Four Basic Reasons Why Liverpool Lost to Manchester United

Depending on your Liverpool/Manchester United stance, Liverpool either did well enough during the course of the game to take a point yesterday, or they were lucky to pull back the two goals and the late winner was fully deserved. But one point which can be agreed on: Liverpool didn't do enough to try to win the game. There was not enough attacking intent. The team was far too happy to sit back and try to soak up pressure.

Problem is, they didn't do that well enough either.

Berbatov has been praised to the high heavens for his display yesterday against Liverpool, but from a Reds point of view, all three goals were so easily preventable.

Stop The Crosses

Really, it was shocking yesterday how many times Manchester United managed to put over dangerous crosses. Johnson and Konchesky failed, time and time again, to get close to their wingers, and Nani in particular delivered a steady stream of high balls into the box which, for the third game running, Skrtel and Carragher seemed helpless to stem.

Teams are picking up on this! For the life of me I can't understand why they were given so much space to keep throwing in the crosses. It was like Konchesky was afraid to get too close to Nani in case he went down looking for a free kick or penalty - perhaps understandable, as when Daniel Agger had the temerity to stand next to him, the Portuguese flyer threw himself to the ground in an utterly embarrassing attempt to win a late penalty.

After twenty minutes I had already lost count of the number of times United had fired balls in from the wing, and Hodgson must have been half-tempted to make a double substitution already - Kyrgiakos and Agger for Konchesky and the again-anonymous-Maxi. Putting Carragher and Agger at full backs would have stopped the wingers from getting so much room, while Kyrgiakos in the centre would've been ten times more effective in the air than either Reds centre back was yesterday.

The second goal illustrated this. Konchesky actively tried to show Nani inside on his left foot instead of running down the wing on his favoured right foot, an old and accepted trick for full backs, but utterly wasted here, given that Nani is very comfortable on his left and also because Konchesky was far too far away from him when he started to do this. All he achieved was to give Nani yards of space to run into towards the Liverpool box and send another cross—from which United scored.

I'm not even going to describe the third goal - for a team to have that much room to cross the ball so late in a tie game was just criminal, even if the player crossing the ball should've been sent off earlier.

Man On The Post From Corners

Paul Konchesky, you should look away now. In fact, Roy Hodgson should look away now as well.

After the game Hodgson claimed that he wasn't disappointed with the first goal as it "was a wonderful corner kick and header" - I very much beg to differ. We'll get to the marking in a moment, but first—for goodness sake, what on earth was Paul Konchesky doing?

He started vaguely near the near post as Giggs went to take the corner, but then, bemusingly, drifted directly behind Pepe Reina as the ball came across. When Berbatov met the ball with his head, Konchesky was well over a metre away from the post and, realising his error, half-tried to keep the ball out with his hand.

From the age of six, when I first started playing football, one of the very first things we were taught over and over was: if you're on the post, STAY on the post.

Have the days of football tactics and technical support staff seen the game drift so far from such a basic concept? No, they haven't. Paul Konchesky made a very serious error because of a lack of concentration. Unless an invisible third goal post materialised in the middle of the goal yesterday, he was not doing his job and ultimately contributed to us conceding the first - very preventable - goal.

Close Marking

Ahh this old chestnut. Under Rafa all we heard was "zonal marking doesn't work". Well, yesterday, man marking didn't work either. Or against Birmingham. Or against Manchester City.

Fact is, until you are actually in the right position, no type of marking will work, and yesterday our defence was far too casual in their attempts at marking the United attack. For the first goal, fingers can be pointed at Fernando Torres in his 'marking' of Berbatov, and yes, it was a poor attempt indeed. Torres never got goal-side of his opposite number 9, and spent the build-up to the corner attempting to grapple the Bulgarian before leaving him free just as he went to head the ball. Not really what defending is about, but as stated above there is another reason the ball went into the goal.

But for goal number two, for all Berbatov's brilliance and wonderful technique, it was a) letting Nani cross far too easily, as I said before, and b) again, a lack of close marking, which allowed United to take a 2-0 lead.

When Nani crossed the ball into the Liverpool area, he had two targets. Wayne Rooney, being 'marked' by Martin Skrtel, and Berbatov, being 'marked' by Jamie Carragher. Except that in both cases the defenders were way, way, way too far away from the forwards. Give either forward that much space and they are bound to come up with something dangerous. That's why they play for Manchester United.

That Berbatov came up with something that special isn't a surprise, and should not detract from the fact that if either defender had gotten right behind him, he wouldn't have been able to control the ball in such a way, or they would have had more of a chance to block the eventual goal.

You Don't Shoot, You Don't Score

At times Liverpool did play good possession football yesterday and in fact that aspect of the performance was much better than, for example, the Premiership victory against West Brom. But there was a lack of threat up front, particularly in the first half when Glen Johnson's speculative effort which flew wide was about the best Liverpool could muster.

If the team is playing poorly defensively the attack must be able to step up and offer both a respite from defending and the chance to score goals to take points from the match. But against Manchester United Liverpool managed only two shots on target during the entire game, with a further six going wayward.

Gerrard scored twice from set pieces, but Liverpool's lack of cutting edge was evident, with passes too often going sideways and backwards and often too slowly, as though the team lacked the courage to take the game to a Manchester United defence which has been exposed as weak in recent games by the likes of Fulham and Everton.

With Jovanovic, Cole, and Meireles all new signings in Liverpool's attacking formation, it is of course going to take some time for them to gel and work together. But too often against Manchester United Torres was lacking in support, and chances were certainly at a premium, both factors which will have to improve in coming weeks.

Looking Ahead

Liverpool face home ties against Sunderland and Blackpool in the next couple of weeks before the International break - after which a trip to Everton beckons. Six points before then will make the table much healthier reading, and hopefully we will see the likes of Torres and Cole add to their tally of one goal for the season.

Defeat against United is never an easy thing to take for any Liverpool supporter but there were signs of improvement during the match and—provided the problems above are rectified quickly—Liverpool should be back to winning ways sooner rather than later.