TOMKINS: THE REAL DEAL

TOMKINS: THE REAL DEAL Paul Tomkins 26 February 2009
	Visiting Real Madrid, on their best winning run for 23 years (nine straight games), and having scored six goals in the first half of their last league game: what a prospect.
Add Gerrard being only fit for the bench and Torres hampered by a bad ankle knock sustained very early on. Mission impossible, eh? There was no excuse for Real to not put on a show. It's clear that despite their sky-high confidence they weren't at their best, but a large part of that was the Reds not letting them play. As ever, a top European team coincidentally has a bad night against Liverpool. Hmm... Juande Ramos said the Reds came to defend, and while it's true that the bus was parked early on as the visitors sussed out the home side, Liverpool did more than just hit on the counter attack. Indeed, they created the better openings, with Real forced to shoot wildly from distance. It's been a tough time for the Reds in the league since the Champions League went into hibernation, even though it remains only one defeat all season in both these major competitions (35 games now). I think usually we'd be celebrating this incredible fact, but this season is a little different, as well all know, with what is at stake. It could very well be that Liverpool are the second-best team in Europe right now; alas, Manchester United can claim to be the best, and that hurts. Chelsea proved last year that they aren't far away either; a fraction from usurping United in both the league and the European Cup. I've been saying it for a couple of years now, but the top teams in the Premiership have improved to previously unthinkably levels, and even the teams outside of the elite have been dragged up to a higher level. Aston Villa and Everton are pushing for top four places, and Arsenal, who can still impress in Europe against teams like Roma, are not guaranteed a place in next season's main competition. For me, that is the overall context, and results like last night's only add to my belief that Liverpool have improved massively as a team, but that the strength of the Premiership masks some of this upward trajectory. While it's not the most technical league, it is probably the most varied in its styles and challenges, and is certainly one where few teams throw in the towel. Individual domestic displays or results may disappoint, but losing sight of the bigger picture obscures the notion of progress. Personally, I get hugely frustrated on those occasions when the Reds fall short, but feel I must focus on the overall standing of the team. It doesn't mean that the smaller picture is irrelevant, but there's enough people focusing on that, and at times, hysterically so. Every side will have players out of form, or those who can be cast in the role of whipping boy; particularly in this squad age, where sometimes your favourites need resting and those replacing them are naturally not as accomplished. But I choose not to obsess over what I don't like when the team is at its highest standing for almost two decades. Add Torres' injury problems; Gerrard's court case, and his own injuries here and there; the fact that Babel and Mascherano have had not found their best form since the Olympics disrupted their pre-season training; and that the Reds' Spanish contingent spent longer away at the Euros than anyone else, and it means that Liverpool have not had the smoothest of rides since the start of the season. All teams need to overcome difficulties, but you need the minimum amount to wrest a title away from a team used to already doing so. As an example, Liverpool weren't great against Man City, but nor were Man United against Blackburn. For me, there was little difference last weekend, apart from the fact that City at least have some world-class talents, and that the squad has improved radically since the start of January (just adding Shay Given was a big bonus). In the last minute, United got away without conceding a penalty that could have made it 2-2; late on at Anfield, Richard Dunne blocked Benayoun's goal-bound header (almost identical to the one that won the game in Spain) with his hand, which, whether intentional or not, was outstretched like a keeper's. As an offence it was similar to the one from which Riera got booked last night, although unlike Dunne the Spaniard appeared to be protecting his face. At Old Trafford, Ronaldo got away with his third petulant kick at an opponent of the season (after ones at Spurs and Stoke), and all neutral observers I encountered said he should have seen red. He then banged in a great free-kick to win the game. These are the fine margins between victory, stalemate and defeat. Whether or not things even themselves out (and I don't believe they do – not 100 per cent at least), this weekend the decisions favoured United. Clearly. If Liverpool had been given United's refereeing decisions, and vice versa, it could easily have been a case of narrowing the gap to three points, particularly as United didn't really have time to come back from a Blackburn penalty (if scored), and Liverpool could almost certainly have closed out the game against City had Dunne been penalised and someone stuck the spot-kick away. But Liverpool, as the challengers, need a bit more luck than United to overtake them, and at the weekend the Reds had less. But hopefully the result in Madrid can lift the spirits and boost the confidence, and help the Reds at least put some pressure on United before the end of the season by playing as well as possible and creating more of their own luck. Of course, a lot will be made again of how Benítez is supposedly a European master who doesn't 'get' the Premiership, but his win ratio is virtually identical in the Premiership and the Champions League. It might look more impressive to some more casual observers because teams like Barcelona, Real Madrid, AC Milan, Inter Milan and Juventus have been bested in Europe; real high-class pedigree institutions who would be Premiership challengers if English. These stick in the mind, as high-profile occasions, and polarise opinion. Of course, Rafa's European record also includes games against a few European sides who'd struggle in the top flight here, while some of the teams beaten in qualifying have been more akin to British non-league sides. So it's not all been games against the stellar names of the continent. As of this season, Liverpool have been beating the English elite on a regular basis, too. The away form is very good; this team looks almost impossible to beat and concedes very few goals; and on every occasion where defeat loomed (bar one at Spurs), points have been rescued, to show character and determination. These are all the hallmarks of a title-winning side. But at home, in tighter games, the Reds are falling a little short. Games aren't being lost – so it's not falling massively short – but more need to be won. At times it's been a case of bad luck (decisions against Stoke and Man City stick out), or outstanding goalkeeping, but a little extra cutting edge has been missing at times. A fit Torres all season long would have made a big difference, but there's no denying that the Reds have fallen short in some Anfield encounters. However, in terms of most of the checklist points you want to tick off, Liverpool are a clear success, with definite signs of improvement on recent seasons, and even more so on the situation predating the manager's arrival. But there's still a little way to go. Another positive has been the effort of some of those fighting for a first-team place. Ryan Babel's attitude in trying to get back into the team has been excellent, and I hope he can utilise his exceptional talent after a very difficult season, and find the confidence he needs. Yossi Benayoun's form of late has also been a real bonus. He can be so clever in tight areas, particularly through the middle. The trouble is finding a role for him there when Gerrard is fit, but at times since the departure of Robbie Keane the little Israeli's done the things that I expected the Irishman to do when deployed just behind the main striker. He's finding space, creating goals (the late strikes against Chelsea, Portsmouth and City), and notching a few, too. He's now also put the Reds in pole position against Real Madrid, although the tie is far from won. Focus returns to the league, but even if Liverpool don't win the title, second place would constitute progress. In the old days, 'First is first, second is nowhere' was the Reds' mantra, but now it means the guarantee of Champions League football. It may not be what we crave, but it is somewhere. It is also the base camp from where every Premiership title has been won; Manchester United, Blackburn, Arsenal and Chelsea all won their first title immediately after finishing second (or with the same points as second place in Arsenal's case). So while finishing second doesn't automatically result in success (as we found after 2002), it does appear to be a vital stopping off point on the way to the summit.

