Daniel Sturridge

[ja1 1,166]

Sturridge is young. I have very little doubt that at one point in the future he'll be good enough for us. Hell, for the whole of 2011, he was good enough for us.

[OneMoSalah 8,883]

Sturridge wasn't good enough to displace Drogba/Anelka/Shevchenko/whoever else was at the club when he was from the striking role upfront. He clearly didn't play good enough on his small marginal chances he got upfront to displace Torres upfront either. Stop with the he never got a chance, because he did actually get a chance. He never showed anything great up top as a lone striker so he's getting moved on due to his persistence in wanting to play there when hes not good enough. The club obviously know more than we do.

He had that good half a season but then you remember the shit year hes had since then. Half a good season of consistent performances isn't good enough - as it isn't with Torres good 2 months then shitness for 6 months or whatever.

[themightyblue 443]

Sturridge is young. I have very little doubt that at one point in the future he'll be good enough for us. Hell, for the whole of 2011, he was good enough for us.

In a season where we finished 6th in the league and had our worst squad for years

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Completely baffling how some are deeming Danny "not good enough" when during 2 seasons the time he got as a lone striker is less than 200 mins!

[ja1 1,166]

In a season where we finished 6th in the league and had our worst squad for years

Here come the excuses that belittle any achievement Sturridge has done. Why can people not admit that he was good? Does this mean whatever good Mata did last season is negligible? Is it really that hard to give Sturridge credit that you have to come up with all these excuses.

Some said he was only on form for 6 months - he was on form for 12. 3rd highest English scorer in 2012. Of course he wouldn't displace Drogba and Anelka when he was starting on the right, and this season, people don't seem to understand he was injured, and then act as if it's somehow his fault.

[ja1 1,166]

You can literally count the amount of times Sturridge has played lone striker by minutes.

At the Olympics - 3 starts, 2 goals

For Chelsea - 195 minutes(in 3 apps), 1 goal (apparently that if a sufficient range to judge someone's ability)

Playing as a striker, though not necessarily lone, for Chelsea and Bolton - 17 appearances, 15 goals.

So doing goals to appearances as any type of striker, 23 appearances, 18 goals. Not good enough, of course.

[ja1 1,166]

You can maybe add 2-3 more apps for very early appearances as CF for Chelsea in his first season, think he started a couple in the Carling Cup.

[Slam Dunk 1,442]

Completely baffling how some are deeming Danny "not good enough" when during 2 seasons the time he got as a lone striker is less than 200 mins!

Whereas I find it baffling that because he's played less than 200mins as a lone striker, that deems hims 'good enough' to be starting up front for us. He's unproven and a club like Chelsea isn't exactly known for being a proving ground for young players.

Dwight Yorke made some excellent points regarding Sturridge after yesterdays game. Both he and Ray Wilkins agreed that he's not ready to be a lone striker, even if he thinks he is. Yorke argued that as a young player, you take what you're given in terms of chances in the team, even if it was out wide. He said he himself hated playing out wide, even if he thought it didn't suit his game, but he did it anyway to build himself a reputation and become an established member of the team. Thierry Henry was the same. This is where my problem with Sturridge lies. He was dropped by Di Matteo and Benitez because he didn't work hard enough on the wings (i'm assuming here, obviously we'll never know for sure) because he was so sure that out wide was not where he belongs. His insistence on being a centre forward (let's call it naive ambition) seems to be his undoing, when the managers that he's played under obviously don't think he's ready. Wilkins said that even when he was at the club with Carlo, Sturridge insisted that he was ready to challenge both Drogba and Anelka as the lone striker. Carlo thought that he was better suited to the wings, obviously to this day he still disagrees, despite being a decent player for us (at times) under AVB. If he'd have worked on his game out wide, perhaps he would've eventually got game time up front. The obvious example of this is Theo Walcott, who has had to wait for his chance, but is now getting it and is making strides.

The problem is that there has always been a better player in front of him in the squad up front and he has done nothing out wide at Chelsea to prove that he deserves to be a lone striker. Perhaps this season would've been different, he's been injured and hasn't been able to play as much, even though we only have one other striker. He probably knew that we'd buy another striker in January anyway, and, with his contract coming to an end, it seems like a good time for him to leave. Sometimes it just doesn't work out for players in football, and it's obvious that this is the case with Sturridge.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Whereas I find it baffling that because he's played less than 200mins as a lone striker, that deems hims 'good enough' to be starting up front for us. He's unproven and a club like Chelsea isn't exactly known for being a proving ground for young players.

Agreed. I never said he was good enough, just that he was never given a chance which is even more baffling since our only other choice has been the biggest flop in football history.

[Slam Dunk 1,442]

Agreed. I never said he was good enough, just that he was never given a chance which is even more baffling since our only other choice has been the biggest flop in football history.

