Part 2
Something is wrong with this picture. If United are ever-improving (and to my mind they are), and Chelsea have the most expensive squad in the history of the English game, and Arsenal are playing "the best football ever seen" (slightly facetious, but you know what I mean), then how come the Reds aren't getting at least some credit for still being unbeaten and within touching distance, while experiencing far more medium- and long-term injury problems?
這情況真是非常有問題。如果曼聯是不斷在進步(我也認為他們是這樣)﹐車路士擁有英超史上最貴的隊伍﹐而阿仙奴的打法是「」世界上最美麗的(雖然有點滑稽﹐但你應該知道我在說什麼)﹐為什麼傳媒沒有至少承認紅軍現在在承受中期到長期的傷兵困擾時還能夠保持聯賽不敗兼保留爭標機會這個事實﹖
(All of a sudden Chelsea have a few players injured, and "injury crisis" has started appearing in the press.)
(最近車路士有幾個球員受傷後﹐傳媒就已經炒作說他們現在面臨「傷兵危機」)
This Liverpool side is improving. The top four in England has been close to being the top four in Europe since Ben韙ez arrived in England. Five years ago that was nowhere near the case.
這個利物浦隊伍是不斷的在進步。自從賓尼迪斯來到英格蘭後﹐英格蘭的前四名差不多成為歐洲的前四名球隊。五年前不是這樣的。
Even when Liverpool hammer someone, as they did against Besiktas, it's down to poor opposition; no-one said the same when Arsenal thrashed Slavia Prague.
就算利物浦以大比數大勝對手﹐好像週中大炒比錫達斯﹐傳媒會說是因為對手級數太弱﹐但阿仙奴大炒布拉格斯拉維亞時卻沒有人這樣說。
The Telegraph piece, which said Fulham failed to get the point they deserved, ignored that the Cottagers are the best team in the league when looking at half-time scorelines, so it was likely to be a case of wearing them down 枛 tiring them out as they chase the ball 枛 and striking late on.
《每日電郵》的文章說富咸痛失他們應得的1分﹐但他們沒有注意到一個事實。若只計算半場比數的話﹐富咸確實是排列榜首。所以對付像富咸的頑強球隊通常是要以逸待勞﹐令他們疲於奔命﹐然後乘虛作出突擊。
Indeed, that's precisely what the great Liverpool sides of the past had to do on plenty of occasions. Or are we forgetting that? (And if late goals suddenly don't count, can we please have our league title from 1989 back, Mr?) Earlier this season Fulham were actually winning at Arsenal until the 84th minute, and then drew 0-0 at Chelsea. So their obduracy when visiting the big clubs is obvious. That's their style.
確實﹐以前1970-1980年代的利物浦也是通常靠這個方法獲勝﹐難道他們忘記了﹖(如果他們說臨完場入的球是不算數的話﹐請問我們可不可以拿回我們在1989年最後一天臨完場前痛失給阿仙奴的聯賽冠軍嗎﹖)在幾個月前富咸在作客阿仙奴時﹐頭84分鐘他們是領先的﹐然後他們0-0賽和車路士。他們作客強隊時的頑固性是無可否認的﹐因為這是他們的風格。
I also fail to see precisely what Fulham did to deserve a draw on Saturday. They defended very well, as they set out their stall for a goalless encounter.
我完全不明白富咸究竟做了什麼去令人以為他們值得拿1分。他們防守是非常好﹐而且他們是想悶和到完場一刻。
However, they offered nothing going forward, and did not stop Liverpool, on top of the two goals, creating several undeniably clear-cut chances: two for Voronin, one of which was well saved, the other fractionally wide; Torres' shot that was saved; Crouch's header off the bar; Benayoun's wonderful dinked chip that was just tipped round, and his miss from a yard as two Liverpool players dived in at the loose ball. Only one keeper was actually involved in the game (unless it was creating assists).
但是他們完全沒有進攻的意欲﹐但這沒有防止利物浦創造不少入球機會。禾朗連有兩次﹐其中一次被門將美妙撲救﹐另一次完全出界﹔托雷斯也有一次射門被撲救﹔高洛治的頭錘中橫楣彈出﹔賓拿約的射門僅僅略過。全場只有一方的門將(富咸的)有參與比賽﹐如果你不計算連拿協助助攻的次數。 |