TOMKINS: WHAT CAN WE RIGHTFULLY EXPECT? Paul Tomkins 23 November 2009
	I don't want to sound like I'm just making excuses, but I'm finding it almost impossible to judge the performances this season.
What should we expect of the team when constantly missing players, with numerous enforced changes each and every week? Maybe I should expect more. Or maybe others expect too much. I'd know where I stand with the best XI, or even something approaching it, playing most weeks. But this has been a season of utter chaos, in terms of selection. The biggest hypocrisy with a lot of Benítez's critics is this: slating him for rotating, saying that you can't win trophies making lots of changes (even though other major managers have had success when making a greater number), yet failing to cut him slack when he's forced to make far too many due to injuries. And injuries are far more unsettling than rotation. At least with rotation the manager has full control of his selection. And at least with rotation the unused players are still fit, and usually on the bench (an example: Ferguson often brought on Rooney and Ronaldo to try and win the game if he rotated his side). Players like Torres, Gerrard and Johnson are currently in and out of the side, and these are all match-winners. So is Benayoun. Aquilani, another potential match-winner, is getting closer to playing, and may well start in Hungary, but his selection is not straightforward, after a longer-than-anticipated ankle problem. It didn't help against City that Gerrard visibly tired in the second half, after a very influential first 45. Maybe he was just frozen out of the game as City threw caution to the wind to equalise, but he's missed a lot of training lately. At least the 90 minutes will help him rediscover his sharpness, even if the second 45 more-or-less passed him by. There has to come a ‘critical mass'-type point with injuries, beyond which too much is missing to expect to compete at anything approaching your normal level. Can you cope without two players? Three players? Four? Five? Six? ... Twelve? ... Twenty-five?! Where is the cut-off point? The same applies to players looking to get fit with games; hence why starting both Gerrard and Aquilani may have presented a gamble too far. Carry too many under-par players in terms of fitness, and you'll suffer, especially in the tougher fixtures. We can all play this new game called Fantasy Physio, but how many fans have both the necessary medical insight and the all-important access to the players and their medical notes? None that I'm aware of. Aquilani needs match fitness, and can't get that without playing. However, if he's thrown in and the Reds lose, at a high-pressure time like this, that's not helpful either. Particularly when Gerrard isn't 100% sharp. If anyone think it's a simple decision, they're deluded. It was seriously complicated by the two early injuries, and the fact that much more than 60 minutes for Benayoun would be a massive risk. I admit that I was surprised when Aurelio came on, but from that point the Reds had full control of the game, and had chances to win it. By helping strengthen the left-hand side, the Reds got the upper hand. While neither team came into the game high on confidence, the 13 players City used cost £162m; the 14 Liverpool used cost £71m. That's well below half of the visitor's line up. A large part of this is down to the incredible spending at Eastlands. But also, three of Benítez's four biggest signings were either unavailable or only on the cusp of the required fitness. But I still feel that the Reds have sufficient quality and experience to finish above City, assuming the number of fit players increases. Are Liverpool's reserves better than City's first-team players? Of course not. I'd take Liverpool's strongest XI over City's any day of the week, but they clearly have more depth (particularly up front – Tevez, Robinho and Santa Cruz in reserve!), and in the 2-2 draw, Hughes had a full hand to choose from. Benítez didn't. Liverpool started perfectly, with a very positive first five mintues that almost brought a goal, but the momentum was killed by two early injuries, particularly the one to Agger. The game slowed down, the Kop lost its buzz (which is never as buzzy as in later kick-offs). City's job was to break up the game and quieten the crowd; the injuries did that for them. I have to say that I thought De Jong's tackle on Babel was terrible: off the ground, two-footed, studs showing. I think he tried to play the ball, and may well have won it – I'm not saying it was malicious – but it is without doubt a red card in the modern rules. Given that Degen was sent off for a far less dangerous challenge at Fulham, this could only have been a red. But that's the kind of luck Liverpool are having this season. Even the N'Gog penalty against Birmingham was wrongly analysed as fortunate, with Carsley's desperate lunge missing the ball; contact with the player isn't necessary if you cut right across his path and don't actually get the ball. If