Liverpool 2-0 Porto: Put Some Respect on The Name

On Tuesday night, Liverpool triumphed 2-0 in the first leg of their quarter-final match against Porto. The fixture, a repeat of last year’s round of sixteen tie, was considered by many to be a formality – no team reaches the last eight in Europe’s elite competition by accident, however, and the Portuguese champions threatened on multiple occasions. A mixture of profligacy on the part of Marega and some important saves by Alisson kept Liverpool’s clean sheet intact, but wasted chances at the other end mean that Klopp’s men cannot go into the second leg with progression as assured as it was last season. Nonetheless, they have put themselves in a strong position to make it to the semi-final; this is a notable accomplishment in any campaign, but to do so while sustaining a challenge for the league title shows just how far this team has come in a short space of time.

The Porto faithful had a haunted look about them when Liverpool took the lead after just five minutes. They had been here before – superior opposition turning up with both skill and luck on their side is a deadly cocktail, one that resulted in a 5-0 humiliation in their own back yard just fourteen months ago. When Keita’s positive drive forward was not tracked and his subsequent shot evaded Casillas courtesy of a huge deflection, there was a feeling that it might be a similarly long night. The players in red appeared to be gripped by a similar vision – at any rate, the waves of pressure remained relentless after going in front.  This made for an entertaining contest, but it exhibited the sort of naivety that is more closely associated with the Liverpool of a year ago. It was the kind of performance that can produce 5-0 wins, but is just as capable of resulting in the squandering of comfortable leads. The second leg of the Roma tie in the semi-final stage of this competition last season come to mind. On this occasion, however, the advantage did grow rather than evaporate: Porto had created and wasted a number of reasonable opportunities, but a glorious sweeping move up the pitch was finished off by Roberto Firmino to double the home side’s lead.

Alexander-Arnold chalked up the assist, but it was Jordan Henderson who truly made the goal. His delightful ball to the full-back gave the youngster the freedom of Anfield in which to pick out Firmino, who was left with the simplest task of the lot. The only surprise was that the Brazilian deigned to look at the ball when steering it in from a matter of yards. Liverpool’s captain has been enjoying himself of late in a more advanced position: Klopp’s growing faith in Fabinho as the sole man in a deeper role has allowed Henderson to move into more natural territory, and Liverpool are reaping the rewards in attack. The ease with which Porto created chances of their own might tempt Klopp into shackling his number fourteen with defensive duties once more when it comes to the Chelsea game at the weekend, but Henderson will feel that he has proved that he can be the answer to Liverpool’s problem of lack of creativity from the midfield.

He was not the only one making his case.

Naby Keita has been steadily growing in influence after a very stuttering start to his Anfield career. The season has been littered with the odd promising cameo, but there has often been a sense that he is playing within himself. The vital equaliser against Southampton, and the evident delight and relief it caused him, looked as though it might prove to be a turning point – even this goal, though, a header at the back post, was not exactly a realisation of the dynamic, all-action Keita that Liverpool fans had been promised. That player arrived against Porto. Per @DanKennett, the Guinean made six tackles, ten recoveries, six dribbles and two key passes – this is before his goal is even mentioned. This array of qualities, the sense that he is doing the job of two men, is what was so eagerly anticipated when Liverpool secured his signature; the recapturing of such form just as Jurgen Klopp’s side reaches the business end of its push for two of the biggest trophies in the sport could not be more well-timed.

Let’s consider that for a moment. It’s April, and the Premier League and Champions League are still very much up for grabs. This is a remarkable feat: on one level it is exactly where Liverpool Football Club belongs, but equally it is essentially unchartered territory in the context of the past two decades. Fans have generally had to content themselves with a push for one or the other, and often neither, and yet some supporters still have the temerity to bemoan the fact that the margin of victory was not so large as to allow players to be rested in the second leg. Of a Champions League last eight clash. That this team is now at the point where a 2-0 triumph in the business end of the European Cup is not a universal source of euphoria, and can even draw criticism, demonstrates the astonishing progress that has been made under Jurgen Klopp. For what it is worth, Liverpool fans should know more than most how fickle fortunes can be in football – there are real reasons to hope that this period of challenging will blossom into a genuine era of great success, but in the mean-time everyone should be consciously striving to enjoy the journey. Nonetheless, the fact that the bar has been so substantially raised is as clear an indication as any that this is a team back amongst the European elite. There is true quality from front to back: enough to dispatch of the likes of Bayern Munich, and to pile pressure on a City side that broke records for fun last season. Henderson’s defiant celebration against Southampton delivered a message to everyone doubting him as an individual, but also to those who doubt the team: it is time to put some respect on the name.

Of course, nothing is won yet, and with opposition of such elite calibre there are no guarantees that the campaign will end with silverware on either front. However, the belief within the team is tangible; not only tangible, but justified. It is hard to deny that the team is one of the best in Europe at the moment - Liverpool will not fear a potential semi-final meeting with Barcelona in the Champions League. On the domestic front, Klopp has nearly steered his side through the toughest spell of the season unscathed – a succession of potentially tricky fixtures while City’s run was favourable could have spelled the end for the title race, but through talent and tenacity Liverpool have relentlessly kept up the pressure. Victory over Chelsea at the weekend in the final against a side from the top six this season would be a massive psychological triumph ahead of Manchester City’s games against Tottenham and Manchester United in the space of a week, but thanks to the efforts of the challengers up to this point the match against Sarri’s men is not make or break in this regard. Whatever happens, the overwhelming feeling towards this team amongst fans must be pride: every last one of the supporters is dreaming of clearing the final hurdle that has proved a stumbling block since 1 

990, but even if it proves too high once more there can be no denying that every single member of the team has given absolutely everything they have. There is no more that can be asked.