OFFICIAL: REDS ARE EUROPE'S BEST

OFFICIAL: REDS ARE EUROPE'S BEST James Carroll 27 February 2009
	Liverpool are the number one team in Europe, according to Uefa's co-efficient ranking system.
Wednesday's famous 1-0 victory over Real Madrid at the Bernabeu propelled the Reds to the top of the official Uefa table for the first time since 1985. The complicated system ranks clubs on their performances in European competition over the past five years, with points being awarded for matches won and the standard of opposition. Liverpool top the table with a score of 114.077 points, ahead of Premier League rivals Chelsea, who are in second with 110.077 points. Arsenal (fifth) and Manchester United (seventh) are the other English teams who occupy a position in the top ten. The Reds have also amassed the highest points total for the current season with a tally of 18.1775. Bayern Munich are in second place, while La Liga clubs Barcelona and Atletico Madrid hold joint third position. UEFA co-efficient rankings: 1 - Liverpool FC (114.077) 2 - Chelsea FC (110.077) 3 - Barcelona (109.403) 4 - AC Milan (109.306) 5 - Arsenal FC (101.077) 6 – Sevilla FC (100.403) 7 - Manchester Utd FC (99.077) 8 - Bayern Munich (93.664) 9 – Olympique Lyonnais (90.576) 10 - Inter Milan (87.306)

The Verdict : REAL MADRID 0 - 1 LIVERPOOL

REAL MADRID 0 - 1 LIVERPOOL Wednesday 25 February 2009 19:45 , Champions League Last 16 (1)

REAL 0-1 LIVERPOOL: THE VERDICT Yossi Benayoun scored a late winner as Liverpool recorded a famous 1-0 victory at the Bernabeu. Here's the best of the post-match reaction. The local paper It was a case of many happy returns at the Bernabeu last night. And for Liverpool, a significant stride towards the quarter-finals of the Champions League. With that priceless away strike, Rafael Benitez's side are now firm favourites to finish off the job and reach the last eight when the teams meet for the second leg on March 10. Daily Post The national newspaper Rafael Benitez masterminded another magnificent European away triumph as Liverpool confounded the odds with a stunning 1-0 victory at Real Madrid. Benitez has coached Liverpool to remarkable performances away to Juventus, Barcelona, Arsenal, Inter Milan and Chelsea in recent seasons in the Champions League, but this was by far the most impressive. Daily Express The national newspaper It was not pretty but it was pragmatism personified, and against a Real team gripped by fear this was just the pick-me-up that the Merseyside club and their manager needed after a difficult couple of months. To limit Real at the Bernabeu to one notable chance spoke volumes for the control exhibited by Liverpool. The Times The broadsheet Crisis clearly brings out the best in Liverpool. Deprived by injury of their talisman, rocked by a day of frenzied speculation and their Premier League charge in shreds at their feet, they produced a majestic display of steel, determination and purpose to stun Real Madrid. Add the Bernabeu to Rafael Benitez's list of conquests. The Telegraph The player Of course I am really pleased to score at the Bernabeu but the most important thing was to get the victory. We're all really pleased because this is a fantastic result for us. It's a great win but we have to think that we still have one more game to play and look to complete the job at Anfield. Yossi Benayoun The boss I am really pleased - pleased for the players, the team, the club and for the fans. To win here in Madrid is very difficult and I think we did a very good job. The players were working so hard - they deserved to win. Rafael Benitez