N'Gog stayed on his feet, he might have a broken ankle now. (And yes, I'd say the same if it was at the other end. If you dive in and don't win the ball, you only have yourself to blame.) I also thought Kuyt was bundled over by Bellamy in the box – a blatant penalty – and that their 2nd goal looked offside, although that was a close call. But I don't think you can argue with a draw being the fair result. The Reds looked nervy after taking the lead; as if they didn't know whether to twist or stick. From Liverpool's point of view, it was a fairly good first half display, a very good start to the second half, a poor 25 minutes after taking the lead (either sitting back or being forced back), and a storming ending that deserved a winner. I'm not saying that the season's problems are all down to bad luck and injuries, but it becomes much more of a lottery if you have a depleted squad. Part of the problem Liverpool had against City was that without Johnson, who reported unfit to play the morning of the game, and with Kyrgiakos (who I felt did well) having to replace Agger after just five minutes, the Reds were shorn of a lot of defensive pace, against possibly the quickest front line around: Bellamy, Adebayor and Wright-Phillips, who were later supplemented by Tevez; and with Ireland arriving from deep. As a result, it was hard to push up as a back-line. It must also be harder defending as a unit when you've never played together before; the last couple of weeks have seen some previously untried and untested combinations, as has the season as a whole. I've said it a lot recently, but the constant changes to the back four have been a nightmare. I'm sorry, but any manager would struggle to get sufficient results in the circumstances. Every week the defence has had to change, and often during the match, too. It's been injury after injury. I'd be a lot more worried if it was the four/five regulars who were starting every week, and still conceding a higher than usual number of goals. It'll be harder to win games on a regular basis again until there's a bit more stability there. When a team is not keeping clean sheets, defenders get nervy; when they are keeping clean sheets, they can look unbeatable. Liverpool defended poorly for City's opening goal, but then the visitor's were twice “beaten” by set-pieces; Lucas knows he should have headed that late chance in and become the hero, following on from Skrtel's strike. All around the country, goals are flying in from corners and free-kicks. So Liverpool aren't alone in struggling with them; but clearly also need to cut out the mistakes, too. On the plus side, in adversity, some young players continue to shine. A big positive is the hold-up and link play of N'Gog, who yet again had a hand in the goals: first by winning the free-kick, and then with some brilliant skill to work an opening, before his shot deflected to Benayoun to equalise. He's showing a great appreciation of what's going on around him, and is progressing very nicely indeed. However, he's still getting used to the gruelling demands of 90 minutes of Premiership action, and seems to be tiring after the hour mark. It's all part of his development. Lucas also continues to get better and better; evidence of what you can get from players by not dropping them. (I'm not saying that dropping players is wrong, just that there are alternative approaches, too.) I believe that Lucas will score more goals in time, but it's the one part of his game where a lack of confidence still shows. I think the Brazilian's form has improved massively these past six weeks, as has Mascherano's. The Argentine was sensational against City – he was everywhere, passing with vision and dribbling forward like a man possessed. At the start of the season they looked a little unbalanced as a duo, but when they are passing well, they are far from the negative pairing some people paint them as. So all in all, I still sense that this is a team very much on the right lines, but a little derailed of late. You can argue over fine details, but there's not a lot wrong with the side, and the majority of the squad, when fit and in form. But confidence and fitness are two of the most important factors in the sport, yet the hardest for the manager to control. Injuries can happen no matter how careful or well prepared you are – anyone can have a muscle injury (name a player who hasn't?), and anyone can clash heads or get studs in their ankle; while confidence comes and goes in mysterious ways, which often revolve around turning points (good and bad) for both individuals and the collective. You can boost a player all you want, but what happens on the other side of that white line affects his performance; start with a bad touch, and it can go downhill fast. End a barren spell with a lucky goal, and you can get a hat-trick. A lucky deflection can change a team's season, not just the player who claims the goal off his backside. Another big week awaits, and I'd gladly see a few deflected Liverpool winners in the coming fixtures.