- Follow me on Twitter @JamesMartin013

See my latest for Colossus Bets here: https://blog.colossusbets.com/author/james-martin/

PSG 2-1 Liverpool: Post-Match Thoughts

Liverpool travelled to Paris knowing that a win would secure their qualification from a very tough Champions League group. An admittedly formidable opponent stood in their way, but it might have been expected that Klopp’s men could have mustered more than one shot on target in their pursuit of the win that would be so vital. As it was, even that one shot came from the penalty spot. The first half in particular was lacklustre beyond belief; the spot kick at the death gave the visitors a lifeline that was frankly undeserved. There were some signs of improvement in the second period, but the penetration from midfield remained all but non-existent and Liverpool could not force the breakthrough.

There was a quiet pre-match optimism amongst the away fans. PSG are on a remarkable run, but it is not as if they have faced hugely stern challenge in Ligue 1; Liverpool deservedly won the reverse fixture, and knew they were at least in with a realistic chance of getting a result at the Parc des Princes. However, some of this hope was dented before a ball had been kicked – the team sheet revealed a midfield three of Jordan Henderson, James Milner and Gini Wjjnaldum. None of these players are bad: each of them has put in dominant performances in the past that can be brought to mind. Wijnaldum in particular was the heartbeat of the side that overcame Manchester City in last season’s Champions League. However, as a midfield unit, the three of them simply do not work. There is a big question mark over where the creativity will come from, and yet nor is there an out-and-out defensive presence in the mix. Each can keep things ticking over nicely, but with nobody to play the killer ball the entire front three might as well be taken out of the game.

This is essentially how it panned out. For the first forty-five minutes, PSG walked through Liverpool’s midfield as though it were not there: all it took was a string of two or three quick passes before Neymar and Mbappe were bearing down on the defence. This was admittedly not helped by a referee undoubtedly influenced by the home crowd – Liverpool could hardly make a tackle without going in the book – but it would be wrong to blame the officials entirely. Klopp must shoulder a proportion of the criticism; he chose to go with what might generously be called an ‘industrious’ midfield, but all of this industry provided essentially no protection to the back four. If the defence were to be left all but unprotected, the manager may as well have utilised his more creative forces in the shape of Shaqiri and Keita from the outset. Milner was probably the best of a bad bunch, and he coolly converted his penalty when called upon at the end of the half, but frankly none of them played at all well. The match was won and lost in the midfield battle, which in reality was more of a massacre than a fight – even if Verratti had got the red card which his horror-challenge warranted it is doubtful that Liverpool would have claimed the ascendency.

It cannot even be said that the problems were limited to the midfield. Both of PSG’s goals can be traced back to Virgil van Dijk – he can be afforded somewhat more slack given that he has been a colossus all season, but he looked as though he was playing with a hangover during arguably Liverpool’s biggest game of the campaign. The attempted clearance prior to Bernat’s opener was unacceptable at any level; he half-heartedly floated a foot at the ball, which looped up into an even more dangerous position than where it started. His role in Neymar’s goal was just as bad; the whole defence had been drawn out of position as a result of Gomez venturing forwards, but the Dutch centre-back was caught in two minds as to whether to go to the ball or stay with his man and ended up taking himself out of the game altogether. Alisson nearly bailed him out with a remarkable save, one of many that he made on the night, but his compatriot was on hand to tuck home the rebound.

The performance by Alisson was really the only significant positive. He simply had no right to make some of the saves he pulled off, most notably a remarkable reaction stop from a corner – it easy to see why Claudio Taffarel has marked him out as a potential world-beater. On another day, his immense showing would have opened the door for the front three to dig out an undeserved result; the lack of any kind of penetration from midfield did not make their lives easy, but such is their quality that more could reasonably have been expected of them. Mane was at least putting in the graft, and he was rewarded by winning the penalty, but the other two were very much off the boil. Firmino produced a few sharp turns here and there, but his passing was frankly awful in places; Liverpool fans could only watch on, frustrated, as some of their few promising positions were squandered with absurd cheapness. Salah was largely anonymous, and on the one occasion where he managed his trademark cut inside he dragged his shot wide at the near post. That proved to be largely indicative of the evening: chances were few and far between, and when they came they were wasted.

Klopp and his players can take some comfort in the fact that qualification remains in their hands. The permutations regarding the final game against Napoli are a little complex, but essentially either a 1-0 win or any victory by two goals or more will see Liverpool through to the knockout rounds. This is a tough ask, and Ancelotti is a shrewd operator when it comes to protecting an advantage – Istanbul of course stands out as a stark exception, and Anfield will be looking to draw on some of that spirit to will the team on against the Italian side. Liverpool’s home and away form stand in marked contrast so far this campaign: two wins out of two at Anfield, three straight losses on the road in Europe. Klopp has called upon the Kop to make a difference once again. Ultimately, despite the uninspiring Champions League performances so far, this is a side that deserves to be in the last 16. Hopefully the players and manager take a pragmatic approach to this loss, learn from it, and use it to ensure qualification on Matchday 6.

