TOMKINS: PROOF OF PROGRESSION
Paul Tomkins 26 January 2009

I don't think there have been many more one-sided derbies since Ian Rush scored four.
Although Liverpool have won a fair few local clashes fairly heavily in the recent past, and lost one too, possession has surely never been so dominated by one side. I half-expected David Moyes to ask Rafa, 'Can we have the ball back, Mr?' Admittedly there weren't too many saves by their goalkeeper, bar one incredible stop to atone for an incredible blunder, but fair play to Lescott and Jagielka for blocking almost everything in a game of attack versus defence. Those two were outstanding, albeit aided by virtually every outfield player dropping deep. Liverpool kept moving the ball, using the width with intelligence and trying to draw out their neighbours, but it wasn't so much that they parked the bus as brought the entire depot and lined them up like an Evel Knievel stunt. While Liverpool attacked and attacked, it's almost impossible to get in behind teams if they play that way. I'm also not sure I buy this hard-luck story of Everton having no strikers; if they choose to play muscular target-man Anichebe on the wing, that's their problem. It's a bit like Liverpool playing Kuyt on the wing with every other striker injured and complaining of having no fit centre-forwards. When Torres was out, Kuyt ended up back up front, naturally. In terms of footballing class, there was a gulf. The gulf in attitude and expectations was also seen in how the visiting fans celebrated a draw like a win, even though they'd thrown away the lead. Part of their glee was knowing that the Reds did not need a replay, with the Premiership and Champions League to seriously contest. So their glee pleased me, in a perverse way, as it was a little hollow. Thankfully Liverpool usually do better at Goodison, where the home team cannot rely on such negative (but clearly effective) tactics. Being a Cup game, the Blues might be even more hyped up, but that could help the Reds find some space in behind. Everton will almost certainly play better, but by making a game of it, they could play into the hands (or feet) of Torres and Gerrard. Everton actually remind me a bit of Liverpool from the early part of this decade when visiting big clubs like Arsenal, Chelsea and Manchester United, and in Europe, Roma and Barcelona. It's testament to how far Liverpool have come that they no longer need to go to such places and get ten men behind the ball in ultra-negative fashion and hope for one moment of lightning to strike. The problem with that Liverpool set-up was how to take it to the next level. It's very hard to spring from a side that is hard to beat to one that can genuinely challenge for trophies – something Everton have yet to do. And while Liverpool have drawn a few games too many of late, that is a transition that I believe the Reds have been making well in the past two years. It's not quite perfected yet, but it's getting there. Only time will tell if this recent run is the kind of 'slump' where a team usually loses three out of four-or-so games; if this is the Reds' dodgy spell, then those draws are better than defeats, and a sign of progress. If it is a greater trend, then that would obviously be more of a worry. But all teams have bad days, and Liverpool don't seem to get beat on theirs. While I have a lot of respect for Houllier (who did a great job in his first three years), I currently see a Liverpool team improving in its overall output under Benítez, to one that had really fallen off the pace in the last two years under his predecessor. Whereas the Liverpool team, and overall squad, weakened after a peak in 2002 (with the replacement of McAllister, Fowler, Anelka, Barmby, Ziege, Redknapp, Berger and a few other established senior players with inferior talents), this one continues to look stronger. Every team will have its lulls on a short-term basis, but Liverpool are now one of the most feared teams in Europe and flying high domestically. The difference was that at this stage in 2002-03 and 2003-04 the Reds were off the pace by 10-20 points, and both times suffered very poor seasons in Europe. If this is not a sign of progress, I don't know what is. While Houllier signed some great defensive players (in particular Didi Hamann and the indefatigable Sami Hyypia), his attacking signings didn't work out so well. Harry Kewell could, and perhaps should have been a bargain, but he was just never fit long enough. That was just bad luck. Perhaps this failing of Houllier's is natural; it's far harder to find top-class offensive talent, and I can list loads of attacking midfield and striking flops signed by Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger in the last decade or so. (For the record I'll name just a few: Veron, Kleberson, Bellion, Forlan and, it could be argued, Nani; at Arsenal: Wreh, Diawara, Mendez, Boa Morte, Reyes and the woeful Franny Jeffers. But once you get just one right, you can be set for a number of years.) But between 2002 and 2004, Liverpool never made the step up to a really potent all-round team, in particular due to a lack of top attacking talents. Back then, Liverpool, like Everton, relied on defending in numbers while a gutsy little forward punched above his weight. But before he even got his feet under the table, Benítez lost Owen, the one guaranteed source of goals, and instead inherited the talented but erratic (and expensive) Djibril Cissé. So in four years, he has had to totally overhaul that side of the Reds' game. By contrast, at the point Benítez arrived, Ferguson already had Ronaldo and Rooney. He also had Giggs and Scholes, so the majority of his attacking talent was already in place, as were Ferdinand and Neville at the back. Already playing catch-up, Benítez had to start from scratch. He went for Peter Crouch and Craig Bellamy, two reasonably cheap players who have recently moved on for lots of money. Neither was a total success at Liverpool, but Crouch was certainly a good buy in every sense: playing well, and making the