Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2015/16 (*EVERYONE READ MOD POST in OP)

Grayditch

Gbear wrote: »

I'm really looking forward to seeing what himself and Sturridge can do together. It has genuine potential to be a frightening partnership.

I think he's gonna be unreal.

K-9

Caovyn Lineah wrote: »

So you mean like a clean sheet away at Arsenal?

Hi Dougal.

Potential Underachiever

AidySevenfold wrote: »

hopefully thats lukakus monthly beast of a game out of the way! 2 great games from him, both away (other one v Southampton)...yes I know I am clutching!

The bad news is we play them next month!

googled eyes

Rodgers: Sturridge injury cost us the Champions league football


So its all Danny's fault.

AidySevenfold

Potential Underachiever wrote: »

The bad news is we play them next month!

Surely its too soon for another - he seems to like to leave it a few weeks between them

Francie Barrett

Sometimes you just wish Rodgers would shut up. I can see Sturridge now staying fit for the rest of the season, but us still not getting top 4.

Potential Underachiever

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Sometimes you just wish Rodgers would shut up. I can see Sturridge now staying fit for the rest of the season, but us still not getting top 4.

Sometimes I wish people would should up about Rodgers shutting up, I'm sure people wish I'd shut up about people shutting up about Rodgers shutting up, how about everyone just shuts up!?!

Knex*

Pretty much everyone last year said the same thing though, right? If we had Sturridge, or a replacement striker, we'd have gotten 4th.

5starpool

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Sometimes you just wish Rodgers would shut up. I can see Sturridge now staying fit for the rest of the season, but us still not getting top 4.

Someone asked earlier "what do we want Rodgers to say" and my answer would be "much less". He really could do with more of what he did in the summer, which was keep quiet.

MD1990

Knex. wrote: »

Pretty much everyone last year said the same thing though, right? If we had Sturridge, or a replacement striker, we'd have gotten 4th.

He is putting add alot of pressure on Sturridge though. Every chance he will get injured & last season after a good start coming back he wasnt great after that.

Mr Alan

MD1990 wrote: »

He is putting add alot of pressure on Sturridge though. Every chance he will get injured & last season after a good start coming back he wasnt great after that.

Rodgers doesn't care

All he is out for is excuses for himself

It's pathetic but happens so frequently at this stage we should be used to it

Knex*

MD1990 wrote: »

He is putting add alot of pressure on Sturridge though. Every chance he will get injured & last season after a good start coming back he wasnt great after that.

Quite true actually.

LuckyLloyd

Knex. wrote: »

Pretty much everyone last year said the same thing though, right? If we had Sturridge, or a replacement striker, we'd have gotten 4th.

Nope, not everyone. And in any case, a phenomenally injury prone player getting injured is something that happens. Rodgers is tasked with building a squad to survive such incidents.

Turtyturd

Is Sturridge the new Joe Allen?

Mr Alan

Turtyturd wrote: »

Is Sturridge the new Joe Allen?

Or the new Lovren?

Potential Underachiever

Turtyturd wrote: »

Is Sturridge the new Joe Allen?

Mr Alan wrote: »

Or the new Lovren?

What are we shyteing on about here lads? You've lost me.

Sturridge is Sturridge, phenomenal goal return and and injury list to match, class player though.

martyos121

Mr Alan wrote: »

Or the new Lovren?

Who?!

Osmosis Jones

martyos121 wrote: »

Who?!

Think he means Velron, he's not a very good speller.

Buck Melanoma

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

Think he means Velron, he's not a very good speller.

Nah, sure he means Revlon, to keep with the lovely hair references.

OwaynOTT

MD1990 wrote: »

He is putting add alot of pressure on Sturridge though. Every chance he will get injured & last season after a good start coming back he wasnt great after that.

I dunno, maybe Studge is the kinda player that would like like to belive he's the main reason why a team would reach or fail to reach its targets.

SlickRic

Rodgers isn't wrong about Sturridge.