- Follow me on Twitter @JamesMartin013

A reminder that my weekly pieces can be found over at Colossus Bets: https://blog.colossusbets.com/7-points-in-7-days-eibar-to-clear/

VAR and the Law

In the aftermath of VAR’s shambolic outing in Tottenham’s FA Cup meeting with Rochdale in February, Mark Thompson (@EveryTeam_Mark) penned a thought-provoking piece on the need to look at the laws of the game in the same way as the laws of the land. It argued that the rules laid down by the FA are open-textured, and that different valid interpretations are possible within the broad ‘statutory’ limits. This is perfectly true – as the famous professor of jurisprudence H.L.A Hart observed, it is an inevitability of the nature of language that rules will admit of more than one meaning. Further, even when the ‘plain meaning’ reading of a rule is clear, the context may change its application. However, this comparison suffered as a result of the absence of anything in football akin to precedent: once a rule is interpreted by a referee in one way, it is not applied consistently thereafter.

As such, within the context of a critique of VAR, the parallels between law and the rules of football were imperfect. Nonetheless, there is undoubtedly merit in drawing the comparison. The Video Assistant Referee technology most resembles a legal mechanism known as judicial review – this allows courts to check the decisions of officials and strike them down where appropriate. In this scenario, the official is the matchday referee: much can be learned about the legitimate scope of VAR by looking at the grounds upon which courts will interfere with administrative decisions.

The three broad grounds for judicial review, as spelled out by Lord Diplock in the case of GCHQ, are illegality, irrationality and procedural unfairness. The latter two are of only limited use in a footballing context. Procedural unfairness could certainly never function as a basis for overturning an on-pitch official’s decision – the referee is under no obligation to explain the process by which he arrives at a call, and provided it is correct there can be no prospect of a video referee overturning the decision. In other words, any review conducted by VAR is bound to be substantive. This still leaves open the prospect of irrationality; the standard of reasonableness review has changed over time, but it now broadly resembles the doctrine known as ‘proportionality’. This dictates that any decision must be a justifiable way of furthering a legitimate aim in order to be upheld. Perhaps this could be used to assess the validity of refereeing decisions taken in order to ‘let the game flow’, or to pursue other such abstract goals, but once the call of a referee is legal on its face it is generally unlikely to be sufficiently irrational to warrant being overturned.

Illegality is thus by far the most useful concept to consider in relation to VAR, and it moves closer to the points touched upon in Mark Thompson’s initial piece. However, the video referee is not best thought of as an appeal judge looking afresh at the meaning of the relevant law; he is conducting judicial review, examining whether the referee’s decision was one that was appropriate for him to make. When will a referee’s decision be ‘illegal’? Are all decisions that are adjudged to be incorrect inherently beyond the authority of the referee, or do the laws of the game act as empowering statutes that give each referee a degree of discretion? These questions have been considered in the context of judicial review, and the answers that have been given shed some light on the extent to which VAR should interfere.

Judges are always wary of conducting what is known as ‘de novo’ review. Their role is not to ‘substitute judgment’, replacing their own opinion for that of the initial decision maker – rather they must decide on the validity of the first-instance decision-maker’s actions. Prior to a case called Anisminic, only decisions that were outside the jurisdiction of the official in question would be overturned; this is patently too deferential to function in a footballing context, where all of the decisions made by a referee are his to make even if he gets them wrong. Ultimately, it was adjudged to be too deferential for judicial review as well – error of law is now a valid ground for interference. However, this leaves the question of how to define an error of law. The reviewing court cannot simply look at the decision afresh, apply the law as they see it to the facts and foist this verdict upon the initial decision-maker; this would amount in practice to de novo review. Rather, they must take as their starting point the initial decision, and ask whether that falls within the scope of the relevant statute.

This is a tightrope. The court (VAR) are not asking whether the original decision is plausible – if an interpretation is understandable but nonetheless wrong it must still be struck down as illegal. Rather they are asking whether, given the open-textured nature of the law touched upon earlier, the decision can be called wrong at all. Thus, a video referee may disagree with an on-field referee’s call, but nonetheless reach the conclusion that the relevant law admits of both conclusions. Wherever this is the case, VAR should leave the original decision intact. This is not the crude ‘clear and obvious mistake’ standard often bandied about by pundits; it is a standard that advocates correction of all mistakes, but a narrow conception of what is meant by ‘mistake’.  Just as in a legal context the case-load concerns and the desire to uphold the legitimacy of administrative bodies warrants giving the original decision-maker some space within which to operate, the need to keep games flowing and respect the position of the referee necessitates a degree of deference from VAR. Particularly where a decision hinges on standards of ‘recklessness’ or ‘dangerousness’, it is unlikely that a decision could genuinely be called wrong: indeed, Jones v First Tier Tribunal involved the issue of recklessness and returned the verdict that reviewing bodies should be slow to find an error of law.

It is often said that VAR comes into its own when there is an objectively verifiable mistake of fact that needs to be corrected. As luck would have it, this is the precise standard required by judicial review in order to intervene based on an error of fact (E v Home Secretary). Provided a factual error that played a material part in the original decision can be shown, the law says that it is justifiable to overturn that decision. This is where VAR can thrive; in the world of judicial review objectively verifiable errors of fact are a relative rarity, but video technology is excellent at providing such verification in a sporting context. Thus, from a purely legal perspective, there can be few complaints with VAR’s correction of factual mistakes.

In summary, the debate as to the proper extent of VAR bears a striking resemblance to that relating to the appropriate extent of judicial review. This comparison paints the referees as decision-makers empowered by the laws to make decisions; these should only be offset where it can genuinely be said that a decision goes against those laws, or where it has been taken on the basis of a mistake of fact. Whether the footballing context calls for more or less deference, or even for no review at all, is a question that cannot be answered purely by drawing parallels to law - nonetheless, the legal framework provides a good starting point for discussion as to what exactly VAR is trying to achieve.

Salah: Stick or Twist?

