins on April 29th, 2008

We’ve been here before. This is not the first time that we’ve looked ahead to see what might appear to be a mountain to climb, but we’ve overcome bigger challenges in the past, and we’ve managed to make those mountains into molehills.

There’s always been something about Liverpool FC where we just don’t seem to enjoy ourselves unless we make things difficult – and especially in Europe. If we had it too easy it would be nothing to talk about, but large parts of our history are filled with stories like the late winner against St. Etienne on the way to our first ever European Cup in ‘77. Then there was the 3-0 second leg win over Auxerre in ‘91 after being down 2-0 from the first leg shortly after our return to European competition. More than ten years later on there was the need for a 2-0 win over AS Roma to progress to the quarter finals of the Champions League in ‘02, and of course there were many others where we needed to win to survive.

As if that’s not enough, there’s a whole other class of matches where we refused to be beaten, no matter how impossible it might have seemed. Even on a few memorable occasions when we’ve needed three goals in only half a game, we’ve somehow managed to do it. One classic encounter saw us 3-0 down at half time and looking for all the world like we were well and truly defeated. But accepting defeat is just not in our nature, and so in the second half we came out flying, worked hard, and managed to snatch a goal to get back into the game. Then a shot from Smicer found its way into the net only two minutes later, and suddenly it was game on.

The drama soon rose to a climax when a penalty was awarded, which surely would be the turning point in the match – score from here and it’s all even at 3-3, but miss it and you might as well hand it to the opposition. As the Red section of the crowd held their breath, the kick was taken only to be stopped by the ‘keeper, but then the follow up was fired into the net for the equaliser. That was not enough though, and a single point was sufficient for FC Basel to progress to the second stage in ’03, while we dropped down to the UEFA Cup. Only two years later we were down 1-0 to Olympiakos at Anfield, where we needed to win by two clear goals. That meant we again needed three in the second half which turned out to be yet another classic. It was in fact those matches that came to mind when we were equally thought to be down and out at half-time in Istanbul, but as I always say, “we’ve been here before”. With the eerie similarities to that earlier match in Switzerland, it’s not an exaggeration to say that!

It’s not just in Europe either that we seem to make life difficult for ourselves. Our 2006 FA Cup run began with a come-from-behind win after somehow going 3-1 down to Luton in the 3rd round. We more or less cruised from there, but if the final was thought to be a walk going in against West Ham we soon learned otherwise. An own goal and a sloppy error put us 2-0 behind mid way through the first half, but we battled back twice to end up at 3-3 and then go on to win on penalties. Some of the players at that match were also on the field against Arsenal in 2001 when we were thought to have lost the cup with a goal conceded with less than twenty minutes remaining. Somehow we fought back and won 2-1 with less than two minutes to go. If that’s not enough excitement, what about the 1986 FA Cup Final where we had to come back against Everton for a 3-1 win to give us “The Double” and show the world who really rules Merseyside (incidentally, we won the League that year with a win at Chelsea).

What we have now is just another test of character as we travel to Stamford Bridge, to face Chelsea yet again in another Champions League semi-final. We should be used to this by now as it’s our third time in four years under Rafa, not to mention facing them in the FA Cup semi-final two years ago. Somehow, in spite of all the money that they have behind them, and the impressive form that they have shown, they have yet to beat us when it comes down to these nerve-racking semi-finals. The difference this year is that we go into the second leg at 1-1 with an away goal conceded. That last minute own-goal was a heart-stopping moment, as we were so close to taking a 1-0 lead with us to Stamford Bridge, after clearly outplaying them over the 90 minutes. But instead it’s 1-1, and supposedly advantage Chelsea. But is it really such an advantage?