It doesn't mean should've said it. The whole quote is self serving. 'If we have the players, we'll do well.' He conveniently leaves out the part where he had a major role in creating the team that he seems to deem pretty reliant on one player for its attacking edge.

Muahahaha

jaysis reading this thread is like being bogged down in a swamp lately

punk_one82

SlickRic wrote: »

Rodgers isn't wrong about Sturridge.

It doesn't mean should've said it. The whole quote is self serving. 'If we have the players, we'll do well.' He conveniently leaves out the part where he had a major role in creating the team that he seems to deem pretty reliant on one player for its attacking edge.

Did he actually have a major part to play in getting this group of players together though? With the amount of crap being posted about the transfer committee and then Rodgers saying he has the last word. I actually don't know who to believe on the topic anymore. People constantly saying he didn't want Sturridge, Coutinho was a TC signing, Balotelli was a last resort. Did he want Benteke? Ings? Did Rodgers really decide Lambert was who we needed?

The fact is our transfer dealings have been so incredibly diluted that we don't know which players Rodgers actually wants. Yes, players bought in his time here have been around 300m worth but how much of that 300m was spent on players he specifically set out to get?

He's taking a lot of flack for performances and that's fair enough given our system and playing players out of position, but there's also a good chance he's stuck with players he never wanted in the first place and instead of the TC being scrapped because Rodgers won't work with a DoF, he's the person in the firing line.

Hoki

Muahahaha wrote: »

jaysis reading this thread is like being bogged down in a swamp lately

The interest in reading what gets said here has waned considerably over the last few weeks, 70% of posts by Caovyn & 20% by people getting worked up at posts by Caovyn , that leaves about 10% of posts split between the 'anti-Rodgers from the get go' group and the ' lets wait & see how he fares out ' group. Before you quote me to ask if I have evidence of these figures Caovyn, I do, right here.

Muahahaha

exactly, I just read through the last 20 pages and the amount of disruption by a single poster is unreal

Jesus Wept

Is canovy a mr alan alt. Because it was his ramblings that were indulged with 80% of responses for years.

Question for canyolvyn. What do you do for a crust?

corwill

Soooo.... FC Sion, eh? They're coming off the back of 2 defeats in the Swiss Super League, in which they are 5th, but beat Rubin Kazan 2-1 at home in their 1st group match. They won the Swiss Cup last year... Em... They presumably each have a swiss...

I know divil a'bit about them as a team, anyone got any insights for us?

OwaynOTT

OwaynOTT wrote: »

I dunno, maybe Studge is the kinda player that would like like to belive he's the main reason why a team would reach or fail to reach its targets.

I think Sturridge reckons/suspects that he doesn't get enough credit for the 2013/2014 season, I have no doubt he wants to prove that it wasn't just the Suarez show that drove that title challenge, I do hope he remains fit and scores a bucket load of goals this season (25 to 30)

corwill

Augeo wrote: »

I think Sturridge reckons/suspects that he doesn't get enough credit for the 2013/2014 season, I have no doubt he wants to prove that it wasn't just the Suarez show that drove that title challenge, I do hope he remains fit and scores a bucket load of goals this season (25 to 30)

It brings to mind people trying to make out the rivalry between him and Suarez was a bad thing, when it was bringing out the best in both of then, or at least it looked that way to me.

whatawaster

Augeo wrote: »

I think Sturridge reckons/suspects that he doesn't get enough credit for the 2013/2014 season, I have no doubt he wants to prove that it wasn't just the Suarez show that drove that title challenge, I do hope he remains fit and scores a bucket load of goals this season (25 to 30)

Goals per game - Liverpool Strikers

Daniel Sturridge - 0.62
Luis Suarez - 0.62
Fernando Torres - 0.57
Michael Owen - 0.53
Robbie Fowler - 0.52
Ian Rush - 0.52

Sturridge is a class act when fit.

LuckyLloyd

whatawaster wrote: »

Sturridge is a class act when fit.

And we all hope he stays that way, but the odds are against it.

whatawaster

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

And we all hope he stays that way, but the odds are against it.