Mohamed Salah’s mercurial form last season saw him finish not only as the Golden Boot winner and record goal-scorer in a 38-game season, but as the highest scoring player ever in a Fantasy Premier League season. In response, the powers that be slapped a 13-million-pound price tag on his head for the 2018/19 campaign. Many managers – over 2.4 million of them, in fact – did not think twice about splashing 13% of their budget on the Egyptian. After all, if he even came close to replicating last season’s numbers he would repay the investment in kind. So far, however, he does not look like the Salah of 2017/18. A number of squandered chances has left many people’s patience running thin, but the big question is this: stick or twist?

Let’s start by looking at the raw numbers. After seven games last season, Salah had netted four times in the league and assisted two further goals. Arsenal and Manchester City were the stand-out games in a relatively kind run; this allows for a near-direct comparison to this campaign, where Liverpool’s fixture list has thrown up tough clashes against Chelsea and Spurs in amongst some more routine matches. In these seven games, Salah has notched three goals and two assists: the numbers are nearly identical to last year. Of course, the missed chances last season could be explained away as a period of adaptation for Salah at his new club – with this excuse no longer available, it is natural to ask whether this relatively pedestrian start by Salah’s high standards is set to continue beyond the opening few games. However, it is at the very least reassuring for Salah owners that he is pretty much on par with the start he made to his record-breaking campaign.

It is also true that Salah’s squandering of big chances is nothing new. It was well-publicised, mostly by jealous opposition fans, that Mohamed Salah missed the most clear-cut chances out of anybody in the league last season – he was scoring for fun, but was missing his fair share too. This started from the very first game at Watford, where he probably should have had a debut hattrick; it is a product of Liverpool’s high-octane attacking play. There were fantasy managers at the time who were scared away by this wastefulness, but they were quickly made to rue it. A huge part of Salah’s appeal lies in his movement and unerring ability to get on the end of chances. The most important question is whether he has continued to do so this season. He undoubtedly has: the wastefulness that has so frustrated his owners in FPL is equally a sign that he is still doing everything right bar the finishing. This is little consolation to those who have seen a damning ‘4’ by the name of their captain for three of the last four weeks, but it should discourage these owners from selling. Every indication is that the goals will soon come.

This theory is backed up by the upturn in Liverpool’s fixtures in the near future. While it has not been the most taxing start ever faced, Klopp’s side have had the toughest fixtures of any of the top four so far. A difficulty calculation based on league positions puts Liverpool on seventy-five points, while Chelsea are on 60 and City sit on a mere 45.  After they face their biggest test yet at the weekend against Guardiola’s men, things start to look a lot more promising for Liverpool in terms of points potential. A run of Huddersfield, Cardiff, Arsenal, Fulham and Watford is about as good as it gets for Klopp’s side – each are set up with vulnerabilities just waiting to be exploited by Liverpool, and any one of those matches could plausibly end up with the Reds netting four or five. Even after this, a sequence of Watford, Everton, Burnley and Bournemouth awaits: the points potential here is perhaps slightly less huge, but the difference is marginal. If there was a time to sell Salah, it was surely three weeks ago rather than on the cusp of one of the kindest runs any top side will ever face.

However, there are of course valid concerns about hanging on to Salah. Most of them are the same ones that existed before a ball was even kicked – £13 million is a huge proportion of the budget, and there might well be better ways to spend it. The goalscoring form of Sadio Mane makes him a viable alternative for a saving of around 3 million, while Eden Hazard is scoring excellently for Chelsea. Kevin de Bruyne’s return will provide another premium option, and Raheem Sterling appears to be a regular in City’s setup once more after a relatively gradual reintroduction to the team following World Cup duty. Equally, sacrificing Salah for a more budget midfielder is one obvious way of accommodating both Kane and Aguero up front: experience teaches us that this is a pretty reliable front two. There is no easy answer, just as there was no one correct way of doing things right from the start: what is clear is that if Salah is to be rejected on the basis of his relative lack of value, it should not be a decision informed too heavily by his relatively steady start.

There is one fresh concern that has only arisen since the start of the new season, and which may be enough to tip the balance for some people in favour of getting rid of Salah. Rotation of Liverpool’s front three was already likely around European matches, particularly since they acquired more depth in the squad over the course of a positive summer. Specifically, Xherdan Shaqiri’s arrival from Stoke posed a minor risk to the reliability of Salah’s league minutes – this was only a slight concern, however, given that the man dubbed the Egyptian King seemed nigh-on undroppable based on his form from the end of the last campaign. This is no longer the case, as seen by Klopp’s withdrawal of Salah after 65 minutes against Chelsea. Perhaps even more significant is the remarkable renaissance of Daniel Sturridge. His recent form demands game time, and over the course of the kind run of league games he is bound to be handed some starts; this could be at the expense of any one of the front three, or else in a 4-2-3-1 that accommodates all of them, but there is no denying that his resurgence places more question marks than ever before over the safety of Salah’s consistent place in the side. On its own this concern is not great enough to prompt owners to sell, as Salah will surely continue to feature in the vast majority of games, but it is another thing to think about when weighing up the various pros and cons.

On the whole, it would be wise for Salah owners to give him at least a few more weeks. His underlying performances promise a glut of goals before too long, and a very kind run of fixtures might be precisely what is needed to get him back on the sort of form that saw him priced at £13 million in the first place. The fact that others are panic-selling only increases his appeal – Salah as a differential is an exciting prospect. There are many tempting ways of spending the savings from leaving him out, and some of these alternatives may end up being the better way forward, but even with all of his misses it is a fairly safe bet that Salah will ultimately deliver for those that keep him.