club a very tidy profit. However, once Torres arrived, neither was going to play as much football, and rather than be substitutes they took their chances elsewhere. However, in Xabi Alonso, Fernando Torres and Albert Riera, Benítez has added skilful Spaniards with real class and vision. These are top-class technical footballers who are a joy to watch, without being prima donnas. Luis Garcia was another attacking success; not the most consistent performer, but you can never argue with the important goals he scored and how he made things happen. Dirk Kuyt is a bit similar in terms of output and important goals, if very different in style; not especially prolific as a striker, his goals and assists from the right flank have made him a positive attacking acquisition. Kuyt's game is that of a 'wide-midfielder', ie a solid type of player who does well at both ends of the pitch, rather than a 'winger', who is usually a skilful player who only excels going forward; making Kuyt more of a Ljungberg than a Pires. I feel Kuyt suffers by comparison with the world's silkiest wingers, but most teams tend to balance a winger on one flank with a more industrious type on the other, such as Park Ji-Sung at Manchester United. I also feel that Ryan Babel has been hit-and-miss rather than anything like approaching a flop, but he's fallen behind Riera in the pecking order. Some fringe players will need to play every week to find their rhythm and gain the confidence to show their true quality. But that will not be possible, by nature of their role, and the limitations placed on them by those established in the team. Dipping in and out of the side is not ideal to help them flourish; but if you don't have the likes of Babel and Lucas – young internationals with major footballing nations – then you don't have cover, and therefore can't rest players or deal with injuries. But it's not just Rafa's signings that have improved the attacking side of the Reds' game. While Steven Gerrard is simply a great natural talent who has improved with age, Benítez has also helped him treble his seasonal goal tallies and redefined his role. All of these players are still at a good age. The same is true of Benítez's key defensive signings: Reina, Agger, Skrtel, Arbeloa and Mascherano, with Insua vying to add himself to that list. So I see no correlation whatsoever between now and what went wrong a few years ago, when the best players, bar Gerrard and Carragher, were either on their way out of the door, or in their 30s. This squad has a far better balance in terms of quality in every position and also age. It has a better mentality, too, with less 'flighty' types. So my fear remains that some impatient fans (particularly with United on 17 league titles) would want the baby thrown out with the bath water if, despite progressing, the Reds fall a little short come May. For me, there are more similarities with Shankly's Liverpool than Houllier's, but even so, neither pattern is predetermined to be repeated. This is a new team, in a new era, heading into new and unknown territory: the future.

TOMKINS: RED HEART STILL BEATING
Paul Tomkins 21 January 2009

Well, this game had danger written all over it. Everton, with a great away record, were on a good run, and Liverpool had just been usurped at the top of the table.
But despite the edgy nature of the match it looked there for the taking with five minutes remaining. Liverpool had ridden out the first half and broke through when on top in the second, only to experience heartbreak at the end. The equaliser could have been better defended, but zonal marking remains the most reliable (if not infallible) system. Arteta's deliveries and Cahill's ability to ghost onto the end of them have flummoxed man-marking systems most weeks, too. It was galling to then hear Evertonians sing about the Reds winning nothing this season, but the reality is that there are three trophies still very much attainable, and only one for those singing without irony (hopefully that figure will be zero come Sunday evening). But the task has been made harder by the nature of this draw, in terms of morale and in terms of pressure. If a draw ever felt like a defeat it was this one. I'm not going to come on here and do anything like throw in the towel in terms of my own beliefs, and nor would I expect that of anyone on the playing or coaching staff. I know some people won't want to read some positives after a night like that, but equally, the death knell will be chimed on the Reds' chances elsewhere, so I will offer my take on things. I may not be 100 per cent right, but no-one can foretell the future. (Having said that, in October I entered a competition on a Liverpool website to predict how many points and what goal difference the Reds would have by January 1st. I was one point out, having guessed one of the lowest totals, and spot-on with the goal difference, and ended up winning the prize; as it was a copy of my own book, naturally I let it go to second place, but I also thought that Liverpool would be second, not top, at that stage. So I'm not an 'optimist', I just don't think we will win every game or blitz our way to the title.) Winners have to focus on the positives, otherwise they will just give up. That doesn't mean ignoring weaknesses, but you won't find sports seminars on Negative Mental Attitude as a route to success. I always thought the point of this season was to make a challenge; and while there was the chance for it to be so much better, the Reds have topped the league for seven weeks over the mid-point of the season. That is progress, and that is an education for all concerned into how these things work. I've said over the past four years that no team has won the Premier League for the first time without having come second (or joint-second on points) the previous season. Teams can no longer just jump from fourth (or further out) to first, particularly with the league's top two last season also the top two in Europe. So if this isn't the year, it can be seen as another building block. It will