10 Sept 2009

Liverpool v Burnley: Nothing but a win is acceptable

Liverpool have a potentially tricky game against early-season giant-killers Burnley on Saturday, and after the club’s below-par start to the season, anything other than a win is unthinkable…isn’t it?

There are no easy games in the Premiership, but any team that is serious about winning the title MUST beat teams like Burnley at home.

Last season, Liverpool suffered damaging home draws against the following teams:

Stoke City
West Ham
Hull City

All of the above were eminently winnable games, and failure to achieve wins cost Liverpool the title. This weekend’s Burnley game is no exception - a draw or defeat could, even at this early stage, be fatal to the club's title ambitions.

Liverpool have better players individually; a stronger squad; a more experienced manager AND the advantage of playing at home. And even if some players do not perform at their optimum level (which has been the case several times this season), Liverpool STILL have enough quality to win the game.

The fact that Burnley beat Manchester United and Everton is irrelevant, and should not be used as some kind of excuse if Liverpool fail to win, i.e. ‘But they beat Man U and Everton, so a draw is acceptable under the circumstances’.

A draw is not acceptable! Nothing but a win will suffice. Fans should demand a win and be unforgiving of anything *but* a win.

Am I wrong?


  1. Draw is not acceptable. We have to show what were made of, and I think we will.

  2. suprise suprise, another pessimistic article from the pessimistic site.

    there is a difference between realism and over critical and this site proves it

    you pride yourselves on your realism. on the fact your not biased but you are. your biased towards the negative always. this site never has anythin positive to say.

    this comment probably wont get on the site.

    the negativity is a way to  get people to read and react i understand you guys want the hits on the site. its proven in the disclaimer at the bottom.

  3. Please explain how this is a pessimistic article.

    What is pessimistic about stating that the Burnley game is and should be a must-win game?

    And what disclaimer are you on about? Please also explain why this site is allegedly just about getting hits.  To what end, exactly? Do you see any advertising on this site? NO.

    Stick to the issues in the article please.  Any further comments that are not related to the topic will be deleted.

  4. Nothing but win is acceptable. Is it negativity to say it? I must be a terribly negative person cause I think we should beat teams like Burnley at home.

    Seriously, Jaimie is quite critical but that's what this site is about. There's been much more critical, much more negative but also much more interesting articels than this one in this site. I haven't liked all that's been said here, but I think this is spot on. We need to win Burnley if we want to stay in the title race. We have enough quality to do it, and considering the fact that we are six points behind Chelsea it's a must win game. To say it is not negativity. It's a fact.

  5. Exactly.  And given the fact Chelsea beat Burnley 3-0 at home, we have no excuse but to follow suit.

  6. Hell yeah! We have the players and the manager. I think it depends on the tactics applied. I hope RB, could switch it's formation to a more offensive ones. We must go all attack when playing the new comers! Seriously, please remove Lucas from the squad. Look at the damage he has done. We shouldn't have lost against Aston Villa. We could have score more goals in Bolton. Lucas is too similar to Mascherano imo. Just play either one of them will do! Gerrard MUST BE in the CENTRE! Give the poor Babel a chance to shine! Put him together wit El Nino would be the key. Both speedy players will cause a riot against the newcomers. They will have difficulties coping with speed! Look at how chealsea own them. i hope rb see this.

  7. Yes its  tricky one with Masch not returning 'til tomorrow along with that man Lucas. We have enough quality in attack but we are conceeding too many goals at the back, so its fingers crossed for a good win on Saturday.

  8. think people should lay of lucas hes getting better all the time. As for must win dont agree its still early in the season, must win puts more pressure on the lads makes them tense and thus less fluent in their passing. Premier league is a marathon not a sprint. And jaimie you do write it in a very critical way always having a little jab even when making valid points.

  9. Burnley will probably have 10 or 11 men behind the ball most of the time so Babel's pace won't be of any use. His lack of game intelligence may prove very costly in a game like this where space up front will be tight. I'd rather like to see Yossi starting just off Torres. Unlike Babel he can beat a man or two and has an eye for a pass.

