₦airaland Forum

larride:
There are teams that have won the champions league unbeaten though.

They also went unbeaten in the league? Or do they give bonus title for going unbeaten in the CL

Melvyn11:
You were told Liverpool season so far does not match the team quality nor is it a reflection of how good they are but you were forming strong head.

Which kin opaks you dey yarn so? Did Pep's Barca go unbeaten??

Are you expecting Liverpool to go unbeaten in England and Europe as well abi which unrealistic bar you dey try set sef.

Wait fess. Are you guys expecting Liverpool to go unbeaten both in England and Europe?

Let's even understand the orisun of this una argument.

And if you are then kindly show us any team that has gone the entire season unbeaten both in England and Europe. From Pep's Barca, to Zidane's Madrid or Sacchi's Milan

raumdeuter:
A40

Na the same Liverpool wey no dey concede for league in almost 6hrs of football don concede in 4mins to Atletico

Juventus, Bayern and PSG combined have 1 CL title between them in the last 7 years

Godx:
My initial premise is that saying Liverpool with their point tally of 95 would win every league title except 2 is technically correct but when context is added it's not possible because their is a possibility of them not matching that tally in other previous seasons. I basically said Liverpool gaining 95 points in 2019 doesn't mean they will do that in 2002 or 2009 . The way you prepare against a car that covers 20km/s is not the same way you prepare against a car that covers 50km/s.

At this point you have to pick a struggle. Unless you're telling me the EPL under Pep is at its weakest level yet which is why Pep was able to dominate his 2nd and 3rd season.

Or give Klopp and Liverpool credit for displaying arguably the finest stretch in recent memory.

We will never know if 2019 Liverpool would gather the same amount of points in that era but your context cannot prove that they wouldn't. Why is that so hard to understand??

Godx:
Who is their competition? Your argument is the one neither here or there. I specifically stated nearest competitor in a title race.

Why will they have competition when they don't slip up? Had they slipped up like last season they would have had a competitor.

Who was Pep's competitor when he and City reached 100 points in 2018. My argument is your initial premise of wanting to finish or accumulate a certain number of points based on your competition is erroneous and complete fahrvegnugen

Godx:
Liverpool have lost so many matches in Europe during the past 2 seasons. When the got to their first final they meet a Madrid who thoroughly defeated them. They meet a challenge as equal to them and lost. They meet a city team in the league equal to them and also lost. Infact the only time time Liverpool have won either the champions league or the Europa league just for the sake of illustration is when they meet an English team.

UCL is a tougher competition than the league just ask Juve, Bayern and PSG so I don't get your point and why you keep going back to Europe.

They lost thanks to a complete basketcase of a goalie. They rectified that and voila they are back in the Finals again and this time they won.

They met a City equal to them and lost. Why was this same City not equal to them this year? Who banned them from being equal this year? Story for the gods

I've forgotten Barca and Bayern Munich are English teams as well.

Stop making excuses!!

Godx:
When they are not as dominant in Europe as they are in the league then questions will be raised how good the team is or are they just being helped by the massive gap in quality in the league which Liverpool tally in the ucl and league points too.

What do you mean by not as dominant? Even prime Barca needed Ovrebo to reach their first Final.

The important thing is getting the job done. They have finished 1st or 2nd over the last two seasons in Europe. They lost the league last year by 1 and are currently leading by 25

Yet all you keep doing is making excuses.

raumdeuter:
It only shows that they face more competition in Europe than what they face in the league where they can lose 1 game in 64

But we already know the competition in Europe is higher than in the league for every team. So?

Godx:
I will like to know on what basis you proclaiming them the best team in Europe? If it's because they won the champions league last season then they are loopholes to that.

What other basis do you need? Who is better than them?

They are running away with the league that had the best coefficient. They have played in the last two CL Finals. So who is the better team.