Maybe, last season was definitely his worst season injury wise, before that he tended to pick up knocks and niggles and played a decent number of games each season (allowing for the fact that he was really only first choice at Chelsea for 1 season)

Fingers crossed, though I'm expecting news of a training ground injury any day now.

LuckyLloyd

whatawaster wrote: »

Maybe, last season was definitely his worst season injury wise, before that he tended to pick up knocks and niggles and played a decent number of games each season (allowing for the fact that he was really only first choice at Chelsea for 1 season)

Fingers crossed, though I'm expecting news of a training ground injury any day now.

Well I remember posting about this during 2013 / 14. First choice or no, the bottom line is he is an athlete prone to knocks who never got big workloads early in his career. My belief is that is part of the reason he's become susceptible to more severe injuries at a higher workload.

brevity

There are a few rumours (Gerrards book alludes to them) that Sturridge is very very reluctant to return to action when he has been injured. He's apparently not a fan of taking a pain killing injection and playing though the pain

This of course is his right and some would say is the correct thing to do but might explain why when he is out, its for a longer time than others.

corwill

brevity wrote: »

There are a few rumours (Gerrards book alludes to them) that Sturridge is very very reluctant to return to action when he has been injured. He's apparently not a fan of taking a pain killing injection and playing though the pain

This of course is his right and some would say is the correct thing to do but might explain why when he is out, its for a longer time than others.

Given the way in which he broke down the last time he returned from injury, I can understand if he's wary.

There's a lot of macho stuff in sport about playing through pain to get back in action, very little of which you'll ever get an orthopaedic surgeon to endorse. I've seen sports physios in shouting matches with sawbones about it.

I'm just coming back from a bad shoulder injury myself (dislocation, ripped the rotator cuff right off the bone), and I'm constantly pestering the surgeon for the green light. He just says I can eff off and get someone else to fix me when I will (not might) do it again if I don't let it heal more.

LuckyLloyd

brevity wrote: »

There are a few rumours (Gerrards book alludes to them) that Sturridge is very very reluctant to return to action when he has been injured. He's apparently not a fan of taking a pain killing injection and playing though the pain

This of course is his right and some would say is the correct thing to do but might explain why when he is out, its for a longer time than others.

You wouldn't get away with that attitude in other sports. Roy Keane notes that Van Nisteelroy was the same in his later autobiography, and that some other of the foreign players at Utd were the same whereas Keane rubbered himself for the cause as much as he could. He adds a joke that Van Nisteelroy played through to 38 / 39 in Spain so his attitude may have assisted in longevity, but then again I think getting to 34 / 35 is fair enough and players would probably do best to wring as much out of their peak years as possible from a competitive perspective. That said looking from their own monetary perspective, probably well worth trading time on the pitch in your twenties for an extra couple of contracted years in your late thirties.

LuckyLloyd

corwill wrote: »

Given the way in which he broke down the last time he returned from injury, I can understand if he's wary.

There's a lot of macho stuff in sport about playing through pain to get back in action, very little of which you'll ever get an orthopaedic surgeon to endorse. I've seen sports physios in shouting matches with sawbones about it.

I'm just coming back from a bad shoulder injury myself (dislocation, ripped the rotator cuff right off the bone), and I'm constantly pestering the surgeon for the green light. He just says I can eff off and get someone else to fix me when I will (not might) do it again if I don't let it heal more.

In strength based sports competing hurt is part and parcel of the process. Rugby / NFL players would be routinely less than 100%. It's not macho if you're an athlete who is rarely going to be 100%, either because of your own physiology or because of the nature of the sport you compete in. At a certain point it becomes a professional choice - the difference between the guy who voluntarily works late to push something through before a deadline and the guy who raises ahead of time that he can't make it and sticks to his contracted hours. There are arguments for / against both approaches to your employment.

whatawaster

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You wouldn't get away with that attitude in other sports. Roy Keane notes that Van Nisteelroy was the same in his later autobiography, and that some other of the foreign players at Utd were the same whereas Keane rubbered himself for the cause as much as he could. He adds a joke that Van Nisteelroy played through to 38 / 39 in Spain so his attitude may have assisted in longevity, but then again I think getting to 34 / 35 is fair enough and players would probably do best to wring as much out of their peak years as possible from a competitive perspective. That said looking from their own monetary perspective, probably well worth trading time on the pitch in your twenties for an extra couple of contracted years in your late thirties.

