wong_se said:
			
		
	
	
		
		
			want to experiment on young player...new formation ? not a problem..but not at this crutical stage.
Again..Pelle started the match.. and we are now 1 nil down..
U said me biased /prejustice/ or superstituious...everytime we have Pelle in the squad...we never seems to get good result. May be he is mere a bad stat to us..
		
		
	 
Nothing much on the last 2 days...no topic to talk about. I bring up "Pelle" again. Pls flame me...hahahaaa..
Lost to Cyrstal Palace. OK..ok...It isn't fair to blame Pellegrino for the goal. Hyppia got no business trying to single-handedly mark the other two CP players in the box. Carra has no business rushing out to close down Routledge. They should have stay on a spot like Pellegrino to defend their zones.
It's just a coincident that Liverpool performance improved after Pelle was
taken out in 2nd half. It's just another coincident that Liverpool performance was much better in CL when Pelle was not involved.
Why I keep picking on him ? Bcos I found a direct correlation between goals conceded and Pelle in starting line-up.
Obvious improvement was seen in 2nd half when we reverted to 4-4-2. The
defence was more commanding, midfield more in control and at least we don't
look like conceding a goal.
Seem like I m not the only one with unkind words about Pellegrino. Quoted from Daily Post.
"The three centre-back formation had proven wholly unsuccessful in the 2-2
draw with Tottenham the previous week - the switch to a more conventional
4-4-2 helping Liverpool to twice draw level - yet on Saturday Mauricio
Pellegrino again lined up alongside Sami Hyypia and Jamie Carragher in a
back three. 
  
It led to a predictable first half in which the defence looked ill at ease
with the system - Pellegrino once more struggling with the pace of the
English game - allowing Andy Johnson to profit with what ultimately proved
the match-winner 11 minutes before the interval."
(click 
here to read the full articel.)