猩猩漫畫.歐陽文風‧

猩猩漫畫

2009-02-24 20:52

《紐約郵報》是美國歷史最悠久的日報，創刊於1801年，銷量全國第六。它一份只賣25分，《紐約時報》則是1元50分。除2001年第一天來紐約，我幾乎從不花錢買《紐約郵報》，理由有二：

第一，雖然銷量驚人，這基本上是一份譁眾取寵的小報，而且政治立場非常保守，沒有甚麼水準；第二，由於只賣25分，紐約上班族幾乎人手一份，乘搭地鐵上班時閱讀，看完就留在座椅，我進

地鐵，隨時可以檢來看，5分鐘就翻完。

上星期，這份小報刊登了一幅畫，把奧巴馬比喻為黑猩猩，引起眾怒，被指種族歧視。美國人把黑人和黑猩猩相提並論，可謂“傳統”。

幾十年以前，美國異族通婚非法，主流社會堅持反對異族通婚，特別是白人和黑人結合，其中一個經典說詞就是：“如果黑白異族可以通婚，人與猩猩亦可結合，道德淪喪，社會倫理會因此大亂”。

職是之故，當這漫畫見報，而且還有一句對白：“這下他們要找別人寫振市法案了”，明顯是趁機抨擊黑人總統奧巴馬的經濟振市法案。批評總統不是問題，但以猩猩來比喻，無異是種族歧視的“傳統”。

至於漫畫作者Sean Delonas其實也是惡名昭彰，他有許多漫畫早就被人批評對弱勢族群和少數族裔充滿偏見。這其實也沒有甚麼值得奇怪的，《紐約郵報》由媒體業鉅子梅鐸擁 有，政治立場超級保守，完全共和黨喉舌的模樣，早就是公開秘密；所謂客觀中立的文宣，也是新聞界的笑話。

《紐約郵報》還有另一特色，就是對中國特別友善。你幾乎不可能讀到一篇抨擊中國政府，或對中國政府形象不利的新聞或評論。理由簡單，他的老闆梅鐸在中國積極投資媒體業，特別是衛星電視，自然要討中國高層歡心。

有關漫畫見報後，不少名人跑出來抗議，著名電影製作人與導演Spike Lee就是其中一人。他們罷讀罷買，要求《紐約郵報》道歉，不只如此，還要求商家不要在該報打廣告，同時呼吁銀行撒退在該報的廣告，不應同流合污，否則其 重量級客戶將關閉在有關銀行的賬戶。先進國的可貴與可愛，在於明星歌星演員不只是賣藝，他們也有正義意識，拒絕“中立”，登高一呼，果效不同。社會進步，連娛樂界也有水準，水平果然不一樣。

3天不到，《紐約郵報》銷量大跌，立竿見影。地鐵站附近的報攤，疊起高高賣不出的報紙。我乘地鐵去大學教書，忽然發現大家都在看《紐約郵報》最主要的競爭對手《每日新聞》──一份梅鐸恨得牙癢癢，想方設法逼售收購的小報。

