The View from South Texas -- Liverpool v. Fulham

[HatterDon]

A Mean Pinball

So Fulham lost to Liverpool Wednesday 1-0, and none of the bookies were surprised. None of the newspapers or pundits who talked about the match prior to kickoff were surprised. Who WAS surprised? Well, I would assume that every man, woman, and child in residence at Anfield were certain that Fulham were going to get something out of the match, for a start, as were most of the television viewers around the world. Just as was the case when Fulham visited Chelsea earlier in the season, the performance merited at least one point, and three would not have been a rank injustice. Instead, we wound up with nothing but "how the hell's" and "what the ....'s."

Fulham, so the announcers on the world feed told us several times, had never won at Anfield in the league. Gerrard was back. Meireles was in splendid form and, those two plus Paulsen would easily dominate a Fulham midfield contingent weakened by the loss of Dickson Etuhu. And yet, despite some sub-standard passing by Danny Murphy especially in the second half, it didn't really feel as if they were bossing anything. We were also told that Kelly and Johnson would terrorize the Fulham flanks. For the first 15 minutes, Kelly did twist and bedevil Baird and, for the better part of an hour, the Paintsil-Duff Axis – so dominant against Stoke – looked incapable of doing anything other than panic defending against Johnson. And yet in the end, it really didn't matter whether the threat came from the wings or from buildups through the middle.

We were also told that Fernando Torres was is good form – and I could attest to that having watched most of Liverpool's recent matches. What we discovered, however, was that Torres chose Wednesday evening as an opportunity to audition for the lead in The Collins John Story. I lost track of the number of times the Sullen Spaniard was caught offside. He never quite mastered the offside rule, it seemed. Of course, he's not a young female assistant referee either, so we shouldn't be harsh on him.

All in all, Liverpool looked very much like a team of aging stars with more reputation than guile, and more bluster than threat. Fulham, on the other hand, looked like the 2011 Fulham Mark Hughes. Duff, absolutely toothless in attack, broke up foray after foray on the right side of defense. Paintsil made two or three key clearances in front of goal. Baird, although he never got the opportunity to cause much in the way of difficulty to Liverpool's defense, rapidly countered the threat of Kelly and played a solid defensive game.  Fulham's midfield managed quite nicely, with Sidwell box-to-boxing as advertised in a cool and calm manner.

Dempsey played sort of on the left, leaving Dembele and AJ to roam up front. But that's only positional info. The truth is that Johnson's pace and positioning bedeviled the Liverpool defense constantly, while Dembele constantly found room to receive the ball and do something productive with it. He also probably led our side in dispossessions so agile and quick was he to tackle back. Meanwhile, Dempsey caused Liverpool trouble all over the pitch, popping up like Woody Allen's Zelig to clear defensive lines, to lay off to Sidwell at the half-way line, to sting Reina's hands with a quick shot.

Perhaps I'm biased or naive, but I thought we were the better side on the day. But there was that goal that went in, and those that should have, but didn't. And no, I'm not talking about the marginal offside decision early in the match that had the announcers chirping until the final whistle. It was a 50-50 call as to whether Torres was offside, but everyone on the pitch had relaxed at the sign of the linesman's flag – including Torres – before he stroked the ball past Stockdale. Had it not been clear to all the players that the play was dead, it was probable that there would indeed have been a shot, but not guaranteed that it would go in. I'm sure that the papers called it "a goal disallowed by a bad offside call," but that's not really what happened. No, Liverpool's best chance for a goal – Meireles's deft header was not thwarted by an official, but by a brilliant save by Young Mr. Stockdale. We have been wondering what we'd see when he was placed under pressure, and we saw it yesterday. The Boy Stockdale Done Good.

He was beaten, however, and the team suffered its first defeat under his stewardship by a goal that was bizarre in the extreme. The previously brilliant Clint Dempsey sought to triangle Fulham's way from defense to attack, but his pass was deflected by Kuyt. Torres took a shot that may well have been going wide had not it ricocheted off Hangeland and then the post. I'm not exactly sure whether Paintsil was about to clear when Stockdale altered the position of the ball, or whether Stockdale was about the claim possession of the ball when Paintsil jarred it loose, but in trickled across like a weird four-rail billiards shot.

None of this would have mattered, however, if The Best Player on the Pitch would have converted either of the two clear chances he was presented with. In each half, Dembele failed to deliver with the goal at his mercy and Reina not near the position he would have wished. And there it was. We deserved at least 1-1. It would not have been a bad day at the office if it had wound up 0-0, but somehow we contrived – by our play alone – to lose 1-0 instead of winning 0-2. Fulhamish.

A word about Gera. His substitution made a SIGNIFICANT difference in the game, but not because of anything he did. Hughes rescued the exhausted Duff and replaced him on the right side of midfield with Dembele. From that moment on, Johnson's forays upfield ended and he looked like the over-rated panic-stricken defender he most certainly is. Gera, perhaps mindful of his quick trigger in earlier appearances, passed on a couple of opportunities to take on a confused and tired Liverpool defense.

So there it is. Stockdale had a brilliant match; Paintsil had a very good one. And yet they combined to give up a comical goal. Dempsey was a source of constant pain to Liverpool, and yet began their winning move. And, in the supreme irony, the man who missed two sitters winds up to be ....

HatterDon's Man of the Match: Moussa Dembele.

[Tom]

Great read as usual Don. I love Moussa but I don't know if I can give him man of the match when he should have had 2 goals.

[LordNelson]

That's the Liverpool that I saw vs. Wolves when I said I was not impressed by their performance.  We outplayed them and actually dominated them the last 30 min of the game.  Their players were panicking, their supporters were panicking.  Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, the ole what could have been.  I know we have some tough matches coming up, but after yesterday's match I felt more unlucky than disappointed about our performance.

[RidgeRider]

Well done Don! Very enjoyable read as usual.  :clap_hands:

[nevzter]

good read, hd.  thanks again.

The Who - Pinball Wizard (From "Live At The Isle Of Wight Festival")

[BarryP]

Thanks for the round-up Don!

[NogoodBoyo]

This year we've lost to Chelsea, Spurs and Pool by 1-0 when we matched them all.  Based on my dodgy memory, in previous years we often drew with big teams despite being inferior on the day. 
But in previous years we would often lose to the "smaller," struggling clubs.  This year, for the most part we're beating them (except for West Ham).  Funny old game.

Nogood "don't know what to make of that, do I" Boyo

[BillNRoc]

It's enough to make a man say "Rats!" as I did repeatedly on Wednesday and a few more times on Thursday. Had Dembele converted either of his chances, the result would have been fair. And for all his bustling about, AJ didn't score and failed to set up anyone else. I worry that management are going all in on BZ's return being marked by immediate return to form, which seems unlikely at best. Sidwell is a good acquisition and Kakuta shows promise, but we still lack a striker who could do what DBent has already done for Villa. Rats.