Politics and paranoia have Anfield divided

THE PEOPLE bidding to buy a divided Liverpool are themselves divided. Of course they are. How could it be otherwise in such crackpot times?

It’s best not to believe a word you read sometimes. Perhaps it’s a sign of encroaching senility, but I keep forgetting the internet is a strange place.

I’d written in cryptic terms about the manager having to explain why he made Skrtel right back. After putting Mascherano there for Sunderland I felt sure he’d crack especially after he took a pasting for the original decision from Hansen and Lawrenson, who ought to know a thing or two about defending.

The question hung in the air: why not Carragher? Mischievous cyber warriors took their cue, armed with pernicious-sounding ‘inside info’ — usually geek-speak for “I made this up in my addled one-eyed head”.

This was different. We know Jamie isn’t thrilled about this position switch so late in his career, it was evident in January when he couldn’t deliver his usual high level of performance.

Filling in for a game or two is one thing; a whole month, another.

A Benitez interview with the local station complicated matters. Why pick Skrtel for that role? “Skrtel wanted to do a job for the team”. Why not use Carragher, like before? “Skrtel wanted to do a job for the team”.

Oh Lord, not this again? True, it was only two answers and not the 25 times he said he was focused on coaching his team – a blatant trail of breadcrumbs that led to confirmation of American duplicity.

With anonymous Internet claims that Rafa was put in an invidious position and Mascherano’s “I’ll do anything for the team, me” speech it looked slightly suspicious.

But was it? I confess to losing patience with the manager’s Machiavellian style of getting what he wants, but this brief repetition may have been his way of avoiding awkward questions and subsequent media mischief. He could on this rare occasion have been quintessentially English, playing a straight bat as we say.

Lawrenson in particular should have mentioned he was happy enough to be a makeshift midfielder in 1982 to accommodate Phil Thompson’s last hurrah.

And the nastiness on the web isn’t Rafa’s fault. Such poisonous, clueless rants about what is irrefutably one of the greatest servants we’ve had cannot be monitored or controlled. They were badmouthing someone who has served with class and distinction for over 13 years: a Youth Cup winner, a Treble winner, one of the heroes of Istanbul.

A player who watched various atrocities and nonentities come and go, invariably having to cover for managerial screw-ups like Ziege. That was the time Houllier asked him to ‘fill in’ at left back, and he stayed there for seven months!

That a few Rafapologists saw fit to almost demonise such a man made me cringe, but giving them significance solves nothing. Until Benitez says anything further on the matter it would be unwise to speculate on blame. It’s time to chill out.

At least this week the football will be a major distraction and a chance for everyone to unite behind the lads. Beating Sunderland doesn’t count, as even with a patched-up team and a muted atmosphere they barely threatened us.

My boy Insua was back, playing like he’d never been away. Masch didn’t do a bad job in his new role. He might change his tune if he was asked to do it for six matches but good for him.

N’gog put his easy chance away, and a goalkeeping error saw the game clinched. The night will only be remembered for the booing of Lucas. Was it a bad joke poisoned by tourists taking it seriously? Greeting any player onto the pitch like that is beneath contempt.

All the intrigue and politics seems to have infected the supporters too and there is a modicum of madness within Anfield lately. Let’s hope there are still things to fight for this time next week and that the bigger picture makes us all grow up a little bit.

We can moan all we like about the desultory standards of behaviour currently set by the hierarchy of Liverpool, the men who really matter, but there’s only one direction our fingers can point when our own actions drop below an acceptable level.

At ourselves.