Our most recent big match in Europe was only a few weeks ago when we faced Arsenal at home in the second leg. We managed a 1-1 draw away in the first leg, which was supposedly a huge advantage to us. It wasn’t so much after only a few minutes into the match when Arsenal scored, negating the away goal with one of their own, and taking a 2-1 aggregate lead. This was once again where the character of the team as a whole had to come through, and instead of having it easy we were suddenly facing another uphill struggle. It was only a few minutes later when we were level, and not too long into the second half when we took the lead. That should have wrapped it up with our 3-2 aggregate lead, but Arsenal somehow scored again which would have been enough to put them through on away goals. The worst part, besides conceding again, was that we only had six minutes left to do anything about it. We did though, and we went through with a penalty and a later strike to put it beyond doubt.

Funnily enough, it’s Arsenal who come to mind in the situation that we now face going down to Stamford Bridge. Way back in 1989, we were faced with the easiest possible task for winning the League on the very last day of the season. Arsenal should have wrapped up the title in the weeks before but stumbled once too often and handed the advantage over to us. We took first place after our penultimate match by thrashing West Ham 5-1. All we had to do was to go out and play our last match of the season at Anfield, and even if Arsenal won by a goal we’d be fine since they needed to win by at least two. It was that ultimately false sense of security that led to us giving the match – and the title – away. Peter Beardsley summed up his thoughts on the disappointment in his 1990 autobiography:

“Perhaps our biggest mistake was in beating West Ham so convincingly on the Tuesday. That gave us the cushion of goal difference advantage, which meant we could afford to lose and still be champions. With so much at stake it allowed for negative thoughts to creep in, whereas if we had needed to win we might have approached the game in a more positive style.”

All that the blues have to do is hold us off the score sheet and they will be on their way to Moscow. Most of the experts have already decided that we might as well not show up as we have yet to score at The Bridge under Rafa, and have at best only drawn 0-0 there - twice in Champions League (’05) and once in the Premier League (this season). That would make them firm favourites on paper, but that doesn’t do them any favours as we thrive on being the underdogs. Who would have given us any chance of winning the trophy in 2005 when we were down 1-0 against Olympiakos? We were the underdog in every match through to the final, and that suited us just fine. It was Juventus, Chelsea, and AC Milan who were under pressure to perform, and we managed to use that each time to overcome the odds.

We’ve had to win the second leg each time against Chelsea, and so this time is really no different. The blues will be nervous knowing that a single goal from us will change everything and so will most likely depend on their defensive home record to see them through. What they might not realise though is that we have players who like to come to the fore on the big occasions, which will no doubt cause a few moments of doubt to creep in. We also have what no other team - and especially Chelsea - can match. That’s something called character, which in turn has given us our pedigree in Europe. We’ve shown that character so many times before, and this is just one more chance to demonstrate why the rest of Europe fears us. It will take more than a fluke own-goal in the first leg, not to mention a few thousand plastic flags at Stamford Bridge, to stop us from going to Moscow next month. Like I said, “We’ve been here before.”

Makna Bacaan Dalam Solat

Doa Iftitah
Allah Maha Besar dan segala puji bagi Allah dengan banyaknya.
Maha suci Allah sepanjang pagi dan petang.
Aku hadapkan wajahku bagi Tuhan yang mencipta langit dan bumi,
dengan suasana lurus dan berserah diri dan aku bukan dari golongan orang musyrik.
Sesungguhnya solatku,
Ibadatku,
hidupku,
matiku
adalah untuk Allah Tuhan sekelian alam.
Tidak ada sekutu bagiNya dan kepadaku diperintahkan untuk tidak
menyekutukan bagiNya dan aku dari golongan orang Islam.

Al-Fatihah
Dengan nama Allah yang maha Pemurah lagi maha Mengasihani.
Segala puji bagi Allah, Tuhan semesta alam.
Yang maha pemurah lagi maha mengasihani.
Yang menguasai hari pembalasan.
Hanya Engkaulah yang kami sembah dan hanya kepada Engkau kami mohon pertolongan.
Tunjukilah kami jalan yang lurus.
Iaitu jalan orang-orang yang Engkau kurniakan nikmat kepada mereka, bukan jalan mereka yang Engkau murkai dan bukan jalan mereka yang sesat.