Yes, but Keane would have had the same attitude if someone got a bang on the head. "Get on with it". It's an attitude from an era when sports science and medicine were often just ignored.

murpho999

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You wouldn't get away with that attitude in other sports. Roy Keane notes that Van Nisteelroy was the same in his later autobiography, and that some other of the foreign players at Utd were the same whereas Keane rubbered himself for the cause as much as he could. He adds a joke that Van Nisteelroy played through to 38 / 39 in Spain so his attitude may have assisted in longevity, but then again I think getting to 34 / 35 is fair enough and players would probably do best to wring as much out of their peak years as possible from a competitive perspective. That said looking from their own monetary perspective, probably well worth trading time on the pitch in your twenties for an extra couple of contracted years in your late thirties.

Could this be down to different positions. Midfeiders being more aggressive team players than selfish strikers?

Harry Palmr

brevity wrote: »

There are a few rumours (Gerrards book alludes to them) that Sturridge is very very reluctant to return to action when he has been injured. He's apparently not a fan of taking a pain killing injection and playing though the pain

This of course is his right and some would say is the correct thing to do but might explain why when he is out, its for a longer time than others.

One only has to watch him, last season he was wary and he was right of course as it turned out. Again he is staying clear of possible tackles and as I said after the game I don't blame him but I hope he quits the circumspection quickly.

No sporting injury will be fixed with an injection. When Gerrard was finally healed it took proper surgery after years sticking plasters.

brevity

Seems Gerrard is of the same mould as Roy Keane which should probably surprise no one...

"Gerrard is not one of those players who pretends injuries are all in the mind. His new book includes perhaps the most graphic account of a football injury yet committed to paper, as Gerrard’s doctors puzzle over a mysterious yet crippling complaint that is eventually traced to a rogue sac of pus deep in his pelvis. Then his ankle becomes infected, and the reader winces as a surgeon slices open the inflamed joint. The pus, Gerrard informs us forensically, took eight minutes to drain.
So some injuries can stop you in your tracks. But Gerrard also repeatedly makes the point that ignoring almost constant low-level pain is part of the footballer’s life. If you don’t find a way to deal with that, you will seldom make it out on to the field.
Gerrard writes of the match against Manchester United at the beginning of the 2013-14 season: “I was always desperate to play against them, even if there had been more defeats than victories. It seemed different for Daniel Sturridge.”
Sturridge, it turns out, had been dubious about whether he was fit , and Gerrard spent the pre-match walk begging him to play through the pain. In the event, Sturridge scored in a 1-0 victory that laid the foundation for a successful season.
Everybody can understand the implications of the fact that Sturridge required some heavy-duty moral arm-twisting to persuade him to play against United. Probably not even Sturridge would argue with the conclusion that he seems more talented than dependable. But it’s also significant that the man doing the arm-twisting was a team-mate, and not the manager."

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/english-soccer/ken-early-brendan-rodgers-rocket-science-and-friction-1.2369086

Bandana boy

While it is easy to admire these warriors pushing through pain barriers , none of us will help them out in later life when they come to pay the piper for these choices.

I have a friend who is suffering really bad back complications in his late 30s from playing through an unresolved back injury in his 20s.
This at a amateur level.
Nobody from that team is going to help him when he cant lift his kids.

Your health really is your wealth and you spend it wisely

LuckyLloyd

Bandana boy wrote: »

While it is easy to admire these warriors pushing through pain barriers , none of us will help them out in later life when they come to pay the piper for these choices.