Show me those loopholes let me slam dunk on them

Godx:
You can only match your nearest competitor. If I am in a title race and my nearest opponent can only attain 80 to 90 points that will also be my objective. One can say Liverpool only reached 95points because that's what it will take to catch City. If the previous past winners were up against a team guaranteed to reach 96points then that will also be their objective.

So what is Liverpool's objective now that they are 25 points ahead of the rest? They can lose 7 matches in a row and still win the league.

Your argument is neither here nor there

Godx:
You keep combining both seasons in order to make them what they are not. Last season is gone and they finished as the best losers. When they meet a team capable of matching them in accumulating wins upon wins the ended up as losers. Now that there is no competition they are running away with it. This should tell you something now imagine if the rest top teams were up for a title challenge.

Nyet Nyet.

I am combining both seasons to highlight their consistency. They went one better in England and in Europe after previous failures. I see a team that learned from previous mistakes. You are making excuses for the rest of the field

In Europe and England over the last 4 iterations the only constant has been Liverpool. They have raised the bar to the level that other teams can't cope. The games they drew last year they are winning this year

What happened in Europe? Why was no team up for the challenge as well?

Stop making excuses. Give credit where it's due

lordfalcao:
are you not the same person who said man city won 18 straight games?? Liverpool were evening doing well if not for that type of massive win which saw man city gap them.

Yes. For a team to need 18 straight wins it simply means Liverpool with one more win would have made it more difficult for City but failed because they drew so many games

raumdeuter:
The credit will be befitting if they are coasting in Europe the same way they are doing locally

If you are 4 losses in 19 in Europe but 1 loss in 64 in the league should tell us the competition locally is not comparable to what they are facing in Europe

They don't need to coast in Europe since we universally acknowledged the CL is the toughest competition of all.

However with the increased difficulty they have still won or gotten to the Finals and lost in the most unfortunate circumstances.

Based on the last two and a half seasons they have been consistent and the best team in Europe

Godx:
Credit is given with a bit of context. You are just against any type of context and looking at the raw figures.

You are not giving any credit at all.

That's why you are still drumming on this weak league line for a team that is quite clearly the best in Europe

raumdeuter:
Last season and this

In Europe Liverpool played 19 games lost to PSG, Red Star,Napoli(twice) that is 4 loses in 19 games in Europe

In the league 64 games Liverpool lost 1 time

4/19 vs 1/64

And they are reigning Champions of Europe. No?

This league argument would be valid if they are not winning the CL or reaching the Finals in the last two years

Godx:
The resource gap between the have and have not in England is still big despite the TV revenue and no it doesn't. A team could finish 7th in league and yet still go on to win the champions league. Liverpool have lost a game in the champions league in just 6matches yet are unbeaten in 25 league matches. That should tell you something

That tells me there are better teams in Europe than in England but still does not diminish the fact that they are the best team in Europe.

So if they are good enough for Europe and still dominate the league. Why then are you making excuses instead of giving due credit

raumdeuter:
In Europe this season out of 6 games they dropped points in 2. IUnlike EPL where they are 25-1-0

Europe is tougher than EPL. Open secret.

raumdeuter:
You have been basing the EPL strenght on performance on the field, why not use that metrics for La Liga when Madrid was winning the treble and Sevilla was dominating the lesser cup

When did Madrid win treble?

So when Barcelona was dominating with superior financial power than the rest of their league everybody crowned them the best team in club history.

So if Liverpool somehow win CL again this year what is the coherent argument that can be made that they don't deserve to be in the conversation

diggz:
The entire league didn't know what they were doing when pap fraudiola Laumdeuter won epl twice.

I tire. The league was not weak when Pep won with 19pts

Godx:
Using point tally argument doesn't work. Because I reached 90points in 2017 doesn't mean I will achieve the same thing in 2003. Technically speaking you are correct their point tally was the 2nd highest but saying they would have won the league apart from 2 seasons is you hyping them as usual.

