What - you mean this?!
"Today West Ham set the pace for almost the entire match and Liverpool were always struggling to contain them and playing catch up. Liverpool had very little to offer themselves and while their goals were spectacular, they came not from persistent, well-crafted attacks, but from a long ball and two long-distance speculative shots from outside the area. Apart from these they created almost nothing. This against a West Ham with a far from impressive defensive record."
Well, really. Here are some stats from The Guardian:
Goal Attempts: Liverpool 19 West Ham 13 On Target: Liverpool 7 West Ham 9
If you go to Sky Sports, you will notice we had a 65% (that's SIXTY FIVE) possession rate, leaving West Ham with a measly 35% (that's THIRTY FIVE).
Weather Alert ** 82Ahhhh here we go, the Liverpool fans were out for revenge, revenge for when they were attacked the previous year in Italy. At...
So, how do these figures compare with your statements "struggling to contain them", "playing catch up", "very little to offer" and "created almost nothing"?
And please, oh please, explain why "persistent, well-crafted attacks" (you pretentious knob) are more worth than spectacular goals - two of which, btw, took the help of several players to execute (the Cisse and first Gerrard goal)?
We will not hold our breath.