果不其然，《紐約郵報》最後不得不為猩猩漫畫公開道歉。

星洲日報／言路‧作者：歐陽文風‧自由撰稿人‧2009.02.24

TOMKINS: PARALLEL UNIVERSE, SAME OUTCOME Paul Tomkins 23 February 2009

TOMKINS: PARALLEL UNIVERSE, SAME OUTCOME Paul Tomkins 23 February 2009
	I want to pose what I hope is an interesting philosophical question.
It involves something bordering on a parallel universe, but only in the loose sense; I'm obviously no astrophysicist (although I did once nearly disappear up my own black hole). It is the summer of 2004. Alex Ferguson has just taken over as Liverpool boss. Down the M62, Alex Ferguson is also still in charge of Manchester United. It is not one man managing both clubs (the chance for sabotage that would be huge!), but two different versions of the same man. An identical clone, if you will, albeit one of whom we'll call Scouse Alec. My question would be, would Scouse Alec have overtaken Actual Alex at United? Or even got close? This question arose in my mind after I heard a Liverpool fan asking if someone like Alex Ferguson would have succeeded by now in bringing the title to Liverpool; in other words, could he have done better than Rafa Benítez? But, of course, whoever took over Liverpool in 2004 had to deal with the reality of Ferguson still being at United, where, just a year earlier, his team had yet again won the Premiership. Hence the two Fergusons for this hypothetical. Actual Alex was already almost two decades into the job at United, and already knighted. He cut a powerful figure. And he has spent roughly £30m more than Benítez since that summer, when the Reds finished 15 points behind United, who were 3rd. For the sake of this debate we'll say that Scouse Alec is given the same resources as Benítez (even though Rafa earned Liverpool a lot of that money in annual Champions League qualifications and progress, which another manager may not have done). So with Houllier gone, Scouse Alec instantly has major problems. Liverpool's squad is pretty average, as its league showing for the previous two years confirms. There are a handful of top-class talents, like Gerrard, Carragher, Hamann and Hyypia, but plenty of players already in their 30s. Henchoz, Hamann and Smicer are not long-term options, and Hyypia, for all his talent, cannot remain a regular forever. Michael Owen, around whom the tactics have been based for years, has already decided to try his luck abroad, and Harry Kewell's fitness record effectively writes him out of regular plans. Back up the East Lancs Road, Actual Alex has instantly moved for Wayne Rooney; but even at his most persuasive, his doppelgänger could not have enticed the player to Liverpool, or forced Everton to sell across Stanley Park. To this day the fee remains more than Liverpool have paid for any single player, but only the 4th-most expensive Ferguson has purchased. United's ethos hasn't changed in years, in the way it has to at Liverpool in 2004; there have been tweaks and evolutions at Old Trafford, but not the total sea-change that any new manager brings, particularly when things aren't going well. So Scouse Alec is instantly behind the 8-ball. His counterpart has already spent £30m on Ferdinand, £13m on Ronaldo, £13m on Saha (who was very effective up until last season), and is still utilising Giggs, Scholes and Neville (not to mention Brown, O'Shea and Fletcher, all of whom, despite their doubters, go on to be effective players). Ruud Van Nistelrooy is still banging in the goals up front, to keep United ticking over, until the next wave matures. Of course, Actual Alex spent badly or had flops on a number of occasions in the years leading up to 2004/05: Veron, Forlan, Kleberson, Djemba Djemba, Bellion, Dong Fangzhuo, Alan Smith, Liam Miller, Laurent Blanc (plus that awful bald French guy who played just four games), and at least five keepers who could make even a blind octogenarian look like Peter Schmiechel. But by 2004, despite a number of wayward purchases, Actual Alex is at least generally on the right lines. It will still take a further two years for Ronaldo to blossom from fancy show-pony to devastating match-winner, Rooney to look the full part, and for Ferdinand to cast off his inconsistency, but the key components are in place. And once they win the league in 2006/07, they are awash with a self-belief that is only increased by last season's success. How can you match that psychological boost? Of the squad that won the league in 2007 and 2008, and are favourites in 2009, a total of 14 were already in place in 2004. With Saha, Heinze, Richardson, Solskjaer and Silvestre (who all played parts in that vital 2007 title) moved on, nine remain in the squad now. Could you find nine players from 2004 who you'd still want at Liverpool, excluding Owen (who wanted away), and who would be key squad members in a title charge in 2009? Could you name 14 who'd have helped Liverpool win the league in 2007? (And remember, someone like Sinama-Pongolle, for example, only did well after leaving as an every-game regular at Recreativo, something he wouldn't really get to do at Anfield; at Atletico he's again struggling to impose himself.) Still missing for Actual Alex in 2004 was one vital ingredient: a top-class keeper. Finally, Van der Sar solves the problem. In 2005/06, Vidic and Evra arrive, and neither even slightly impresses. But by the following season, they are settled, and lauded. So what can Scouse Alec do? He has lost his main striker, and has to have a tactical overhaul. At United, Actual Alex has around 70% of a successful squad already in place; at Liverpool, Scouse Alec has around 30% who are of sufficient standard. So he clearly needs to buy a greater number of players. That means more transfers, and a greater number of failures, too, given that no manager gets close to making a great signing every time. (Look at a ‘genius' like