Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:56 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

I just dont see Sturridge as a "down the middle" striker. He played all his junior football behind a target man. Most of his goals were scored by latching onto half clearances, or balls nodded back by the main striker, on the edge of the box and clinically putting them away. Or running at defenses from deep. He only played a couple of games for City as a single striker and was poor, couldn't play with his back to the goal and just wasn't physical enough. He may have developed that side of his game at Chelsea but I haven't seen it.

He lacks the technical skill to be a top class striker which is why City wouldn't be held to ransom over his perception of how good he was.

On the Michael Owen thing, I don't think it was over-playing him unless his hamstring injury came as a direct result of that. Once he lost his speed he was a fraction of the player he used to be. I've seen in happen in league to Kevin McCormack and Shaun Edwards to a lesser extent. Red hot pace blown by a hamstring injury.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:17 pm  

He's only had a handful of games as the main striker at Chelsea as well.

And that's the big problem. Even though Torres was stinking out the place he still wasn't given an opportunity to show what he could do.

Just watching Sturridge play and comparing his efforts with Torres, I don't have a shadow of doubt that he would have given us way more than Torres has. In Di Matteo's last match against West Brom Torres played for an hour up front and was pretty much invisible. Torres went off, Sturridge went up front and was involved in three good chances. Two very good saves and dragged a shot wide.

And after the game the criticism of Sturridge was that he didn't score either.

But to me that's just BS. I think Hoddle was the main builder of the nonsense that the top strikers are massively more clinical than lesser strikers. When talking about Andy Cole he said that he needed 4 chances to get a goal. But IMO they all do. The best strikers are the ones who don't let the misses get to them and always offer themselves even when under pressure. Isn't Suarez one of the most prolific shooters in the league? That's why he scores a lot, because he works to create scoring positions for him and the team.

In all honesty I hope I am wrong about Sturridge and he does prove himself to be a dog. The fact that no one else is nipping in to take him suggests it. But my feeling is that we're giving the scousers a major boost and pretty much saving their season for them. I don't want this risk to be taken.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:26 pm  

McClennan wrote:

He lacks the technical skill to be a top class striker which is why City wouldn't be held to ransom over his perception of how good he was.

I call BS on that BS.

The rumour was that Citeh actually offered more money to him than we did. The reason he left was because he was out of contract. It wasn't your decision.

There's no way Citeh, managed by the managerial genius of Mark Hughes, had the knowledge of whether a 19 year old player with 21 first team games under his belt would develop the technical skill to be a top class striker.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:14 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

http://25.media.tumblr.com/8cd6ad77b0021a4b481be4a3eaf18ef8/tumblr_mfhxg4Zc5T1rdg4zpo1_400.gif

His life flashed before him.

There is nothing the FA can do about it. The defender was booked, there's no way the FA can say that's serious enough to add further punishment without completely throwing away their usual excuse for inaction.

But seeing as She Said No's life was put at risk, surely Man United should be putting in a police complaint, or maybe Rio can have a word with a sergeant friend who will complain on their behalf.

Williams clearly does that deliberately, he's looking at Van Persie's head for christsake.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 26, 2012 3:19 am  

I actually think that Fergie has pulled a fast one. Everything thinks he came out with his nonsense because United dropped two points.

But having watched the incident again I think Fergie made his claim to cover up Van Persie's sexual assault of Williams.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 26, 2012 10:32 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

No justice for Sandra Krijgsman though. Just like the scousers.

You may need to enlighten me on this topic, as i was aware that Krijgsman later admitted she lied about being raped?

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:09 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

There's no way Citeh, managed by the managerial genius of Mark Hughes, had the knowledge of whether a 19 year old player with 21 first team games under his belt would develop the technical skill to be a top class striker.

He's 23 now and hasn't been able to generate or hold onto a starting position in either of the two top class teams he's played for, even when they've struggled. I may be assuming here but given the number of managers who've looked at him, if he had something I imagine one of them would have given him a free run instead of putting other strikers in ahead of him. That he has never been able to secure successfully either opportunity suggests that his managers have been in agreement with that point of view. It can't all be bad luck at his age.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:39 pm  

100% Wire wrote:

You may need to enlighten me on this topic, as i was aware that Krijgsman later admitted she lied about being raped?

that's the truth of the matter she later admitted making it up for publicity - not sure that matters to LGJM though snakes with t/ts

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 26, 2012 1:54 pm  

McClennan wrote:

He's 23 now and hasn't been able to generate or hold onto a starting position in either of the two top class teams he's played for, even when they've struggled. I may be assuming here but given the number of managers who've looked at him, if he had something I imagine one of them would have given him a free run instead of putting other strikers in ahead of him. That he has never been able to secure successfully either opportunity suggests that his managers have been in agreement with that point of view. It can't all be bad luck at his age.

He was 19 when he left you. You were in the beginnings of your massive buying spree.

At Chelsea he had Didier Drogba ahead of him. And the last couple of seasons even Drogba was undermined to try and accommodate the misfiring Torres.

Even though he was shunted out on the wing last season he still outscored Torres and matched Drogba. It was only Roman's desperation to make the Torres move work that meant we persisted with him when the clearly better option of giving Sturridge a run was ignored.

I don't know whether he will make it to a high standard. I've liked most of what I've seen when he has played but he's never been played long enough to know how good he will be. But Citeh didn't make some expert assessment on him at 19, Chelsea have given him virtually nothing to work with. Chelsea fans have generally offered him zero support while bending over backwards to support Torres.

When on loan at Bolton he scored plenty. When actually played at Chelsea he did enough to show he deserved more opportunity.

With Joe Cole I would have driven him to Anfield to help that move through. But I think that CFC are taking an insane risk by selling him to them. I am 100% against him being sold to the scousers.

Us letting Sturridge go when Torres is our only striker strongly suggests that we're buying bigger in January. Either Falcao in a permenant move or David Villa on loan. Either of those are clearly on a different planet to Sturridge so I shouldn't be that bothered. But I think LFC will be hugely helped by signing Sturridge, and it pi55es me off.

Most CFC fans write Sturridge off as a greedy player who doesn't play for the team. And a bottler too. And there's supposedly problems with his arrogance. I can't comment on his arrogance as I have heard no actual examples, but I think the selfishness and bottler claims are just woeful examples of supporters rushing to judgement because they don't want to like a player. Given his lack of opportunities at CFC of course he is going to be on the selfish side.

Obviously there are massive financial considerations that play a part, but for me if it was my choice to dump a striker in January I'd be dumping Torres. I think we're flogging a dead horse with Torres and expect that next season Sturridge will be banging in plenty more than Torres.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Dec 26, 2012 2:05 pm  

flipper wrote:

that's the truth of the matter she later admitted making it up for publicity - not sure that matters to LGJM though snakes with t/ts

Have you actually got any DECENT links to her admitting that she made it up for publicity?

If she admitted making up the claim then surely she was charged and convicted?

Because from what I've seen the admission from her was just something that RVP's agent threw out after the case was dropped. Pure PR BS that carries no weight. Just like the scousers with their lie that the whole Suarez-Evra incident was "cultural differences".