Bacaan ketika rukuk
Maha Suci TuhanKu Yang Maha Mulia dan dengan segala puji-pujiannya.

Bacaan ketika bangun dari rukuk
Allah mendengar pujian orang yang memujinya.

Bacaan ketika iktidal
Wahai Tuhan kami, bagi Engkaulah segala pujian.

Bacaan ketika sujud
Maha suci TuhanKu yang Maha Tinggi dan dengan segala puji-pujiannya.

Bacaan ketika duduk di antara dua sujud
Ya Allah, ampunilah daku,
Rahmatilah daku,
kayakan daku,
angkatlah darjatku,
rezekikan daku,
berilah aku hidayah,
sihatkanlah daku dan
maafkanlah akan daku.

Bacaan ketika Tahiyat Awal
Segala penghormatan yang berkat solat yang baik adalah untuk Allah.
Sejahtera atas engkau wahai Nabi dan rahmat Allah serta
keberkatannya.
Sejahtera ke atas kami dan atas hamba-hamba Allah yang soleh.
Aku naik saksi bahawa tiada Tuhan melainkan Allah dan aku naik saksi bahawasanya Muhammad itu adalah pesuruh Allah.
Ya Tuhan kami, selawatkanlah ke atas Nabi Muhammad.

Bacaan ketika Tahiyat Akhir
Segala penghormatan yang berkat solat yang baik adalah untuk Allah.
Sejahtera atas engkau wahai Nabi dan rahmat Allah serta keberkatannya.
Sejahtera ke atas kami dan atas hamba-hamba Allah yang soleh.
Aku naik saksi bahawa tiada Tuhan melainkan Allah dan aku naik saksi bahawasanya Muhammad itu adalah pesuruh Allah.
Ya Tuhan kami, selawatkanlah ke atas Nabi Muhammad dan ke atas keluarganya.
Sebagaimana Engkau selawatkan ke atas Ibrahim dan atas keluarga Ibrahim.
Berkatilah ke atas Muhammad dan atas keluarganya sebagaimana Engkau berkati ke atas Ibrahim dan atas keluarga Ibrahim di dalam alam ini.
Sesungguhnya Engkau Maha Terpuji lagi Maha Agung.

Doa Qunut
Ya Allah, berilah aku petunjuk sebagaimana orang-orang yang telah Engkau tunjuki.
Sejahterakanlah aku sebagaimana orang-orang yang telah Engkau sejahterakan.
Pimpinlah aku sebagaimana orang-orang yang telah Engkau pimpin.
Berkatilah hendaknya untukku apa-pa yang telah Engkau berikan padaku.
Jauhkanlah aku daripada segala kejahatan yang telah Engkau tetapkan.
Sesungguhnya hanya Engkau sahajalah yang menetapkan, dan tidak sesiapapun yang berkuasa menetapkan sesuatu selain daripada Engkau.
Sesungguhnya tidak terhina orang yang memperolehi pimpinanMu.
Dan tidak mulia orang-orang yang Engkau musuhi.
Telah memberi berkat Engkau, ya Tuhan kami dan maha tinggi Engkau.
Hanya untuk Engkau sahajalah segala macam puji terhadap apa-apa yang telah Engkau tetapkan.
Dan aku minta ampun dan bertaubat kepada Engkau.
Dan Allah rahmatilah Muhammad, Nabi yang ummi dan sejahtera keatas keluarganya dan sahabat-sahabatnya.