Mourinho's signings: Malouda, Kalou, Kezman, Shevchenko, Wright-Phillips, Del Horno, Ben-Haim, et al. But having inherited a great squad, and with players like Cech and Robben already on their way, it was the three he got spot-on – Drogba, Essien and Carvalho – who made all the difference.) Liverpool did not have as much money as United between 2004 and 2009, so expensive fees on single players present more of a risk. What if Scouse Alec spends £28m on another Veron, and loses £14m on him in two years? To start with, Liverpool need a top-class keeper. Get it wrong, and Liverpool are in big trouble. Would Scouse Alec have signed a better keeper than Pepe Reina? I don't see how it's possible. What if his keeper turned out to be another Bosnich, Howard, Tiabi or Carroll? There's less room for manoeuvre; Liverpool are right on the edge of Champions League qualification, and any failure could see them fall like Newcastle did once excluded from the top four, just as teams fall like stones once relegated. Chairman David Moores is struggling to get anywhere close to matching the Glazers in terms of financial clout, and with Old Trafford a 70,000+ seater stadium, the chasm is widening. When Liverpool do finally have secure a few big-money signings, United go out and buy even more expensive ones. All the same, could Scouse Alec have signed a better passer and schemer than Xabi Alonso? Michael Carrick is having an excellent season, but at almost twice the price he is still not, to my mind, in Alonso's class; and at the time, in 2004, Alonso is on Actual Alex's radar, having spoken of considering a £20m bid to Real Sociedad a year earlier. Could Scouse Alec have bought Liverpool a better midfield shielder than Mascherano? I don't see how. A better striker than Torres? No chance. Because currently there is none. Better centre-backs than Agger and Skrtel? Well, Vidic, a hot tip for Player of the Year, was a Liverpool target too, but he chose United. Indeed, Ferguson coveted or was linked to almost all of these stellar Reds, and Benítez was interested in some of those stars who ended up at United; so even at his best, Scouse Alec could only really have matched Rafa in terms of key signings. To have bettered Benítez, Scouse Alec would have needed to do what Actual Alex never could: make no mistakes, and shop exclusively in the mid-price range (where his record is very patchy). You could argue that Scouse Alec would have adopted different tactics to Rafa. Obviously they have different approaches. But he would not have been able to call upon wingers like Ronaldo and Giggs, because they were already at United. The wingers Actual Alex has signed since 2004, like Nani and Park, haven't impressed on a regular basis, and with wide flops over the decades, like Karel Poborsky, you could argue that Ferguson has only signed two successful wingers in 23 years: Kanchelskis and Ronaldo. Of course, those two were spot-on, and Giggs' presence lessened the need to buy more. But it's not like Scouse Alex would have pitched up at Anfield and bought thrilling wide-men; what if he'd purchased a Nani rather than a Ronaldo? He'd also have had the same Kewell Conundrum: at the time, up there with the best wingers in the English game, but just never fit. Too good to ditch, too unfit to play regularly. In the real world, Liverpool appeared to have caught United in 2005/06. But United, at the time eclipsed by an even bigger-spending rival, were a young team awaiting its moment to explode into maturity. The same could be said of Liverpool now. The core remains fairly young, and has massive potential. Actual Alex is rightly held up as the benchmark, because his record is there for all to see, and his team is top of the table; hence why I have again chosen to use him for comparison (if Everton were top, then I'd be discussing Moyes; they are not). But even Ferguson at his very best, if at Liverpool between 2004 and today, would not, to my mind, have done a better job than Benítez. After all, the ‘Professor', Arsene Wenger – an expert in English football – has gone from regular title challenges and successes to now battling for 5th spot since 2004. The only man to eclipse Ferguson since 2004 was the only man who spent more money. Coincidence? The fact is, Ferguson, having inherited his own similar situation at United in 1986 (a team used to finishing in the top four but without a title for two decades and in need of a serious overhaul), could not make even the remotest impression during his first five league seasons. So when people say it doesn't matter that Ferguson took seven years to win the title, and that it's not relevant now, I ask why? Surely it's even harder now, with United the best team in Europe? However, my key point in this comparison has always been less the fact that Ferguson couldn't win the league, and more that he didn't even get close until 1992. Ferguson's league ‘win %' in his first five seasons was a little over 40%; roughly the same as Graeme Souness' during his ill-fated stint at Liverpool. Yes, that bad! By contrast, Rafa Benítez has won 55% of his league games in his first five seasons so far. Times have changed, but it's 3% higher than Shankly's and only 1% lower than Paisley's. And yet he's still portrayed in the media as someone who doesn't understand the English game and who prioritises Europe, while Ferguson, who arrived with no language issues and who, as a Scot, will have had a natural knowledge of English football, is excused his fairly awful first five seasons. So, with United riding high ever since Benítez got to grips with the league (in 2005/06), all Rafa has had to do is far outperform the man most neutrals hold up to be the best there is, and who has also had more money to spend and more time to construct his squad. A doddle, surely?