Check out my other recent pieces:
Ruben de la Red: https://footyanalyst.com/ruben-de-la-red-a-legends-career-cut-short/

Colossus weekly columns:
1. https://blog.colossusbets.com/7-points-in-7-days-5/

2. https://blog.colossusbets.com/james-martins-seven-points-in-seven-days-2

Duology: Suarez and Sturridge

All the world is a stage, but Luis Suarez and Daniel Sturridge were more than merely players. In 2013/14, their only full season together, the two combined to produce sheer theatre of the sort rarely seen before on a football pitch: Suarez the anti-hero, Sturridge the flawed genius. Ultimately it was not an Achilles Heel but an Achilles tendon that brought the latter down, while the Uruguayan left for Barcelona without a Premier League medal and with yet another scandal hanging over him – it transpired that the campaign was destined, in the end, to be a Greek tragedy. However, though the partnership collapsed, the memories endure; Liverpool has seen some truly wonderful footballers in its long history, but Suarez and Sturridge can stake a claim as two of the greatest ever.

It is tempting, with hindsight, to diminish the impact of Sturridge in the whirlwind 13/14 campaign. This would be to do a gross disservice both to Sturridge as an individual and to the near-telepathic connection that the two built up. Suarez, of course, is one of the most gifted forwards ever to grace a football pitch, but without Sturridge there would be no title charge about which to reminisce. The English forward led the line himself in Suarez’s enforced absence at the start of the campaign; he scored all three goals in three consecutive 1-0 wins, clearly laying out his credentials as a world class striker in his own right. His subsequent terrible injury luck has clouded the memory of many, but make no mistake: the undisputed best English centre-forward at the time plied his trade at Anfield.

The results of throwing a volatile South American into the mix were predictably seismic. Each was equally capable of picking the other out or taking on their marker with consummate ease, and the movement was simply impossible to defend against – a visibly less-than-fit Suarez returned from his ban against Sunderland, and managed to score two goals simply by virtue of getting on the end of Sturridge passes. Many frustrating minutes wasted out on the wing at Chelsea came to fruition in these moments, as Sturridge effortlessly drifted to the byline before instinctively picking out Suarez in the middle. Despite having just half of the previous season to get acquainted, the pair seemed to intuitively occupy the same wavelength: this was an enviable gift indeed, and defenders were certainly rarely able to enjoy similar premonitions as to what was coming next from either of them. Countless established defenders and goalkeepers were made to look foolish over the course of the season – there was little to be done when the pair descended upon a back line. Sure enough, while Sunderland were occupied with Luis Suarez at the back post at a corner, Sturridge added a goal to his two assists in the 3-1 win at the Stadium of Light. This two-man show proved to be a sign of things to come.

Part of the beauty of the partnership that came to be known as ‘SAS’ was the way in which it harnessed a certain volatility to such deadly effect. The two strikers undeniably struck a chord, but it was at times a jarring one – scoring was the currency of both forwards, and a kind of rivalry developed. If one decided to go up a level, the other instantly responded with a refusal to be outdone. A game against West Bromwich Albion sticks particularly firmly in the mind. Suarez had wrapped the result up almost on his own. He opened the scoring with a trademark winding run through the entire defence, followed by a powerful finish into the corner. The second was just as admirable; a fairly average cross meant that Suarez had to meet the ball at a near stand-still, but he somehow managed to generate enough power on his header to beat the goalkeeper. The hattrick was completed with a second header, a delicate glance into the far post from a corner. A visible change came over Sturridge, as he started to play entirely off pure goal-scorer’s instinct; he was not going to fail to get a goal on a day when his partner had managed three. Sure enough, he found his way on to the scoresheet by upstaging all of Suarez’ strikes – he went on a powerful run of his own before lifting the ball delightfully over Ben Foster from twenty yards out. Cue the ‘wriggly arms’, an enduring image from Sturridge’s time at the pinnacle of the game. Very few players would have even spotted the keeper marginally off his line; the technique to execute the chip to perfection was simply outrageous, and ensured that Sturridge shared the headlines.

That is not to say that the pair were selfish, or at least not overly so. They were undeniably single-minded, and would never pass up a goal when presented with the opportunity, but this is what made them so good – the reason these chances came along with such regularity in the first place is that Suarez and Sturridge kept laying them on for one another. Many classic partnerships have had a playmaker and a finisher, or some variation on the ‘big man, little man’ approach that so dominated the thinking of English coaches in the 1990s: not these two. They were both complete forwards, equally adept at producing something out of nothing and converting the chances when they came.

Indeed, the partnership that developed was almost transactional – an assist created more than a goal, it created a debt. It merited a response in kind, often an immediate one: in away matches at Stoke and Cardiff, in which Liverpool scored a combined eleven goals, Sturridge laid on goals for the Uruguayan only to be presented with tap-ins of his own later in the same games. Invariably, this would prompt a celebration almost as iconic as the wriggly arms: Sturridge would turn and point at the provider, who would be pointing back at him with a look of unbridled joy etched on his face. The elation was about a goal for the team, of course, but beyond that it was about the restoration of equilibrium between the strikers.

There was no such parity by the end of the season in terms of goal and assist tallies – Suarez ultimately found a level with which even Sturridge was not quite on par, finishing with an astounding 31 goals and 13 assists despite missing the start of the campaign. He was second only to Steven Gerrard in assists, and led the second-highest scorer by ten clear goals. Who was this second-placed man? Daniel Sturridge. These statistics make it all the more remarkable that Liverpool did not win the league; it is a historical anomaly, and one that does a disservice to a front two who are almost unrivalled across the entire Premier League era in their brilliance. Suarez had thrown absolutely everything he had into the campaign, and his tears after Crystal Palace were those of a man who has done everything within his power but still fallen short. Even before the unpleasant side of his utter single-mindedness reared its head at the World Cup in the form of a bite on Giorgio Chiellini, a move away from Anfield seemed inevitable.

