Chelsea vs Liverpool - A Fascinating Stat

If Liverpool beat Chelsea on sunday, it will be their 4th back-to-back win at Stamford bridge.
0-1 W (Feb '11)
1-2 W (Nov '11)
0-2 W (Nov '11- League Cup)

The last time Liverpool won 4 or more back to back games at Anfield, it goes back to Jan/Feb/March/Apr of 2010, last year under Benitez when they won 9 consecutive games at Anfield (in all competitions).
2-0 W vs Spurs
2-0 W vs Bolton
1-0 W vs Everton
1-0 W vs Uniera
2-1 W vs Blackburn
4-1 W vs Portsmouth
3-0 W vs Lille
3-0 W vs Sunderland
4-1 W vs Benfica
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 years and 9 months, since 4 back to back wins at our own stadium, and we can repeat it at Chelsea's

Shame it won't happen though. 3-1 loss waiting

Yeah right, nice reserve jinx.

Although no Lucas maybe we have a chance, but some scrub always turns up to perform. I expect Suarez to rape Luiz and Jonjo to score a hattrick.

Liverpool are our bogey team.

Liverpool will win 3-1.

Liverpool will lose 4-1 with Torres scoring a hattrick.

Chelsea fans will love him "again" for approximately six months before they turn on him again.

ynwa wrote:Liverpool will lose 4-1 with Torres scoring a hattrick.

Chelsea fans will love him "again" for approximately six months before they turn on him again.

that tool has just as much chance of scoring a hat-trick vs liverpool as Petr Cech does, and even if by some miracle he does it wont be heaily due to his "brilliance"

fingers crossed Sturridge starts but i doubt he will

No chance we are gonna win this, Would be more than pleased with a draw.

Chelsea 4-1/3-1 Liverpool.
Suarez will score, But so will Torres

Cashley out for the clash...

^ well, It's good news for sure. because neither Mata nor Hazard track back much, so if we could create a 2 vs 1, with Johnson and Suso/Sterling doubling up on Bertrand we may find some good openings.


Though, I am sure we'll concede at least 1-2 goals since Allen can't single handedly handle Mata,Hazard,Oscar.

where are you Lucas when we need you

Schweini wrote:^ well, It's good news for sure. because neither Mata nor Hazard track back much, so if we could create a 2 vs 1, with Johnson and Suso/Sterling doubling up on Bertrand we may find some good openings.


Though, I am sure we'll concede at least 1-2 goals since Allen can't single handedly handle Mata,Hazard,Oscar.

where are you Lucas when we need you

You'd have to be as fast and accurate as Shaktar on the counter and in general to REALLY exploit Cole's absence.

I've a feeling it's time for us to taste defeat at Stamford Bridge, but still wishing the match was already tomorrow!

My bet for Chelseas victory has been already made. Hope I win now

I think Chelsea will win 2-1/2-0/1-0.

However Liverpool usually do well against Chelsea/big teams and that might continue.

I dont think it will continue.

Lost to Arsenal, Drew with City, Lost to Utd.

Chelsea 3 - 5 Liverpool

Liverpool have looked great against the big clubs, which is the only reason I think anyone who wants off the Rodgers bandwagon is crazy.

The problem with Liverpool is they need to take care of business against the middle and lower ends of the EPL table. However, despite the manager, hasn't that been the Liverpool story of the last few years?

fatman123 wrote:
fingers crossed Sturridge starts but i doubt he will

Damn.

I would much rather Sturridge starts than Fernando. Please start Daniel lad.

Torres would definitely want to fix his goal to game ratio. He may have scored more goals against Chelsea than he has for them. /triestobegoallegacylegendbytrolling

Motogp69 wrote:Liverpool have looked great against the big clubs, which is the only reason I think anyone who wants off the Rodgers bandwagon is crazy.

The problem with Liverpool is they need to take care of business against the middle and lower ends of the EPL table. However, despite the manager, hasn't that been the Liverpool story of the last few years?

That really isn't the case this season. We've lost to Arsenal and United (robbed.) and drew with Man City.

But yeah, every manager since Hou has found it difficult against the "lesser" sides rather than the "big" teams. Well, bar Roy, though he did beat Chelsea at Anfield thanks to Fernando Torres.

Blue Barrett wrote:You'd have to be as fast and accurate as Shaktar on the counter and in general to REALLY exploit Cole's absence.