Liverpool's chances ended by City? By Richard Jolly February 22, 2009

Liverpool's chances ended by City?

By Richard Jolly February 22, 2009

Few clubs specialise in the perverse like Manchester City. It was part of their quintessential charm in the days before they acquired the tag of the world's richest club. But it was in keeping with the club's traditions that, having been utterly abject on their travels this season, they came to Anfield and took a point.

GettyImages

It was another day to forget for Liverpool boss Rafa Benitez after Sunday's 1-1 draw

It was typically bittersweet, the draw proving a silver lining to a particularly sizeable cloud for their long-suffering supporters as it should ease Manchester United's passage to the title.

This is a club who have contrived to lose at Stoke, Portsmouth, West Brom, Bolton and Middlesbrough this season, yet they procured a point at Liverpool. Having attempted to lure the world's premier attacking talents, they did it with uncharacteristically dogged defending.

Yet if there is a club as illogical as City, it may just be Liverpool. Their title challenge has been formed by improbable wins, whether because of the late timing or the lofty opposition.

It is foundering, however, in the matches where a comfortable victory is anticipated. As City emulated Stoke, Fulham, West Ham and Hull by emerging with a point at Anfield, Rafa Benitez, with his scientific approach and emphasis on control, must be more perplexed than most.

This is a control freak with an enigmatic team. It is another paradox at Anfield, where a seemingly inoffensive man is part of the warring factions and where an insistence he wants to stay has not entailed actually committing to a new contract.

'I want to concentrate on football,' said Benitez, on three occasions, when asked about the unsigned deal and reports of his unhappiness at the current impasse (the source of which is thought to be a Spaniard with a beard).

His own future is an issue. So is his team's. There is an acceptance that Liverpool have to beat Manchester United on March 14 to overhaul the Premier League leaders.

'Yeah, if you want to reduce the gap,' admitted Benitez. His analysis of Liverpool's title chances was: 'Clearly, it is more difficult. We have to win against Middlesbrough and against Sunderland and start thinking if we can win at Old Trafford.'

Benitez, as ever, polarises opinions. It surprised that he persisted with two holding midfielders - including the Kop's bête noire, Lucas - for 85 minutes and the thought occurred that the departed Robbie Keane could have had a part to play in Steven Gerrard's absence.

Yet Benitez contrived to influence the game: Liverpool were energised by the arrival of Nabil El Zhar, when Benayoun was switched to the left flank.

In his new role, the Israeli crossed, Fernando Torres applied one touch and Dirk Kuyt finished emphatically for the equaliser. Thereafter, in another frantic finale, Kuyt was inches away from a winner and Shay Given produced a magnificent stop to thwart Benayoun.

Yet he had been so under-worked that Given had emerged early with one of the coaching staff for some practice before the second half began. Although Micah Richards had blocked Albert Riera's shot on the line, Liverpool failed to turn control into clear-cut chances.

That, in turn, reflected well upon a dogged City side. Mark Hughes, so often a picture of frustration outside the City of Manchester Stadium, was entitled to look satisfied. 'It was an excellent performance,' he said. 'There was drive and purpose to what we did. We were strong and resolute when we had to be. A draw was the least we deserved.'

More appeared probable when, rather predictably, Craig Bellamy scored on his return to Anfield with a shot that deflected in off Alvaro Arbeloa. It was not City's only threat. Stephen Ireland and Robinho played a wonderful one-two that should have brought a firmer finish from the Irishman.

GettyImages

Hughes and Robinho: Strained relationship?

The Brazilian, whose relationship with his manager is under the microscope, was praised by Hughes: 'I thought he was excellent. His contribution was very good. If you give him the ball, very often he will retain it. That gives people the confidence to give him the ball in tight areas.'

This was a rare away match where City appeared to have balance. Robinho is always liable to be stranded up-field, but City defended in numbers. It is unusual to see them so intent on preserving a clean sheet. Ahead of Given, Hughes fielded seven essentially defensive players and only three who are more attack-minded.

That said, Vincent Kompany was the de facto target man, especially from goal kicks, working tirelessly in a more advanced position. Having arrived as a centre back, played much of the campaign shielding the back four and spending this afternoon roaming around in an attacking midfield role, the Belgian will presumably end the season as the centre forward.

But then, at both Manchester City and Liverpool, the implausible often becomes possible.

MAN OF THE MATCH: Richard Dunne
It has hardly been a vintage season for the man who used to be City's most dependable defender, but the captain was excellent. Several interceptions were a reminder of the defiant Dunne of old.

LIVERPOOL VERDICT: They could do with starting games with the same urgency that they display at the end. While others complain about a surfeit of fixtures, Liverpool hadn't played for 15 days and it may have showed in an insipid opening. But although the absences of the injured Gerrard and the suspended Xabi Alonso could account for the setback, Liverpool were insufficiently inventive until the end.

MANCHESTER CITY VERDICT: There are times when they can be overloaded with attacking midfielders. Not today; City were disciplined with Pablo Zabaleta and Nigel de Jong staying behind the ball. 'Nigel was excellent,' Hughes said. 'It was almost certainly his best game since he arrived at the club. He has an understanding of where he has to be on the pitch to break attacks up.'

HAVING THEIR PHIL: Manchester City's travelling fans earned a few laughs when they told Phil Dowd: 'You're too fat to referee.' Dowd isn't one of the Premier League's more slim-line officials but, in his defence, he seemed to cover plenty of ground.

ARTETA INJURY BLOW: Everton's influential Mikel Arteta was stretchered off after just five minutes against Newcastle with what appeared to be knee ligament injury; a potentially severe setback for the Toffees.