This same World Cup provided one fitting last act in the Suarez and Sturridge relationship. England were drawn in the same group as Uruguay, which meant that the two forwards who had thrived so much together would now have to do battle on the biggest stage. Again, this was almost irresistible theatre: the two men had just endured the pain of falling short in the Premier League together, and now it fell to one of them to inflict a final blow on the other.  It was Suarez who would emerge victorious, scoring twice to eliminate Sturridge and England from the competition. This final severance of the ever-unsteady bond between the two signified the end of a partnership that burned bright but ultimately burned out.

Sturridge remained at Liverpool in 2014/15, but a combination of awful misfortune with injuries and the club’s utter failure to adequately replace Suarez cruelly limited the influence he could exert – all that was left of the SAS was a memory. It is inevitable that this casts a shadow over the partnership, but it would be an immense shame if the pair were lost from the archives of the best footballing duos in history. Circumstance transpired to bring them together in a team that was otherwise simply not equipped to push for the league, and they were ultimately dragged down, but this cannot erase the mesmerising connection shared by the two strikers. Who can forget Suarez’s remarkable four-goal haul against Norwich, or Sturridge’s delicate chip over an onrushing Tim Howard in the derby? These are the things that fans pay to go and see: it cannot be denied that Suarez and Sturridge were the ultimate crowd-pleasers. This, and not the circumstances in which it all fell apart, should be their legacy.

First published on These Football Times as part of the Duology series: https://thesefootballtimes.co/category/duology-footballs-greatest-partnerships/

Follow me on Twitter @JamesMartin013

Duology: Henry and Bergkamp

Dennis Bergkamp... Dennis Bergkamp… Dennis Bergkamp! The Dutchman cannot be mentioned without this immortal piece of commentary from the 1998 World Cup coming to mind, but at club level his name was seldom heard without being closely followed by that of his strike partner, Thierry Henry. At the same tournament, the young Frenchman was bursting on to the international scene: at just twenty years of age he ended up as top scorer for his country, who of course went on to win the trophy. A defeat on penalties for the Netherlands at the hands of Brazil meant that the pair were not destined to meet in the final - it would be another year before they united at Arsenal, forming a partnership that would shape the club for the next seven seasons.

In fact, the year preceding his move to Arsenal was a tough one for Thierry Henry. He could not recreate his form for Monaco and France at new club Juventus, where he was forced to play wide against defences far more disciplined than those he had grown accustomed to facing. Bergkamp, meanwhile, was having no such problems at the English club – he achieved the impressive feat of reaching double figures in the league in both goals and assists, only missing out on the title on the final day of the season. This success was coming under the tutelage of Arsene Wenger, who had given Henry his senior debut for Monaco five years previously. He opted to gamble upon the striker once more following his tough spell in Italy, paying a club record fee for the forward: the decision proved to be one of his best.

The connection between Henry and Bergkamp, which grew to be almost telepathic, was not instantaneous. The strong form of Kanu, an out-and-out striker if ever there was one, thwarted any hopes of a regular pairing up front between the Dutchman and the new acquisition – Wenger started the season with all three of them, shifting Henry out wide to accommodate all of the talent, but settled upon rotation as the policy for much of the campaign. None of the trio surpassed twenty-six league starts. Nonetheless, there were glimpses of what was to come; on an individual level it was an excellent campaign for Henry, who managed seventeen league goals, while Bergkamp exerted much creative influence as well as chipping in with six league goals of his own. The team never looked capable of posing a threat to Manchester United, however, who won the league by a very comfortable margin of 18 points.

In many ways it was a similar story in the following season. As if starting places had not been hard enough to come by already, Robert Pires and Sylvain Wiltord were added to the strike force. This surfeit of attacking talent was particularly damaging to Bergkamp – he was reduced to fewer than twenty league starts, and managed just three goals on the way to another runners-up finish for The Gunners. At thirty years of age, it seemed likely that his time at Arsenal was coming to an end: fans were left ruing the fact that Henry had not come to Highbury just a little sooner, as another seventeen-goal haul had established him as a firm favourite amongst the fans. The prospect of him in a partnership with Bergkamp in his prime was a tantalising one, but appeared to be little more than a pipe dream. However, this failed to account for the remarkable renaissance of the Dutchman.

2001/02 marked the start of the golden age for Arsenal under Wenger. Plenty of purists argue that this was truly the best Arsenal side of the last two decades, surpassing even The Invincibles that were to come two seasons later. Central to the success were Thierry Henry and Dennis Bergkamp, finally playing together up front as a bona fide duo. It was Wiltord who transitioned into a wider role to allow the partnership to flourish, and the result was arguably the most iconic strike partnership of the Premier League era.

Each knew his role: Bergkamp was the creator, calling upon his wealth of experience to lay on chance after chance for the finisher, Henry. This came naturally to the Frenchman – he tucked away twenty-four goals in the league to secure the Golden Boot. More impressive than individual accolades, however, was the league title. The pair combined to help finally wrest the trophy from the hands of Manchester United, to whom they had been runners-up for the previous two seasons. Some moments of sheer inspiration took place along the way, not least amongst which was one of the goals in a 2-0 away win over Newcastle. Bergkamp, so often the provider, found the net himself with a goal that epitomised his supreme talent. Having received the pass from Robert Pires, he deftly flicked the ball past defender Nikos Dabizas; he then went around his man on the other side, but instinctively knew where his own flick would end up and latched on to it before slotting it past the goalkeeper. Ironically, Henry was absent through injury for this moment of magic – however, it encapsulated the joy and creativity upon which the partnership thrived.