I have a friend who is suffering really bad back complications in his late 30s from playing through an unresolved back injury in his 20s.
This at a amateur level.
Nobody from that team is going to help him when he cant lift his kids.

Your health really is your wealth and you spend it wisely

Health has very little to do with elite sport imo.

gafferino

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Health has very little to do with elite sport imo.

Go on

Bandana boy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Health has very little to do with elite sport imo.

You only have to look around the amount of "elite" sportsmen in the world suffering the consequences of decisions in their careers.

NFL players in America live 20 years shorter than average American Males !

We all seen pictures of Tommy Smith Crippled from Football.

Then as you pointed out you have the purely financial aspect of extending/shortening your career by 20-25%


http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/2013/01/29/nfl-players-union-and-harvard-team-landmark-study-football-injuries-and-illness/aCGnf96h7ptWX2Lnp5MIiP/story.html

5starpool

gafferino wrote: »

Go on

I'm assuming he means that elite athletes are elite athletes because they put their body on the line and risk more in order to achieve more. It doesn't mean you compete when you are seriously injured, but will have a higher level of tolerance where you will play through than non elite athletes generally.

This is becoming less true though I think, especially in football and the likes when there is far more money on the line for clubs who would be risking their stars.

LuckyLloyd

gafferino wrote: »

Go on

Go on to what? Sport is about winning above all other considerations and the consistent willing use of blood doping fits with early runs of 'Goldman's Dilemna' - i.e. elite level athletes are willing to sacrifice their future health for the opportunity to win now. As such, physical fitness is an offshoot or side benefit of certain sports that require a broad aerobic base for an athlete to complete the required workload, but you have to remember that the world of sport is very broad and not all sports have that component.

If Sturridge or any other footballer is always erring on the side of caution because of long term health concerns then it may speak of a fundamental lack of desire to win. A deep rooted desire to win to the point of obsession can manifest itself negatively of course in terms of willingness to cheat, having negative personality traits, etc. But the positives of being desperate to get on the field and seek every edge can be related to that extra bit of tenacity on the field that carries the day. Suarez / Keane were the types to straddle that line. Suarez also demonstrated a remarkable turnaround to get on the pitch for Uruguay at last summer's world cup to contrast Sturridge a little bit.

Anyway, bit rambly but some general thoughts.

Harry Palmr

Under 21s beat Leicestershire 2-1 last night, Jose Enrique played at left back in the first half, goals from Jerome Sinclair and Cameron Branagan - the winner basically rebound off him, the away keeper with the assist! :pac: Had i known Teix was playing I'd have looked for a stream - poor fella is right on the margins and I have no idea why. Use him or loan him.

LIVERPOOL: Fulton, Maguire, Enrique (Randall 46), Cleary, Brewitt, Chirivella, Gomez, O’Hanlon, Sinclair, Brannagan (c), Teixeira (Hart 90)

SUBS NOT USED: Virtue-Thick, Wheeler, Marsh

5starpool

34 years ago today, Bill Shankly died. Pity I am not quite old enough to remember the great man who built an empire.

corwill

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

In strength based sports competing hurt is part and parcel of the process. Rugby / NFL players would be routinely less than 100%. It's not macho if you're an athlete who is rarely going to be 100%, either because of your own physiology or because of the nature of the sport you compete in. At a certain point it becomes a professional choice - the difference between the guy who voluntarily works late to push something through before a deadline and the guy who raises ahead of time that he can't make it and sticks to his contracted hours. There are arguments for / against both approaches to your employment.

I'm not sure that there's any meaningful comparison between putting in more effort at work and playing sport, at whatever level, through certain injuries, they're different things.

In the case of the latter, it's completely dependant on the nature of the injury, no matter how driven or committed one might be. Play through a few concussions, for instance, and you'll be familiarising yourself with the wide range of modern incontinence clothing in the fullness of time.

With my injury, a hard enough sneeze could have put it out again within the first couple of weeks, if I didn't keep it immobilised in a sling. No amount of iron will can change basic physiology.