Who is to blame? This article is written in the aftermath of Liverpool's 3-1 home humiliation by Tottenham Hotspur in the fourth round of the Worthington Cup. Prior to this, defeats by West Ham United, Manchester United, Leicester City and Derby County have aroused discontent and disillusionment among critics and the Anfield faithful (sometimes there is no real distinction between the two), who are already dismissing Liverpool's ability to challenge for the league title just 3 months and 12 matches into the Premiership season. The Reds have won just once in their last 8 matches, and have three times already conceded 3 goals in a game at their Anfield fortress. It is crisis time indeed at the troubled Kop.

Every Liverpool fan appears to know who is to blame. Roy Evans. And the muddle-headed decision by the Anfield management to install the joint leadership of Evans and Frenchman Gerard Houllier - which doesn't work for all the apparent contradictions a joint leadership brings. Evans then, these disgruntled fans insist, must go. Not surprisingly, they have been muttering like demands before Houllier stepped into Merseyside.

I do not know for sure what the other supporters of the club would say, but I think it is always difficult to criticise managers fairly - although it is certainly easy to just criticise them. Any judgement, I believe, must be based on evidence. Is there any evidence that the joint leadership has not worked this season? Or that Evans has in certain instances proved to be a stumbling block in club management?

The only instances I could think of are, clearly, in team selection. Yes, I have been mirthed by the managers' selection this season - for instance when Karlheinz Riedle was dropped when the managers opted to play one striker at Upton Park, or when Michael Owen was "rested" in the home leg of the UEFA Cup tie against Valencia. Right now, I question their decision to play Steve Staunton, a left-back, in place of the injured Phil Babb (or Dominic Matteo) in the centre of defence.

Besides this? Not much. And with so much criticism levelled at management now, wouldn't one think it would have been easier to come out with concrete evidence against them? Is there something fundamentally wrong with the Evans leadership? Or is it just talk and rumour-mongering among Liverpool fans that Evans is too soft, tradition-bound and uninspiring to motivate the legion of stars at Merseyside?

I am not asking rhetorical questions. I would be grateful if fans can point out such evidence to me. My point is that it is very difficult to make managers accountable in a fair, public way other than by results and performance. The thing is, results and performance are just as often linked to other factors like the players themselves. Criticism of the club should rightly start with the players, because they are far more accountable, concretely speaking, for results and performance than managers are.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that Evans should stay. I think he should go - the club needs a new style of management. Change of managers often has this almost magical effect on clubs - witness Arsene Wenger, John Gregory and now George Graham. That is, however, not to say that new managers do not build on the foundations left by their oft-discredited predecessors, a fact seldom noted and appreciated by fans and club bosses alike who want instant, spectacular success.

Back to the players. Many fingers will certainly point to the central defence, where Staunton, Babb and young Jamie Carragher have taken turns shoring up, many a time desperately. The general consensus, I think, is that these players are just not good enough, especially in the air. This has been a long-standing problem; I date it back to the FA Cup semi-final which Liverpool lost dramatically - 4-3, to Crystal Palace.

The management have themselves insisted that defending is a team effort, not just that of the fullbacks. That is true, but little more than a truism, a shield for the fullbacks who have been inadequate too frequently. Like many fans, I hold culpable not so much the fullbacks themselves, but the management for not signing new defenders. Marcel Desailly, for one, is at Chelsea, and see how much more difficult to beat the Londoners are these days.

I just cannot rationalise how the managers can fail to make insignificant inroads into remedying a department which even ordinary fans could see the need for. High salaries, age and a lack of world-class defenders are some of the reasons the managers have cited for failing or not wanting to sign potential defenders. A load of crap. If there are no established players available and suitable, get some young ones. Rob Jones was no star when he made his debut for Liverpool. I do concede that defence has been a failing of management. Bottom line is - far more needs to be done here.

Besides the defence, Liverpool have been woeful in most of their recent games. Too often have they failed this season to find the net. Recall Arsenal, Manchester United, Valencia, Everton and Leicester? Hey, is this the same club we were talking about only before the start of the season which had a shaky defence and an exciting strike-force? It appears now that both the defence and the strike-force are shaky.

Michael Owen has scored ten already, but even the youngster has shown signs of tiredness (some say) and predictability. Riedle, by general consensus, has been enjoying his best spell at the club, and Robbie Fowler is sharp and raring to go. The root problem, I believe, lies in the defence. The attacking game is one in which defensive risks are greater than usual; to excel in it, the defence must hold until the strikers score. And when they do, the team takes it from there to place the opponent under greater pressure - to come out for the equaliser and leave itself vulnerable to counterattacks.

The attacking game is certainly not built on a scenario when the opponent scores first - or twice, and then the team behind tries to chase the game. Liverpool's "exciting" game is fundamentally flawed because the backline is not sound. It will not do to have exciting wingbacks, Ince, Redknapp, McManaman and Berger in midfield and an impressive forward line of Fowler and Owen when the defence cannot hold its own under pressure.

I am not sure if the other usual criticisms of the club are all that valid. I do believe that Owen and Fowler can play in the same team - what with all the talk about them being too alike. Fowler, remember, has been injured for a long period of time - Alan Shearer could not bounce back immediately for Newcastle last season as well. The Owen-Fowler needs time to gell, and faith from us fans. Do not forget also that Macca has oft played this season (and the last as well) with injuries; certainly he has not been the force he was last season.

The current Liverpool team is not without its strengths. Do not be misled by the scores into thinking that it lacks will and motivation to win games. I have been impressed since last season by the persistence of the Reds' attacking game in the face of adversity - several times then they came back from behind to force 3-3 draws. This season, they have battled as well, against Charlton, and do not forget the display in the second half against West Ham for instance. But their game is flawed. It has been said that Liverpool lack 11 world class players to win a championship. I think 11 may not be necessary - suffice it to have world class players in every department of the team.