This, surely, was a final heroic send-off for Bergkamp. It had been a remarkable campaign, during which he and Henry had combined in ways that moved the parameters of what it meant to form an effective pairing up front, but the veteran was now 33. Unbelievably, however, he was not done yet. Henry, meanwhile, was truly hitting his prime. As Bergkamp amazed by refusing to burn out, the French forward’s star shone brighter than ever: the 2002/03 campaign saw him end on an astounding 32 goals and 23 assists in all competitions, finishing runner-up for the World Player of the Year award. As a team, Arsenal were unable to retain their title – they did take home another FA Cup, however. The mutual admiration that the pair had for each other could be seen both on and off the pitch – Henry has declared Bergkamp the best player that he has ever played with, while the Dutch maestro insisted that his strike partner was “the complete package”.

In truth, though, the package was only ever complete when the two played together. Each was blessed with their own immense individual talent, but the combination took them onto a new plain altogether. Indeed, in the 2003/04 season, the whole team were propelled to something never achieved before or since in the Premier League. Much ink has been spilled over The Invincibles season, but in truth the headline record speaks for itself: an entire league campaign unbeaten. It would be a disservice to the phenomenal squad that Wenger assembled to place all of the praise on the duo of Bergkamp and Henry, but they were undoubtedly the talismans. In a team of greatness, the master and his apprentice stood out. Henry, by now, had become the more important of the pair, but Bergkamp still featured in well over two-thirds of the games on the way to the unprecedented feat – he sealed the team’s immortal place in folklore by setting up the winner in the final game of the season against Leicester.

The next two seasons proved to be the swansong for the clinical partnership. Bergkamp, fittingly, was beginning the process of passing the torch to another Dutchman: Robin van Persie had arrived on the scene, and had started to turn heads very quickly. Nonetheless, Bergkamp still had a wealth of talent to offer – in the final game of 2004/05 he scored once and laid on three assists in a 7-0 routing of Everton, and was met with chants of “one more year”. This was quite the vote of confidence in the longevity of a now-36-year-old Bergkamp. It was in this campaign that Henry overtook Ian Wright as Arsenal’s all-time top scorer – it is no coincidence that he, and Wright before him, achieved this impressive record with Bergkamp providing the service. That is not to downplay Henry’s talent as an individual: he hit 25 and 27 league goals respectively in the last two seasons with his partner, reinforcing his status as one of the all-time great goal-scorers. It was little surprise when, a year after Berkgamp’s retirement, Henry moved to a Barcelona side emerging as one of the greatest club outfits ever assembled.  

There was some poetry in the fact that Bergkamp’s career, and with it his beautiful partnership with Henry, came to an end in the same year that the club finished its time at Highbury. Arsenal had been based there since 1913 – the exploits of Henry and Bergkamp were a final flourish in an illustrious list of achievements at the ground stretching back nearly a hundred years. The stadium is no more, the ground upon which it once stood now a block of flats; the memories live on, however, memorialised in the minds of the fans who experienced such joy there. In much the same way, although Bergkamp eventually had to call time on his remarkable career, his partnership with Henry is an immortal one: it will forever be remembered as one of football’s greatest duos.

First published on These Football Times as part of the Duology series: https://thesefootballtimes.co/category/duology-footballs-greatest-partnerships/

Follow me on Twitter @JamesMartin013

Duology: Gerrard and Torres

Steven Gerrard, more than most, is familiar with Liverpool’s revolving door of strikers. His illustrious career saw him take to the pitch with Robbie Fowler, Michael Owen and Luis Suarez, along with many more who cannot claim to be such household names. One by one, each came and went – the captain remained, doggedly turning in performance after performance even as the team around him was in constant flux.

The same fate would ultimately befall the partnership that Gerrard struck up with another forward to come to Anfield; he, like the supporters, could only watch on in horror as Fernando Torres departed for Stamford Bridge in January 2011. However, in the three and a half years prior to this frustratingly familiar end, Gerrard and Torres created something altogether unfamiliar. The unique partnership between the English midfielder and the Spanish forward is still revered on the Kop to this day.

There was huge optimism at Liverpool from the moment Torres signed in the summer of 2007. The 22-year-old had been top scorer at Atletico Madrid for each of their last five La Liga seasons, and had been entrusted with the captaincy since 19. Excitement on Merseyside reached fever pitch when his captain’s armband came loose one game to reveal four words on the inside: You’ll Never Walk Alone. In fact, this had little to do with Liverpool’s anthem, instead referring to the motto that he and a group of friends had adopted, but it reinforced the feeling that Torres belonged at Anfield.

This feeling would only grow following the Spaniard’s start to life at the club. It was immediately apparent that this was the player Gerrard had been crying out for – the instantaneous understanding between the pair was almost beyond belief. As early as his home debut against Chelsea, Torres profited from his first Gerrard assist; the captain set him free with a typically inch-perfect pass, and the striker ghosted beyond Tal Ben Haim before curling the ball effortlessly beyond Petr Cech.

