no gerrard affects our style of play, he completely slows it down and is certainly not a dm.

Yes he does......hen scores goals and form an amazing partnership with suarez.

Indeed, I'd say Gerrard has had a bigger detrimental affect on our style of play than Sturridge.

I think he probably does, we have been very successful with Suarez up top with two inside forwards, but it's a nice problem to have because the SAS are potent. We need a bit more strength in midfield to accommodate them both.

No. The problem today was having Gerrard & Henderson sat in midfield. All week people have been posting on here to play those two together and to drop Lucas.

We score goals for fun but we are in the position we are because we are poor defensively. One stat can prove that. Lucas has more tackles than any other player in the league. This has been the case for the last few seasons.

Rodgers left Lucas out today and we were mauled in midfield. Gerrard admitted that in his interview after the game.

All I can say as a Chelsea fan is that his biggest downfalls at Chelsea were his laziness and selfishness.

By the brief amount I've seen of him at Liverpool, he seems to look for team mates a lot more, rather than shoot on sight as he did at Chelsea, so I think that aspect has improved.

His laziness however, I don't know I haven't watched enough of him with you. But with us, it was very frustrating.

433 in the only way forward. 442 we get punished.

Lucas Allen and Henderson is the way forward with Gerard coming in to change games.

City let Sturridge go. They could have course kept him, had they agreed to his terms in regards to a new contract, but the club decided against that.

So off he went to Chelsea.

Chelsea have since let him go, to Liverpool no less - not just another PL side, but Liverpool, a club who have realistic ambitions of challenging the likes of Chelsea to the league title.

So why did Chelsea allow Sturridge to go there?

I get the feeling (it is just an opinion), that Sturridge has all the ability in the world to become a top class player, but lacks the mentality in which to do so.

But then, to be fair (in the interests of balance), it could just be a factor of a player (Sturridge) finding the right club (Liverpool) and feeling at home.

He is a top class player. I, for one, will just wait and see whether he is able to maintain the aptitude, and indeed attitude, that is needed in order to succeed at the very highest level.

comment by Charlag™ (U1717)
posted 51 seconds ago
All I can say as a Chelsea fan is that his biggest downfalls at Chelsea were his laziness and selfishness.

By the brief amount I've seen of him at Liverpool, he seems to look for team mates a lot more, rather than shoot on sight as he did at Chelsea, so I think that aspect has improved.

His laziness however, I don't know I haven't watched enough of him with you. But with us, it was very frustrating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd probably agree with that, fact is he scores us a lot of goals and we need to have him in the team really. It's probably what's seperating him from the top players, as he certainly has all the talent, maybe just not the work rate of someone like Suarez

I think Studge is a great player. I was really worried about his selfish attitude when he signed for us but look at his assist stats last season & this. He also creates space for Suarez.

He left Chelsea because he wasn't getting the chances he deserved, best move for him.

I hesitate to say this but he would be a very good super sub....

He left Chelsea because he wasn't getting the chances he deserved, best move for him.

------------

Too simplistic a response.

Why wasn't he getting the chances at Chelsea?

Why did City not offer him the contract that he felt he deserved?

There are reasons for that.

What those reasons are however...

Gerrard in the deep CM position affects out play more. He's not good in that position. He wasn't against Stoke but for some reason the pundits waxed lyrical about it. He was awful today in the first half.

We are a better when Lucas is in the team as the deep CM. I'd say Allen too. Gerrard is too slow and immobile now. Still a good player so I'm not slagging him off but he can't play as our def waive midfielders.

Sturridge let his own frustration get the better of him. He is and has been a fantastic signing for our club. StevieG was dreadful first half. Joe Allen made a difference in that he fought tooth and nail to keep possession, also that he passed better.

JimmyTheRed

comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 43 minutes ago
He left Chelsea because he wasn't getting the chances he deserved, best move for him.

------------

Too simplistic a response.

Why wasn't he getting the chances at Chelsea?

Why did City not offer him the contract that he felt he deserved?

There are reasons for that.

What those reasons are however...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the club preferred to play their £50m fail of an investment over him. City not offering him a contract is their loss. I'd hardly call it a right decision (while they are hardly lacking in the striking department)

Because the club preferred to play their £50m fail of an investment over him. City not offering him a contract is their loss. I'd hardly call it a right decision (while they are hardly lacking in the striking department)

-----------

Mistakes can be made. But nevertheless, your response to my questions is far too simplistic. Sturridge has failed at two top clubs. You could be right - it could simply be their loss (and Liverpool's gain (and to be fair, he has been a "gain" for Liverpool).

In regards to City, he was a kid who asked for too much far too soon. He wanted a wage that wasn't befitting his first team experience. Ergo he didn't get what he wanted.

At Chelsea, he failed to break through - one side would say that Chelsea is a striker's graveyard, another side would say that they're looking for a top class striker that the signings that they've made haven't delivered. Even despite spending £50m on Torres.

At Liverpool, Sturridge, at the moment, looks a great fit. He compliments Suarez so well, and as a result is part of a strike-force (attacking options) that is formidable in terms of the league.

But it's a strikeforce that is tentative. Suarez could leave, and has expressed a desire to leave in the summer just gone. If Liverpool don't get top four, then judging from the comments on this site from Liverpool fans, not many would be surprised to see him go come next summer. So where does that leave Sturridge, who has formed a great partnership with a great player. My point being - just how much is Suarez making Sturridge look like a top class player? Or indeed vice-versa?

dropping Lucas is the problem

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.

Maybe that's the mentality that you write of?

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.

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?

Gerrard was the worst player on the park tonight

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.

That should read: *any of the FIRST two seasons when he was at Chelsea*