An expensive Plan B:40 million BR legacy lives

[Sir X]

But under Klopp Liverpool are not a crossing team, and to play with a big striker who does absolutely no pressing is a serious concern. We saw it with Mario Balotelli, and sometimes we see it with Daniel Sturridge (although he wins games because he’s an FRR, and was helped by the dervish-like Suarez); and before that we saw it with the latter-years version of Fernando Torres. With all these examples we saw that a striker who stands around sulking absolutely kills the heart of a team. If the forwards press then the midfield have no excuse not to press. If the forwards don’t, everything can grind to a halt.

Benteke remains a fine Plan B (a battering ram against deep defences, or to hold the ball up late in away matches), but unless Klopp is going to build his Plan A around him (and perhaps wisely, given his success has been built on gegenpressing, he won’t) then that’s one expensive Plan B. It would leave Benteke unhappy at being a bit-part player, but also not give him the chance to get into a rhythm.

http://tomkinstimes.com/2015/12/live...d-consistency/


I agree with every thing Paul says..hehe

[Peter R]

But under Klopp Liverpool are not a crossing team, and to play with a big striker who does absolutely no pressing is a serious concern. We saw it with Mario Balotelli, and sometimes we see it with Daniel Sturridge (although he wins games because he’s an FRR, and was helped by the dervish-like Suarez); and before that we saw it with the latter-years version of Fernando Torres. With all these examples we saw that a striker who stands around sulking absolutely kills the heart of a team. If the forwards press then the midfield have no excuse not to press. If the forwards don’t, everything can grind to a halt.

Benteke remains a fine Plan B (a battering ram against deep defences, or to hold the ball up late in away matches), but unless Klopp is going to build his Plan A around him (and perhaps wisely, given his success has been built on gegenpressing, he won’t) then that’s one expensive Plan B. It would leave Benteke unhappy at being a bit-part player, but also not give him the chance to get into a rhythm.

http://tomkinstimes.com/2015/12/live...d-consistency/


I agree with every thing Paul says..hehe

That's quite an admission!

What is ONE recurring theme throughout the article?

[Paul Marin]

http://tomkinstimes.com/2015/12/live...d-consistency/


I agree with every thing Paul says..hehe

I hope you meant Paul Tomkins and not me. While I think Tomkins is a fairly smart guy, I don't put too much stake into the ramblings of those in the "Opinion" business. In his case, he has shown he is frequently wrong, and more than just a day-to-day Rafaist. However, he does admit when he is wrong. Now...as for this article...do you agree with this?

... not only did City help edge Liverpool out of the top four, but they bought the kind of players who would otherwise have gone to United and Chelsea, and possibly Arsenal or Liverpool (and they even bought players from those clubs, in a way that they wouldn’t have been able to do before).

[Sir X]

Frequently wrong like you,sunday is fast approaching.

[Peter R]

So what is the theme that Paul T mentions throughout the length and breadth of his article?

[Sir X]

Why are you sidekicking about a theme,if you seek to extrapolate on it , do so ! he made a point of someone being an expensive plan B, thats my focus.

Am I the worse for it ?

[Peter R]

Fair enough, that's your focus. and I have NO PROBLEM with that. However, your writer in residence, by my estimation wrote a 5,000 word essay of which he devoted about 10% of it to Benteke in the paragraph he calls "Elephant". That is not an insignificant percentage, considering the number of players in the squad, but what is the theme in the other 90%?

The reason I ask is you say : "I agree with everything Paul says"... Does that statement refer to the other 90% of the article? If so, my question stands... if you cannot answer it, just say so. It's all about reading with comprehension...

[Sir X]

So you comprehend that agreeing with everything Paul says means just that ? If you go through my post in the past you will see where I have stated,Klopp is going to take time to know his charges, players will be given time to adapt and prove themselves, that doesn't mean I can't dream and set myself up for missed expectations or critique those who I might doubt of being able to adapt or prove themselves.

That's my prerogative,can you accept that in comprehending me,in your capacity to read and comprehend.

[Peter R]

I am referring specifically to this article you linked, nothing more or nothing less, so...

Let me help you answer my question which, I will remind you, is: "Does that statement refer to the other 90% of the article?" ("that statement" is that you said you agree with everything he (Paul T) says. You wrote it just after the excerpt you pasted about Benteke, so I'm just trying to clarify. Did you mean, just the Benteke part or including the rest of the article?... it's not that complicated dude!)

So here is a multiple choice to make it easier for you:

a. Yes. I also totally agree with the other parts of this article.
b. Well, I agree with about 75% of the rest and I might have doubts about the other 25%.
c. Well, I agree with about 50% of the rest and I might have doubts about the other 50%.
d. Well, I agree with about 25% of the rest and I might have doubts about the other 75%.
e. No. I only agree with the part about Benteke.

That about covers, more or less the possible answers without getting into too fine details.

TIA ...

[Sir X]

Given what you just posted ,you read the article,and comprehended it I hope -how does my answer differ from 90 % of the article,is it that you seek a direct answer ? in yes or no .

If you can tell me .... If you go through my post in the past you will see where I have stated,Klopp is going to take time to know his charges, players will be given time to adapt and prove themselves. ....is different from 90 % of the article I will answer you.Throw in the 10 % of Bentke and tell me what you get .


Is that easier for you,or do I have to answer the abcde ? You can play the ass , I can too,thats all it comes down too.

[Peter R]

Ok... in truth I exaggerated when I spoke about a particular theme throughout the article [notwithstanding his analysis of the crop of players] but, your boy PT devotes about 15% of his article to it... and that is significant, so, your best answer should have been "b."

You don't have to thank me!

[Sir X]

So you exaggerate and expect lucid answers to what gain,is it to pontificate? You haven't answered my question is my 3- 4 line summary of the article any different from it and did it answer your question about the theme?

Thanks.

[Peter R]

I learn (exaggeration) from the best.. LOL

Yes, your summary is not it, as I said that is a no-brainer. It is his section that he calls "A quick aside about Europe". You should re-read it.

[Paul Marin]

Frequently wrong like you,sunday is fast approaching.

Blah blah blah...stop gwan wid u foolishniss and answer my question. Again, do you agree with this?

... not only did City help edge Liverpool out of the top four, but they bought the kind of players who would otherwise have gone to United and Chelsea, and possibly Arsenal or Liverpool (and they even bought players from those clubs, in a way that they wouldn’t have been able to do before).