Now don't get me wrong, we all know he's a great player but does he have a negative affect on how we play? Earlier on in the season we were playing poorly with him in the team yet still winning matches and then when he was injured we played our best football.
Could it be down to his slight laziness and unwillingness to press the ball? When we were playing well in a 4-3-3 a lot of that was down to really energetic pressing;something we lacked today. Or could it simply be the fact that we're playing 2 men up top, meaning we're a man short in midfield.
Personally i think that we can't play SAS in every match and I wouldn't like to see either player on the wing. Maybe the games at home against opposition that will sit deep and want us to break them down. Maybe that's what BR was expecting today, who knows.
Does Sturridge affect our style of play?
posted on 18/1/14
dropping Lucas is the problem
posted on 18/1/14
RipleysCat (U1862)
I take your point but I feel there are some mitigating circumstances. He was very young at City at a time when they came into a lot of money. I think the same could be said at Chelsea where they certainly played him wide.
I think he is a bit better player now but also older (I've heard it said he has found God or something). I also think that he has shown he can score goals with or without Suarez and indeed at every club he has played for.
However, I don't think he'll score many at International level. I've just a feeling he's going to be a bit like Andy Cole in that respect. Just happens sometimes.
posted on 18/1/14
Maybe that's the mentality that you write of?
posted on 18/1/14
Robbing, I agree, there most probably are mitigating circumstances. But City coming into a lot of money isn't one of them. After all, he moved from City (a club who had just come into a lot of money) to a club (Chelsea) who were renowned for having a lot of dosh.
Chances of playing in the first team weren't his reasons for moving away from City. If they were, he wouldn't have moved to Chelsea, who at the time had a much better strike-force than City had.
posted on 18/1/14
that's a tricky one though, he may have simply felt he wasn't getting a fair shake at City and who in their right mind would turn down an offer from a side that will win medals/titles as a place to try and get treated better?
posted on 18/1/14
Gerrard was the worst player on the park tonight
posted on 18/1/14
that's a tricky one though, he may have simply felt he wasn't getting a fair shake at City and who in their right mind would turn down an offer from a side that will win medals/titles as a place to try and get treated better?
----------------
He did get a "fair shake" at City though. The bottom line is, because he played a fair share of first team games, he wanted a much better contract than City were prepared to offer him at that time of his career. That is simply a fact.
And what backs that fact up is that he got a better contract offer from Chelsea, hence why he signed for them (despite his chances of first team football at Chelsea being just as good as, or arguably even worse, than they were at City (at the time he left)).
Here's a stat for you:
In his last season at City he played more games for the first team in one season than he did in any of the two seasons when he was at Chelsea.
posted on 18/1/14
That should read: *any of the FIRST two seasons when he was at Chelsea*
posted on 18/1/14
OK - I didn't know the facts behind the transfer
the only times I really looked into other clubs transfers in detail was back during the nett spend wars of 2006-2011 and that was purely looking at numbers.
posted on 19/1/14
Sturridge affecting what??? Madness to think that he played ok today nice finish. The only thing is sometimes he needs to move the ball quicker but hes integral to our team. If suarez were to leave in the summer I have everything faith in sturridge.