"wahai tuhan ku,aku tak layak utk kesyurgamu ...namun tak pula aku sanggup
keNerakamu....kami lah hamba yang mengharap belas kasihan darimu ."ya allah
jadikan lah kami hamba2 mu yang bertaqwa..ampunkan dosa2 kami .kedua
ibubapa kami .dosa semua umat2 islam yang masih hidup mahupun yang telah meninggal
dunia"

TOMKINS: TIME TO TIP THE BALANCE Paul Tomkins 07 April 2008
	While Liverpool still struggle against Manchester United, five drawn games against Arsenal and Chelsea suggest a parity between the chasing pack.
Liverpool have a slight advantage in the second leg against Arsenal, but it's fragile in these situations. We all remember 1989, and how Liverpool were caught in two minds about how to approach the game, needing only a 1-0 win to clinch the league title. And I struggle to see Liverpool keeping a clean sheet against this Arsenal side; they just seem to score whenever they play. But equally, at home in Europe, when the crowd is buzzing, Liverpool rarely fail. Liverpool clearly need to improve their set-piece defending. Andy Gray still laughably mocks zonal marking, doing so again last week because Arsenal scored from a corner, and also because the Reds have shipped goals from a few of those of late. But in the same match Arsenal left Torres, Skrtel and Hyypia totally unmarked on three separate occasions. Where was the criticism of managers who opt for man-marking? This season I've seen Man United's man-marking cost them two goals in one match at West Ham, while Chelsea conceded four goals from set-pieces in two games recently due to shoddy man-marking. It seems that more and more goals are coming from set-pieces throughout the country, and while Liverpool are losing far more than in the previous two seasons, you don't abandon a system that has done so well for you for such a long period of time. It seems an issue with confidence as much as anything, as players get nervy when they concede a certain type of goal and the situation arises again. 
Short of an emphatic win at the Emirates, I'm not sure what result I would have wanted going into the second game. Any time you are a favourite without a great advantage in the scoreline it gets harder; it's yours to lose. The away goal was important, but a 1-1 draw in the second leg and suddenly Arsenal have a further 30 minutes where the away goal rule still applies. Including last season's League Cup game as some kind of marker of Arsenal's ability to get a result at Anfield, as some have done, is ludicrous. For a start, it was mostly reserves, and eight of Liverpool's starting XI are no longer at the club (although Danny Guthrie is only on loan). Arsenal's hero, Julio Baptiste, has also moved on. Which leaves two contests to take seriously from last term, and as well as Arsenal winning 3-1 in the FA Cup they lost 4-1 in the league. Admittedly that was a pretty heartless side, but even so, they were despatched with consummate ease. Should he get on as a sub, as he did in the league game earlier this season (when both Torres and Alonso were injured), Peter Crouch will still feel the confidence of that inspired hat-trick, and now another fine strike, this time at the Emirates. But as highly as I rate Crouch, it's hard to argue for his inclusion from the start with the way the team is performing, and the way Gerrard is linking with Torres, as well as the midfield behind him. The balance looks right. In this role, Gerrard is less involved in the play, and at times he can be isolated. Against better teams it's inevitable that he will see less of the ball. But the point is what he does when he is involved. Still, it makes me laugh that it was Gerrard who ‘inevitably' got Liverpool back into the game last week; had it been Torres, it would ‘inevitably' have been the Spaniard instead. Meanwhile, as great as Gerrard's play was, if Babel or Kuyt had produced such a run but Gerrard scored, Gerrard would have been the ‘saviour', not the person who created it. So Gerrard should share the credit with Kuyt, who backed up my constant assertions that he gets into good positions when coming infield. At the other end of the pitch, Eboue didn't have a clue how to do the same. And even when it is Torres and Gerrard who win the plaudits, it shouldn't be seen as a bad thing to have two world-class match winners who frequently make a difference; that's what they're there for. Also, it's not like the others aren't playing their part in providing the platform or chipping in with goals; Babel, Kuyt and Benayoun have 28 between them; two more for Crouch and Babel, and it will mean six players into double figures, while Torres could end with 30+ and Gerrard 20+. Meanwhile, the defence and shielding midfielders continue to play extremely well. Even if some argue that he's not a ‘big game' player, in that you don't always see him dominate the major