TOMKINS: LEVELLING THE PLAYING FIELD - 13 February 2009

TOMKINS: LEVELLING THE PLAYING FIELD Paul Tomkins 13 February 2009
	Following my piece earlier in the week, I want to expand on a couple of the themes and clarify one small mistake on my part.
I was accused by one Liverpool fan of being obsessed with Manchester United. In truth, I was just responding to people in the media saying that Liverpool can't cope without key players when, quite clearly, they can, and that United can cope wonderfully without key players when, quite clearly, that's not totally true. Manchester United are the current barometer. Their success dictates comparison. They are where we want to be. In the bigger picture, the Reds are catching them up, and at a far greater rate than Ferguson originally caught Liverpool. But it's still not enough to spare Benítez some appallingly wayward criticism, much of it relating to his rival down the East Lancs Road. Even as Liverpool fans, we cannot argue with Alex Ferguson's record or his status as a legend of the game. However, at times he will do something that Rafa also does and be labelled a genius for getting the result, whereas the Liverpool manager will be castigated even after a win. Stuff like that needs redressing. With the purchase of Berbatov, United now have three £30m(ish) strikers. This season they've coped much better without one of those: Wayne Rooney. You can't argue with their depth up front, which is better than last year, when Rooney's absence left them light. But in the four league games Ronaldo has so far failed to start this season, United won just one, drew two and lost one. Two were tough games, but then so too were two of the four Gerrard has missed, and Liverpool's results were better. I made one error in my piece discussing United without Rooney and Ronaldo last season: they also won at Fulham. It doesn't greatly alter the overall picture: that they were much diminished without these two key men. For me, this is perfectly natural anyway. Any team would miss a pair of the quality of Ronaldo and Rooney. But it's glossed over with United that, actually, they did really rely on them, and that this season they still look iffy without Ronaldo. The fact that this season Liverpool have coped exceptionally well without Gerrard and/or Torres is my main point. And I must emphasise greatly –– I wouldn't draw the United comparison if it wasn't for the media ramming that myth down our throats to start with. At the weekend I lost count of how many times different pundits said United can make do without players like Ronaldo. The evidence is suggestive of the contrary. What's interesting is that Ferguson, with a Champions League game looming after the Fulham fixture last season, did exactly what Benítez did at the weekend, and left out his star names. At the time, United were trailing Arsenal at the top of the table. Was it a crazy gamble? Was he cracking up? United won 3-0. Again, this might suggest that his squad was far stronger than Liverpool's now, but I've already shown that United were far inferior without Rooney in 2007/08 to their overall form, and almost impotent without Ronaldo. Also, United hadn't just had a 120-minute midweek derby and lost players to injury. Liverpool's win against Portsmouth may have been less convincing than United's at Fulham last year, but it was a win all the same; just as United, with a full-strength team, needed a Stoke player sent off late-on to eventually aid a breakthrough. That's football. Good teams wear down less-good teams. Whatever side you select, you cannot always win the game in the first 80 minutes. And it can't be 'luck' that Liverpool have won so many games late on under Benítez, including coming back from what appeared impossible situations. Dirk Kuyt has scored and set-up a lot of last-gasp goals this season, and part of that is down to the manager finding such characters, who will never give up. Similarly, look at the determination of Javier Mascherano, a defensive midfielder, in the dying seconds, to try and win the game. Look at his joy at Torres' goal. This is no accident, no fluke. Ferguson deserves great credit for buying Ronaldo amongst others, but then so too does Benítez for purchasing Torres and turning Gerrard from a six-goals-a-season midfielder into a twenty-goals-a-season midfielder-cum-striker. Prior to Torres arriving, Liverpool were accused of lacking a world-class striker; now he's here, the manager is wrongly accused of an over-reliance on him. With all this, I'm not trying to belittle Manchester United or Ferguson. What he has done has worked. Some years he may have had luck at vital times, but their enduring success speaks of doing things right time and time again. But by having a massive head-start on Benítez, he has had the kind of advantage that he himself could not overcome when Kenny Dalglish was Liverpool manager over a similar time span. Neutrals may now say Ferguson is a better manager than was Dalglish; and yet Ferguson was miles adrift of Dalglish season after season before King Kenny resigned in 1991. And Ferguson had arrived from the similar Scottish football, not a different culture like Spain. People say that the seven years it took Ferguson to win the title cannot be compared with now; football has changed too much. But if anything, it's now harder to come from lower in the league (indeed, below 2nd-place) to win the title. Gone are the days when people like Brian Clough could take a promoted side to the league title; imagine West Brom or Stoke doing that now! And in 1992, Leeds won the title in their second season back in the top flight; I don't see Sunderland doing that in 2009, do you? Casting the net further afield, Arsene Wenger is used as an example of how it's possible for someone to win the league very quickly. But he was a pioneer as the English game changed to a more continental style; his timing was perfect in order to offer new enlightenment. By the time Benítez arrived, you could not get such an advantage. Everyone was enlightened. Even Bolton used sports scientists, dieticians and psychologists. And if you look at Wenger's record since Rafa arrived, you can say that the