How can it not work?

If for nothing else that will at least help you appreciate the difficulty of opposition and what it took for them to not win the league.

You literally cannot prove that they don't win the league any other year but those two years. I can theoretically say they can but you have absolutely no shot at proving they can't

raumdeuter:
Wenger did not go 25-1-0 Infact no one in Europe has done it before

Exactly. So give credit where it's due

lordfalcao:
liverpool knew what they were doing. Another team that knows what they where doing overtook them by a marginal gap

You can't know what you are doing and lose a 7 point advantage I'm sorry

raumdeuter:
They simply failed to make that feat because they had quality opposition which Liverpool is lacking

This same Liverpool that lost 1 in 64 games has lost 2 times in 13 CL games in the same time

The quality of opposition is not verifiable or juxtaposable (apologies Donjazet) so this argument is neither here nor there

Losing in CL games but it did not hurt their overall objective did it?

raumdeuter:
That shows the rivals standards dropped

What of in Europe? Where they are dominating the rest of the competition

Godx:
Liverpool would not have won 25matches and drawn 1 if the rest teams were up to the task. It's as simple as that. They will be no need to keep up when Liverpool are losing and drawing matches against the other teams.

Based on what evidence? They only lost 1 the previous season. What you are witnessing is a team at its peak. Simple!! I don't know why you are stretching yourself beyond biological boundaries to discredit them

Godx:
It's very reasonable to compare them. La Liga is still deemed uncompetitive and an easy league despite most of their teams dominating Europe in recent times. La liga team performance in Europe have not stopped epl fan boys from ridiculing the league. So epl team performance in Europe this past 2 seasons has not reflect the actual quality of the league.

Suggesting La Liga as an uncompetitive and easy league would be fairly accurate considering the resource gap between the haves and have nots.
This is not applicable to EPL

Do you agree EPL was also weak the season Pep won by 19 points or your bias is only applicable to Klopp and Liverpool?

Performance in Europe reflects quality in and of the League. There is a reason we have coefficients mate

lordfalcao:
I said the weakness of the other teams made the tittle race bit easy. Last season we saw two clubs who know what they were doing slug it out. We all so how the race was. That’s how a league should be

That is not how it works. Nobody was parroting this opinion when Pep won the league at a canter. The onus is on Liverpool to win as many games as they can. If the other teams don't keep up despite equal resources then Liverpool's achievements should not be diminished on the back of that.

When Pep's Barca was dominating Europe nobody said Europe was weak. When Wenger went unbeaten nobody said EPL was weak

raumdeuter:
Has City kept that standard of 18 wins in a row this year?

Good. They couldn't keep up. Liverpool showed it was no fluke and went one step better. Why are they being discredited for it instead of praised?

Godx:
Using point tally to say a team in 2019 would have won the title in 2002 is Soo gringy. That's not how it works.

What are you chatting about. Show me any other year aside 2018 and 2019 that Liverpool with their points tally don't win the league?

I'm showing you how high the bar was set you are speaking grammar

lordfalcao:
no the difference is that man city don’t know what they are doing this season

Iyen o kan aye. Liverpool didn't know what they were doing last season too else they would have won back to back

raumdeuter:
But Barcelona Milan and Madrid even at the peak of their powers never went 25-1-0 in any season in the past 30yrs despite them being the 3 most dominant teams of the last 3 decades

Its the league that has the fabled financial parity that is having a 25-1-0 run

They failed to reach that feat for reasons we will never know. However what I know is if Liverpool win the CL this year again then nobody can tell me they don't belong to that conversation of the all-time greats. Because at that point you will have to explain your criteria and why Liverpool don't belong there

It's not fabled. Which league can a club play £40m for goddamn Joelinton and £60m for Ndombele. This is not La Liga where Barcelona can pluck Leganes best player for €20m midway into the season. Man City cannot do that even for Teemu Pukki. They will still pay almost £50m