matches from start to finish, he is a ‘big moment' player. Liverpool have had few, if any, better at coming up with the contribution at the right time. Against Arsenal, as in Istanbul, it needed a quick riposte to change the complexion of the game. At other times, such as Olympiacos, West Ham and Inter Milan, it's been stunning last-gasp contributions. Arsenal deserve most of the credit that comes their way. But I do feel Arsene Wenger is exempt from some of the criticisms levelled at others. In the last three seasons, Arsenal have amassed seven fewer Premiership points than Liverpool. Arsenal are a young side. But Liverpool are also a fledgling team, and unlike Arsenal, the majority haven't been part of the set-up for years. The 18-man squads involved in last Wednesday's match had average ages of 25 (Arsenal) and 26 (Liverpool). By comparison with the other English teams involved, Manchester United's was 27 and Chelsea's 28. (Players' ages correct to the last day of this season.) And of course, had Agger been fit to play instead of Hyypia, the average age of the Reds' starting XI would come down by a full year. While Arsenal have a few youngsters who are regularly on the bench –– Walcott, 19, and Bendtner, 20 –– they are not this team of raw kids as which they are portrayed. Almumia is 31, Gallas 30, Rosicky 27, Hleb 27, Toure 26, Eduardo 25, while van Persie and Adebayor are 24, and Eboue is nearly 24. Senderos is now 23, and Clichy will be 23 in the summer. The one truly young gem they have is Cesc Fabregas, who is about to turn 21. The key difference is that most of Liverpool's younger players are new to England this year, and part of a newer project, and as such are lagging behind Arsenal's younger players in terms of adaptation. You will always get the exceptions to the rule like Torres, who adjusted very quickly (although has still improved), but the majority take time. Incredibly, none of Arsenal's starting XI arrived into English football after 2005, and nine were either at Arsenal (or Chelsea, in Gallas's case) in 2004. No wonder they play with a lot of understanding, of English football and of each other. Contrast that with Liverpool, where six had arrived since 2006, and four of those since the start of 2007, and you can see the relativeness newness of Benítez's project. Arsenal had two subs who arrived in 2006, but otherwise they all pre-dated 2005. In other words, Wenger had collected nearly all of his squad before or during Benítez's first year. Liverpool's bench contained four players signed in the last nine months. This returns to a point I've been making all season long: that Wenger, without the riches of Chelsea or Manchester United, has been allowed time for his youngsters to mature, and for his unit to grow in cohesiveness, by starting this project several years ago, and accepting two mediocre league seasons while they developed. Benítez, as a new boss with more to prove, was under more pressure to deliver quickly. While Fabregas and Clichy are now top-class top-level players, you need to wait at least two or three years to judge Benítez's youngest signings, like Hobbs, Insua, Pacheco, Bruna, Nemeth and the impressive Plessis, who mixes midfield destruction with a sweet left foot. I think it was the otherwise sensible Henry Winter who said on Sky's Sunday Supplement that "Benítez buys either good or bad players", while one of this weekend's papers said "Far from all of Rafa Benítez's numerous Liverpool recruits have succeeded" –– as if there was the existence of one single manager who doesn't get plenty wrong. One of my main bugbears is how Arsene Wenger's mistakes in the transfer market somehow get overlooked. While, as with Benítez, he has unearthed a lot of great players, he's also bought a fair few failures and disappointments too. Stepanovs, Jeffers, Wright (Richard), Boa Morte, Diawara, Cygan, Wreh, Grimandi, Chukwunyelu Obinna, Danilevicious, Luzhny, van Bronckhurst and Baptista (bar one game, at Anfield) –– to name just a few; in all, a mixture of substandard players and a couple of talented ones who failed to settle. Meanwhile, Wiltord and Reyes were £10m+ players who hardly set the world alight. With Benítez, a few cheap flops like Nunez, Josemi and Paletta (a mere kid) get brought up as if they are par for the course. You could add those three to the fee of Morientes and still not get what Arsenal paid for either Wiltord or Reyes. With the relative merits of both sides I find this game virtually impossible to call. But Liverpool are ending the season on an upward curve, while Arsenal appear to be on a slippery slope. The full force of the European Kop, and it could easily be one more step towards another European Cup. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and are not necessarily shared by Liverpool FC or Liverpoolfc.tv.