This was a sight to which Liverpool fans would become accustomed. Perhaps the greatest passer of a generation working in tandem with a forward whose movement terrified defences was enough to undo almost any opponent in the path of Benitez’ side; it would take just a month for Torres to complete his first hattrick for the club. Who should set him free of the entire Reading back line for the crowning third goal? Steven Gerrard, of course. In many ways it is hard to pick out the highlights of this pairing, because so many of the great goals were almost carbon copies – even after these first few weeks defences knew exactly what they could expect, but they were helpless to prevent it.

Premier League, Europe, it didn’t matter. The duo was all-conquering: Torres scored his first Champions League goals in a crucial meeting with Porto, converting a Gerrard corner early on before slotting away another chance in the 78^th minute. This highlighted his double-threat; few players have been able to boast such a lethal right foot as well as a major aerial presence. Gerrard himself scored from the spot and registered another assist, this time for Crouch, on the way to a 4-1 victory. Together, the pair dragged Liverpool through a tricky group stage. All too regularly it would fall to the duo to deliver results on their own, but more often than not they managed to do so.

It would be a mistake solely to cast Gerrard as the provider and Torres as the finisher. Amongst his array of talents, Gerrard was a consummate goal-scorer in his prime: El Niño was not often the one laying on goals for others, but when he did do so it was invariably the captain steaming in to apply the finishing touch. This is reflected in the numbers from their debut season together, where the two combined to score a remarkable 54 times. This was enough for 4^th in the league as well as an eventual run to the Champions League semi-finals.

Ultimately, this was an era in which Liverpool were destined to continually fall just short of glory. In the following campaign, 2008/09, Gerrard and Torres came agonisingly close to the Premier League title that their partnership warranted, but the side could only manage second behind Manchester United despite amassing 86 points. It was cruel that injuries restricted the number of games the pair could play together – the two of them featured in the same starting line-up just twelve times. In a season where the title slipped away as a result of too many frustrating draws, the trophy would surely have found its way to Anfield had the duo been able to play together on even a few more occasions.

As it is, there is no silverware to commemorate the time Gerrard and Torres shared at Liverpool. Off-the-pitch problems at the club began to bubble to the surface in 2009/10 – Xabi Alonso’s departure ended up being the first of many over the course of the next two years, as an array of talent flocked away from what was turning out to be a sinking ship. An ownership dispute that ultimately had to be settled in court sent the club into chaos.

Despite all of this, El Niño managed 22 goals; Gerrard, meanwhile, contributed twelve goals and thirteen assists. It is testament to their partnership that they could produce these figures essentially on their own, at a time when the team around them was collapsing in on itself. Even these two greats did not have the capabilities to deliver trophies at such a turbulent time in Liverpool’s history, but they continued to deliver memories that last to this day.

One goal in particular that is embedded in the minds of supporters came against Everton: it was Gerrard who scored it, charging on to the end of a delightfully improvised flick from Torres to fire past the keeper at his near post. This epitomised the telepathy between the pair – each knew where the other was going, and they were both blessed with the ability to pick the pass. This has since led Torres to declare that Gerrard was “by far the best player [he has] ever played with”. The feeling is mutual: Gerrard has called the Spaniard “an absolute joy and pleasure to play behind”. Though they may have come together at the wrong time in the club’s history, the fact that they came together at all is something worthy of celebrating.

For some, even the memories are now tarnished. The tale of Gerard and Torres cannot be told without reference to the sudden and acrimonious split of January 2011 – murmurings in the background exploded into harsh reality on deadline day, as Torres completed a move to Chelsea. That the switch was to a team which he had repeatedly helped put to the sword was particularly painful: in the context of Liverpool’s bitter rivalry with Chelsea in the preceding few years, this felt like a final concession of defeat. In a cruel twist of fate, the move ultimately signalled the start of a torrid spell for both Torres and Liverpool – El Niño never recreated anything like his best form in London, while his former employers underwent a testing rebuilding phase that is only now truly coming to fruition.

A majority of fans have now made their peace with Torres. Much as it was too painful to admit at the time, nobody could be blamed for wanting to leave the club in that period – the circumstances surrounding the move were far from ideal, and certainly left a sour taste, but such things are sometimes unavoidable. It would be a shame to erase from the history books the sheer joy of the partnership that he struck up with Steven Gerrard; he took one of the greatest midfielders of all time and allowed him to reach new levels, and the result was a privilege to witness. No matter where he has been since, he will always be Fernando Torres, Liverpool’s Number 9.

There was one last bow for the duo at Gerrard’s testimonial in 2016. Anfield rose to welcome back the man who was once a favourite son; all is not quite forgotten, but is mostly forgiven. The connection was still there for all to see – Torres twice flicked the ball through to a rampaging Gerrard in a manner almost painfully reminiscent of that goal against Everton more than seven years previously. The match also brought to the fore the haunting thought of what might have been; Luis Suarez, who had also happily taken up the invitation to return to Anfield to honour Gerrard’s phenomenal career, wreaked havoc alongside Torres. The last decade has seen some exceptional talent at Liverpool, but rarely all together in one place.

Gerrard and Torres, though, did hit their primes together at Liverpool. Had the union occurred a couple of years earlier or later, who knows what might have been for the side; it is foolish to dwell on these hypotheticals, however, when the football actually produced by the pair was magical in its own right. Torres did ultimately end up as another striker through the revolving door, but in all Gerrard’s seventeen years at the club he never had a better partner.

First published on These Football Times as part of the Duology series: https://thesefootballtimes.co/category/duology-footballs-greatest-partnerships/

Follow me on Twitter @JamesMartin013

See my Colossus Bets round-ups of the past two weeks in football here:
https://blog.colossusbets.com/28082019/

https://blog.colossusbets.com/kane-breaks-the-august-curse-its-7-points-in-7-days/