I do rate Bertrand, but if he doesn't get help he may find it difficult with Suso and Johnson double-teaming him. Hazard has been really lazy with tracking back.

Nishank wrote:No chance we are gonna win this, Would be more than pleased with a draw.

Chelsea 4-1/3-1 Liverpool.
Suarez will score, But so will Torres

Nish, your pessimistic attitude is making me worried. I miss the old positive Nishie.

ynwa wrote:
Nish, your pessimistic attitude is making me worried. I miss the old positive Nishie.

Nothing seems to work nowadays, I have faith, But its long term.

I have trouble knowing what to expect from this match. We do tend to step up for "big matches" (Chelsea in particular). However, we've also failed to convince for the full 90 mins, yet. We can play with anyone in the league. The problem is still remaining focused for a full 90 and not giving away "stupid" chances. Perhaps this is a symptom of youth, a new system, or a combination of the two, but it bit us in the bum against Man City, Man Utd (extenuating circumstances), Sunderland, Udinese, and most recently Anzhi.

On the one hand, I think we're capable of exploiting a rather static CB pairing of Cahill-Terry and an untested full-back pairing of Bertrand-Azpilicueta. Even so, I think the best we can hope for offensively is a goal... maybe a lucky second. Let's face it; the cutting edge just hasn't been there recently. For us to take this, at least one of Suso, Sterling, Sahin or Gerrard will have to be on their game and likely score. On the other hand, we would still have to limit Chelsea to a single goal at most. I'm not sure our concentration/comfort-level is at a point where we can deal with Mata, Oscar, Hazard, and Torres. Let's not underestimate our former #9. He may be out of form, but he's not missing the sitters this year. If Mata, Hazard and Oscar create something, he will be lurking in the area, hoping to feast on the scraps. Because of this, I have trouble seeing us come away with more than a point. That said, stranger things have happened.

ynwa wrote:

fatman123 wrote:
fingers crossed Sturridge starts but i doubt he will

Damn.

I would much rather Sturridge starts than Fernando. Please start Daniel lad.

Torres would definitely want to fix his goal to game ratio. He may have scored more goals against Chelsea than he has for them. /triestobegoallegacylegendbytrolling

Motogp69 wrote:Liverpool have looked great against the big clubs, which is the only reason I think anyone who wants off the Rodgers bandwagon is crazy.

The problem with Liverpool is they need to take care of business against the middle and lower ends of the EPL table. However, despite the manager, hasn't that been the Liverpool story of the last few years?

That really isn't the case this season. We've lost to Arsenal and United (robbed.) and drew with Man City.

But yeah, every manager since Hou has found it difficult against the "lesser" sides rather than the "big" teams. Well, bar Roy, though he did beat Chelsea at Anfield thanks to Fernando Torres.

I didn't say anything about winning or losing, but your best soccer has been played against the best teams. However, you should of done the business against United and City.

Motogp69 wrote:I didn't say anything about winning or losing, but your best soccer has been played against the best teams. However, you should of done the business against United and City.

I personally have to disaagree with this.

We have been pretty consistent against most teams this season. We're just not very clinical infront of goal. I do feel you're saying we've performed better because it's been more free-flowing football against the bigger sides as they don't play with 10-men behind the ball. But on the majority, we have performed against most sides.

ynwa wrote:

Motogp69 wrote:I didn't say anything about winning or losing, but your best soccer has been played against the best teams. However, you should of done the business against United and City.

I personally have to disaagree with this.

We have been pretty consistent against most teams this season. We're just not very clinical infront of goal. I do feel you're saying we've performed better because it's been more free-flowing football against the bigger sides as they don't play with 10-men behind the ball. But on the majority, we have performed against most sides.

To go on what ynwa said, we've only been outperformed once against Arsenal. Quite frankly, we've been the better side on all of our other matches.

Messiah "Aggerswagger" wrote:

ynwa wrote:

Motogp69 wrote:I didn't say anything about winning or losing, but your best soccer has been played against the best teams. However, you should of done the business against United and City.

I personally have to disaagree with this.

We have been pretty consistent against most teams this season. We're just not very clinical infront of goal. I do feel you're saying we've performed better because it's been more free-flowing football against the bigger sides as they don't play with 10-men behind the ball. But on the majority, we have performed against most sides.

To go on what ynwa said, we've only been outperformed once against Arsenal. Quite frankly, we've been the better side on all of our other matches.

Well id say against WestBrom Liverpool played very badly aswell