hurt, but it will also educate. However, at this point the league table still doesn't look too bad. It could be so much better, but I'm sure all teams can say that; after all, they've all dropped plenty of points of their own. Whereas Chelsea and Manchester United won at the weekend against unfashionable opposition with goals right at the death (something United have started doing of late when not playing well), Liverpool hit the post in the dying seconds at Stoke. Sometimes the margins are that fine, whether you are on top form or not. Earlier in the season the Reds were winning games in the 90th minute, this time they took the sucker punch square on the chin. The Everton support celebrated like they'd actually won a trophy. (It wasn't that long ago that we had the same attitude to Manchester United, but now the Reds are genuine rivals and annually in the hunt for the same trophies.) Liverpool have not become a bad team because they've slipped from the summit. But after some excellent performances over the festive period, a little edge has been lacking in the last two fixtures. Form comes and goes over the course of a season, no matter who you are. You have good spells and bad spells. Even champions don't play like champions every week, and don't win every week. The main positive is that the Reds have lost only once all season across 30 games in the major competitions. The main negative is that too many have been drawn. But in a bizarre paradox, people wouldn't be focussing on the draws if Liverpool had actually lost a couple of those games; three defeats wouldn’t look too bad at this stage, and nor would six draws, which would be only one more than United - but one defeat, which is one fewer than United, combined with those eight draws, is somehow portrayed as a far bigger negative. So while I'm worried by the amount of draws, I'm also not losing sight of the fact that some of them have come in games that might have ended in the inevitable shock defeats that all teams seem to suffer at some point. Better disappointing draws than disappointing defeats. Of course, part of the pattern of those draws has been down to the sharpness - or lack of - of Fernando Torres. He needs games to get back to his very best, but he is not yet fully into the swing of things. It's catch 22, and a bullet you just have to bite: each game will see him get fitter, sharper, stronger and more into his rhythm. There were signs last night that he was finding his old form, but also clear signs of rustiness. United struggled without Ronaldo for a few weeks earlier in the season, and then for a few games after he returned, so it's not like Liverpool are unique in relying on the form and fitness of their best players. A sublime piece of skill in beating three players, followed by the way he approached his effort that hit the post (even though he should have scored), highlighted both aspects of the Spaniard's current condition: the great technique and acceleration (almost) of old, but the finish of a man who hasn't played much football in a number of months. It clearly gave Everton a lift when the Spaniard was inevitably replaced near the end; and yet the alternative gamble was to keep him on and risk further damage when at his most vulnerable. That's why management is such a ludicrously tough job. Sometimes you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. It's also peculiar how you get these weird, almost unexplainable patterns in football, which swing wildly between seasons. In Peter Crouch's first year he couldn't score in Europe; then in his second season he was the competition's second-top scorer, behind some little-known fella called Kaka. Ditto Dirk Kuyt, who went until the last minute of his first season to nab a European goal, then the next season virtually all his strikes came in the Champions League. And now we have Torres, almost all of whose league goals came at Anfield last season, and yet this time he has five away and none at home. However, had he been fit this season, it's hard to believe that he wouldn't have been approaching double figures at at Anfield, and that there'd have been fewer draws as a result. We know that derby games will always be something of a lottery. Again, Manchester United lost both of theirs last season, and that to a team not as strong as the current Everton side. So it's not like Liverpool are failing in areas where other teams have not. Similarly, a lot is always made of Manchester United's attacking prowess, and criticism is made, in turn, of Liverpool's inability to put teams to the sword, but going into the Everton game, Liverpool had actually scored more league goals, and that without Fernando Torres more often than not. I stated early on in the season that this is a Liverpool team showing the hallmarks of champions - but that other teams were, too. That remains the case; United are now favourites, and have the current momentum, but despite their game in hand, the two clubs are level on points and barely separated by goal difference. The league as a whole is more competitive, and now only three points separate the top four. But the Anfield form has to improve soon if the Reds are going to keep challenging. Liverpool are very much in the race, as the league table definitively proves, but it's getting to the stage where a couple more slip-ups will prove fatal. The games against Chelsea and Manchester United (and Aston Villa) will give Liverpool the chance to turn the table back in their favour. Break a hoodoo like at Stamford Bridge in October with a win at Old Trafford, and everything could switch back. But Liverpool will almost certainly need to go there with the gap at a minimum. To conclude, I honestly wouldn't have expected the Reds to be anywhere near as fully in contention at this stage had I known that Torres would miss more games than he played. This means that so much more is right than wrong with the team. The aim now has to be to follow a couple of backwards steps with even more made in advance, and prove that the red heart still beats strong.