I honestly think that Liverpool lost the game when Mascherano came out because up until then he had controlled Kaka without any trouble. With Mascherano out, suddenly no one kept an eye on the brazilian (certainly not Xabi Alonso) and you can see that in the second goal when Kaka received the ball completely unmarked and had all the time in the world to pass it through to Inzaghi who sentenced Liverpool with his second goal. If Mascherano woull have been there, Milan wouldn't have scored that second goal because he would have inmediately closed on Kaka and the Reds would have been able to equalize and send the game to overtime and penalties where they would have won because most Milan players were awfully tired and they've never been very successful on taking penalties anyway.
What a shame. What do you think?
2007-05-23 12:30:14 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football ➔ UEFA Champions League
what was Benitez thinking not just when he substituted Mascherano (which you're right about because it gave Kaka all the space he needed to create that 2nd goal) what was he thinking when he kept Crouch on the bench till the end of the game?? You could see that as soon as he came on, he dramatically affected Liverpool's game and helped score the goal. I still don't understand why Bellamy wasn't used either, I mean the guy is reallllly fast and considering Milan's defense was very iffy tonight, he could have really caused problems and quite possibly scored a goal.
2007-05-23 13:58:11 · answer #1 · answered by jdoe 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Many people blamed Rafa because of substitution, but I can understand his tactics: Milan had 1 goal lead, and there was not much time for Liverpool. So, he decided to put more emphasis in attack. He tried to switch from 4-5-1 (or 4-4-1-1) with Steven Gerrard behind lone striker Kuyt, to 4-4-2 with Crouch & Kuyt in front. But who was to sacrifice? He had 2 choices: Alonso, or Mascherano (certainly not Gerrard, because he is Pool's spirit, nor the wingers, because he needed crosses). Alonso is better in attacking, while Mascherano is better in defending. Mascherano marked Kaka very well, but he had received yellow card. If he got second yellow card, Liverpool would have to play with 10 men. Alonso was less effective, but perhaps Benitez thought he would be able to help in attacking, meanwhile Gerrard, recalling his aggressive style, can play as a holhing midfielder. Thus, he did the substitution.
If I were him, I would make same decision. But the problem is, why didn't he let Crouch play as a starter? He might cause trouble for Milan's ageing defenders. Who could fight such giant? But anyway, everything had happened. Too late to sorry.
2007-05-24 10:13:09 · answer #2 · answered by r083r70v1ch 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sometimes I wonder about Benitez, I think Liverpool have perhaps got what it takes to be the greatest club in the world again (This is coming from a Man U fan by the way!). But I seriously doubt they will be able to do it with him in charge. He makes far too many reckless decisions and doesn't think his tactics through properly.
What the hell did he put Harry Kewell on for as well? The guy has only played 46 minutes of football all season, and so he decides to play him in the Champions League final? Kewell was out of match practice and it showed!
Crouch played well, but wasn't on the pitch long enough.
2007-05-23 23:41:31 · answer #3 · answered by Zombie Jesus 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Simple!! Liverpool were losing and he had to replace a defensive player for an extra attacking one. Losing 2-0 is just as bad as 1-0 in a cup final, why not take a risk and go for the equaliser! Its easy to say in hind sight that Liverpool would have scored from the corner and won on penalties etc but Benitez doesn't have a crystal ball!!
2007-05-24 03:37:56 · answer #4 · answered by Chelsea Shrimper 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hang on! Wasn't mascherano replaced by Crouch? And didn't he set up the goal? Shouldn't have brought on kewell though. Maybe if mascherano was there inzaghi wpuldn't have scored the second. but if crouch wasn't there Liverpool wouldn't have scored. You can't have it both ways.
2007-05-24 10:45:45 · answer #5 · answered by kyles GG 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yep... until then Liverpool looked like the only team to score.. Why was'nt Bellamy brought on, I think his pace would have given the Italians problems.. there was nothing to lose with Gerrard and Crouch on, I'm certain they would have turned it around. Milan looked nervous.
2007-05-23 19:40:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
being a west ham supporter i agree with you.
he kept kaka in his pocket with 3 fantastic tackles.
what was benitez on.
they looked solid apart from stevie g thought he was quite.
i personaly thought mascherano was 1 of the best players out there along with pennant,
seems a shame.
what might have been a.
2007-05-23 20:55:44 · answer #7 · answered by Graham C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ye i think macharano (i really need to learn how to spell his name) was the best player on our team if not the best player in the match but we had like 10 minuites left aswell (if i remember right) so there was no need to get every attackin player on the pitch until the last 5 minutes
i think just to rub it in the ball rolled slowly i meen like slow motion slowly it just made it 10 times worst i dont no why
2007-05-23 19:40:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
to me it's simply wrong tactics... i would have thought kewell and crouch should have started ahead of pennant and zenden... oh well, it's over now... next year...
2007-05-24 04:34:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
shame the best team lost
2007-05-23 19:46:01 · answer #10 · answered by billy p 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