Up until now, he's had Anelka, Drogba and Torres to contend with. Proven strikers who on their day, can be world class. Understandable that he hasn't got a clear run of games when we have players like these at their disposal, at a club that demands results. We all know that the club would rather buy a superstar than test a young player with potential, I don't know why we're so surprised that Sturridge is leaving.

This season, Torres has been better (although his goal tally somewhat masks his performance levels), and i've repeatedly said that he will be the no.1 striker at the club this season, like it or not, because of the investment the club has made, but also of his known capabilities. Say what you want about him, he's still a better lone striker than Sturridge. At any other top club, Sturridge would be 3rd or even 4th choice striker, unfortunately for him, his injuries and contract situation have limited him this season, not his fault, i'll concede. It happens in football.

[Madmax 9,219]

I don't think his back-to-goal play is any good at all, really. That's essential for someone who wants to be a lone striker. That's something he shares with Walcott and it's led to me wondering whether getting Walcott would do us any good after all since the latter wants to play upfront too. Ideally, Sturridge would link up well with a battering ram alongside him, like Davies (Bolton) or Carroll. There's no one like that at Liverpool and I can't see Rodgers playing him alongside or in place of Suarez so out wide is where he will remain.

[ja1 1,166]

he has done nothing out wide at Chelsea to prove that he deserves to be a lone striker.

------

Despite being our second top scorer last season?

Sturridge never said he wasn't happy playing on the wing, it's something people have made up and gradually grown on to. If you want to look at the original quote:

Moaning playing for chelsea on the wing,

-------

When talking about his form and the way he has been playing in recent weeks, Sturridge is quoted to have said:

"That's the position I will always pick myself, centre-forward.

But whatever position the manager picks me in I'm happy and right now, for the team, I'm in the wide position.

"I will always give 100 per cent and work as hard as I can to get the success we all want."

If you remember, at the time, 2010, Anelka and Drogba were rubbish. Sturridge was impressing in the very limited outings he got - many Chelsea fans were asking for him to be starting. Even at this point he was playing some reserve football when he was clearly too good for this, scoring 5 goals in one game, and there's a video of him scoring 3 goals in a training match - but he never got a chance.

He was well within his rights to ask why he wasn't getting more chances, which probably led to his loan to Bolton, where he promptly did better than anything Torres or Anelka had shown at CFC that season. I'm sure Lukaku probably did the same when he was playing reserves and the CF's were not doing well - he even came out to the media and was pretty malicious about that.

People are being far to naive to think this move is simply about whether Sturridge starts at CF or not. Far too trivial to say that. If he was so demanding about CF - why is he going to a club where he's starting on the wing? Why did he play and was happy playing wing for AVB? All part of this alias people have created for him.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Up until now, he's had Anelka, Drogba and Torres to contend with. Proven strikers who on their day, can be world class. Understandable that he hasn't got a clear run of games when we have players like these at their disposal, at a club that demands results. We all know that the club would rather buy a superstar than test a young player with potential, I don't know why we're so surprised that Sturridge is leaving.

This season, Torres has been better (although his goal tally somewhat masks his performance levels), and i've repeatedly said that he will be the no.1 striker at the club this season, like it or not, because of the investment the club has made, but also of his known capabilities. Say what you want about him, he's still a better lone striker than Sturridge. At any other top club, Sturridge would be 3rd or even 4th choice striker, unfortunately for him, his injuries and contract situation have limited him this season, not his fault, i'll concede. It happens in football.

I was talking about this season. If you are saying that Torres has been better than Danny this season, I wholeheartedly disagree. If you're saying that Torres has been better than he was last season, then that is irrelevant because Danny was still miles ahead of him.

It's one thing to want results, completely another to only play big names even when you have better players who will get you better results on the bench.

[Slam Dunk 1,442]

I was talking about this season. If you are saying that Torres has been better than Danny this season, I wholeheartedly disagree. If you're saying that Torres has been better than he was last season, then that is irrelevant because Danny was still miles ahead of him.

No, I meant that Torres has been better than he was last season. I don't see it as being irrelevant, because he's still a better all-round lone striker than Sturridge in my eyes. That doesn't mean he's good enough either, because he's not.

It's one thing to want results, completely another to only play big names even when you have better players who will get you better results on the bench.

My point was that Sturridge hasn't done anything to show that he would get results up front on his own rather than Torres. Playing out wide is a whole different game to playing up front alone. As Ray Wilkins said, his goalscoring is good, but his all-round game isn't there yet. And if it comes from him, I trust his opinion more so than anyone on here.

Just because he's scored from the wing, doesn't mean he'd be an instant success up front either, meaning that we would have to give him time to adapt and learn his trade, which i've already said we're not the type of club to do. This season would've been his chance (more than likely), but as I said, injuries/contract situations have prevented that.

I've gotten to the point that i'm repeating myself here

[OneMoSalah 8,883]

Meh, fuck him hes off to Liverpool to win the Carling Cup twice in the next 10-12 years of his career. Fuck him indeed.