great Frenchman has been decidedly second-best to the Spaniard on the whole. More experienced than in 1998, Wenger, already an expert in English football, has found it tougher because the top end of the table now has a number of great sides to compete with. Of course, there was Jose Mourinho's impact at Chelsea. But he had exceptional resources, to add to a team that were already a 2nd-placed 80-point Premiership outfit and Champions League semi-finalists. But even then, what he built appears to have been a little short-term in its vision, given the ageing side and subsequent strife at Stamford Bridge. Going back to United, Alex Ferguson made a series of astute signings in 1988 and 1989. But it took 4/5 years for Bruce, Irwin, Pallister, Ince, Hughes and co. to win the title. The fees for these players may seem cheap to us now, but in relation to the transfer record of the day, these (and some of the expensive 'flops' he bought at the same time, like Danny Wallace and Neil Webb) were big-money deals. One of the main points of writing Dynasty was to make comparisons across the eras on as even a playing field as possible. The United team that won the 1990 FA Cup had an average cost (at time of purchase) of half of the transfer record; or the equivalent of an average of £16m per player in today's market. By contrast, Kenny Dalglish had a far cheaper team at the time. Part of that was the decreased need to spend big, as over the years Liverpool, similar to United now, had become a well-oiled machine that needed tweaks rather than overhauls. However, to show that it's not just about money, and also that Liverpool can't claim to have been paupers when Ferguson finally ended United's 26-year wait, Graeme Souness, in rebuilding the ageing side he inherited, formed a team that also cost on average close to 50 per cent of the transfer record. His own purchases, which did include some cheap players like Rob and Lee Jones, worked out at 45 per cent of the record: an average of £13m per player in today's market. Had a world-class manager spent that money at Liverpool, Manchester United 'might not' have made that vital title breakthrough. But they did, just as Liverpool won against Portsmouth at the weekend, despite all the 'if Liverpool hadn't won' speculations. Even so, Ferguson spent big to lift the burden on United's shoulders. At the time Dynasty went to print, Rafa's average spend on all players was just 16 per cent of the English transfer record. (This figure does not include the many youngsters and reserves yet to play a part in the first team, so it's not skewed by such cheap investments.) United's strongest XI based on last season is listed in Dynasty as having an average cost of 43.5 per cent of the record, compared with the 18 per cent of Liverpool's. That 43.5 per cent was based on United making the Tevez deal permanent at £32m; so it still stands because Berbatov cost precisely that, and Tevez, rather than a regular pick, is now a rather luxurious reserve (to add to expensive signings like Anderson, Nani and Hargreaves. The first two have just nine league starts between them this time, despite their cost.) Liverpool's (perceived) strongest XI did become a little more expensive with the signing of Robbie Keane, but he's no longer part of the equation, while a signing like Riera, who has replaced Babel as first choice on the left, was actually £3m cheaper. So for Benítez to have the financial advantage that Ferguson could call upon between 1986 and 1993 – i.e. the ability to outspend a great rival in order to overtake them – he would need a team stuffed full of £15-30m players, as opposed to just a couple. (Again, I'm not saying that if you spend the money you’ll definitely have success, but equally, Ferguson did not overtake Liverpool with thriftiness.) But there's an even more crucial point. Not only did Ferguson have a financial advantage that Benítez now doesn't, he also had disruption at Liverpool from 1989 onwards, when Hillsborough derailed the Reds and left Dalglish suffering from understandable stress. The worst imaginable luck in all senses for Liverpool was, in sporting terms, good luck for United. It's also important to note, by way of balance, that United were similarly damaged by Munich in 1958, without which Bill Shankly might have found Matt Busby's men impossible to overhaul six years later. No matter how good Shankly was, and how great the team he assembled, if United had not been rebuilding when he arrived 50 years ago, but instead going from strength to strength with a great young side, it might have been too great a gap to bridge. At the very least, it may have taken Shankly beyond 1964 to win the championship if Duncan Edwards and co. were still alive. You almost always need some disruption with preeminent rivals to sneak a march on them. Because whatever you do, they already have momentum. Since his arrival, Benítez has elevated the Reds above Arsenal, although it could be argued that they are in transition. This season he has got the Reds above Chelsea, but their constant changing of managers in search of 'sexy' football appears to be part of their undoing. All the same, you have to be in a position to take advantage, and so far Liverpool have with their own improvement. In other years, this might be enough: two strong rivals (and recent European Cup finalists) overtaken. But the one constant remains United, who were miles ahead of Liverpool in 2004, and who, even though the gap has been closed dramatically, still have undeniable advantages that stretch back well into the 1990s in terms of personnel, finances and one manager's vision. So I repeat, the point of this is not to demean Ferguson's achievements. They are set in stone. But what irritates me is how he is seen as almost able to do no wrong, and Benítez no right. I reiterate: in the last two seasons, United's results without Ronaldo have been the equivalent to mid-table form. Liverpool's results this season without either Torres or Gerrard have been far, far better. And yet Liverpool are portrayed as the one- or two-man team, and Benítez the clueless, lucky manager with a weak squad. And how utterly wrong that is.