  10. I am in total agrement with you jaimie to be perfectly honest the only teams we should be aqccepting a draw at home from are the other top 3 teams, every other team we should be expecting nothing other than a win.

    Our problem is when teams put everyone behind the ball do we have guile to break them down?

  11. Thinking that Burnley are just going to put ten men behind the ball all the game surely proves that you know nothing about Burnley as a team, or Owen Coyle as a manager. How do you think they beat Man Utd? By attacking, and not just parking the bus.

  12. Yes they beat utd and pleyed quite attacking football but that was at turf moor i doubt if that game was at old trafford they would have played the same attacking style and i doubt they will sat

  13. <span>any team that is serious about winning the title MUST beat teams like Burnley at home.</span>

    It's just not true.

    2007/2008 MU drow to Reading at home

    (last season they drow to Newcastle. IMHO Newcastle were worse team last season than Burnley so far)

    Of course we need to win that game - we need every single point available. But your statement is just untrue. MU poved you wrong. Sorry.

  14. 2005/2006

    Chelsea 1 - 1 Charlton

  15. 2004/2005

    Chelsea 2 - 2 Bolton
    Chelsea 1 - 1 Birmingham

    Do you want some more results?

  16. Samsamire - I know that in the past teams have tripped up against the so-called weaker teams, but I'm not talking about the past; I didn't say 'no team from the past that is serious about winning the title has slipped up against the likes of Burnley'.

    What I am saying is that NOW, this season, any team that is serious about winning the title should be beating the likes of Burnley at home.

    In Liverpool's case, it is even more vital given the two losses so far this season.

  17. Whatever the formation, all out attack from the word go should be the approach.  It's Anfield and this is Liverpool.  No need to fear the smaller teams.

  18. Yes, completely agree.  We should only be accepting home draws from the very best teams in the league, i.e. Man U, Chelsea and Arsenal.  Even then, we should go out there to win without fear, especially with our results against the top 4 last season.

  19. "What I am saying is that NOW, this season, any team that is serious about winning the title should be beating the likes of Burnley at home. "

    No Jaimie, you said what you said. You didnt say 'should' you said 'MUST', you even capitalised it to be more clear about it.

    So you are clear and you are wrong. Had Chelsea lost some points to Hull on opening game (they were very close) they surely wouldnt be out of contention. It is obviuos mate.

    You overuse some words (like 'must', 'poof', 'waste')  - just like tabloids do. Refrein from this - its a good advice.

  20. Samsamire - the following sentence is present tense, is it not?

    <span>Any team that is serious about winning the title MUST beat teams like Burnley at home.</span>

    Yes it is.  Present tense, thus I am speaking of the present.

    Any team that is serious about winning the title MUST (i.e. there is no excuse not to) beat teams like Burnley at home.

    The sentence does not imply that if title contenders DO NOT beat teams like Burnely at home that their title challenge would then be over.  That is a false assumption on your part.

    But I take your point about the use of words like 'must', 'proof' and 'waste', though I disagree that only tabloids use such words in headlines.  Every news organisation does, including the broadsheets.

    Anyway, I stand by my sentence:  it is present tense and was merely suggesting that this season, any team that has designs on the title must beat weaker teams.

  21. "Yes it is.  Present tense, thus I am speaking of the present.  "


    You suggest every other season a future champion could afford to drop points to a weaker team, but this season is different.

    I cant see any difference to former seasons.

    For me points gained are points gained and I dont care where from they are.

    Assuming the champions will need the same amount of points as last season they need to get 90 points. What the difference from wich games they are?

    (Actually I believe this season the champions will get less points than last season so can lose more points then before. More like 85 than 90)

    So we ghave two contradicting opinions:

    1. This season - opposite to former seasons - the serious title contenders must win every home game against theoretically much weaker teams.

    2. This season serious title contenders must get as close to 90 points as possible. It doesnt matter which games they draw or lose.

    Do you stick to your opinion, Jaimie?