Daniel Sturridge

[TheCount 146]

He was shit, Ba is better, good business, good luck.

[robsblubot 3,595]

we all agree he was never given a proper chance, but the question is why? Because Chelsea coaches did not like his haircut?

Or perhaps they did not like what they saw in training? Perhaps they think he just isn't good enough?

Sturridge applied a nice finish against nobody and then vanished as usual. The difference in quality between Suarez and Sturridge is just astonishing...

[bushman 2,043]

Whatever he said & he must have said something, there is an urgency for him to do some homework.

He played for Chelsea, won several trophies with a little contribution.

Has he not realized that Liverpool have not won anything for over 6 years ?

Chelsea made the right decision to sent him packing.

[Liquidator 5,176]

I'll give it a week before his house is robbed

[ja1 1,166]

we all agree he was never given a proper chance, but the question is why? Because Chelsea coaches did not like his haircut?

Or perhaps they did not like what they saw in training? Perhaps they think he just isn't good enough?

Sturridge applied a nice finish against nobody and then vanished as usual. The difference in quality between Suarez and Sturridge is just astonishing...

What do you mean 'vanished'? After he scored he put Shelvey through for a one on one and really caused their defence problems with his dribbling and pace. You may not have noticed him later on because he was not on the pitch due to being taken off at 55' - BR saving him.

[zolayes 14,489]

I'll give it a week before his house is robbed

he has lost his hub caps already

[robsblubot 3,595]

What do you mean 'vanished'? After he scored he put Shelvey through for a one on one and really caused their defence problems with his dribbling and pace. You may not have noticed him later on because he was not on the pitch due to being taken off at 55' - BR saving him.

I thought he was very poor esp in the second half; manager prob thought the same because Suarez subbed him immediately creating lots of probs to their defense.

Suarez was so much better when he came on; well, he is the better player in every aspect of the game and by a wide margin.

Let's agree to disagree then, because I think Sturridge is a mediocre player (as in average).

[bushman 2,043]

The way I saw it, he scored a sitter. Then, he had another chance but he tripped over the ball.

As I said, I wish him well. Just as long as he shuts his mouth.

[Amblève. 4,995]

What speech? Link it.

There's none. Just like there's no video about him saying that he's pissed because he's being used on the wing position.

Some people have made up their minds up that Sturridge is a selfish, egocentric arse and they won't change them. They'll, now that he's playing for Liverpool, only find more and more quotes to make him look like the evil who hated Chelsea.

[Las7 951]

We didn't give him chances even though he should have been on equal footing to Torres this season based on their performances over the last few years. Sturridge has averaged a goal every 171 minutes he has been on the field since 2008, which is quite remarkable for a striker his age in the EPL. He got one start in his preferred position out of 14 possible matches he was fit for(Torres was banned) - that would of course lead to him looking for a club where he won't have to continuously try to prove himself to new coaches. Rodgers obviously will play him regularly and give him a fare chance up top.

If Sturridge was given a run of at least a few games in a row in his preferred position and failed to take it at CFC, I'd understand him being labeled a failure but at Chelsea he never even got 2 games in a row up top. Even though on loan to Bolton he outscored the combined tally of Drogba/Anelka/Torres for half a season against the same defenders they could not find the net against.

That's why I want to see how he does at Liverpool - just so I can call out our board of muppets for the huge muppetary their continued support for Torres ahead of better performing players and how that has cost us.

In just one match we have seen what a difference a striker who is actual doing pretty standard things like trying to get to rebounds or trying to run onto crosses have allowed Ba to score two goals out of three chances in a game where I would not say our midfield created all that much for him. Imagine if we had actually tried Sturridge or tried Lukaku against the clubs we managed to drop points against we might have found similar results - it's not exactly rocket science just a bit more movement inside the box which has been one the major weaknesses of Torres.

[zolayes 14,489]

We didn't give him chances even though he should have been on equal footing to Torres this season based on their performances over the last few years. Sturridge has averaged a goal every 171 minutes he has been on the field since 2008, which is quite remarkable for a striker his age in the EPL. He got one start in his preferred position out of 14 possible matches he was fit for(Torres was banned) - that would of course lead to him looking for a club where he won't have to continuously try to prove himself to new coaches. Rodgers obviously will play him regularly and give him a fare chance up top.

If Sturridge was given a run of at least a few games in a row in his preferred position and failed to take it at CFC, I'd understand him being labeled a failure but at Chelsea he never even got 2 games in a row up top. Even though on loan to Bolton he outscored the combined tally of Drogba/Anelka/Torres for half a season against the same defenders they could not find the net against.

That's why I want to see how he does at Liverpool - just so I can call out our board of muppets for the huge muppetary their continued support for Torres ahead of better performing players and how that has cost us.

just because I don't rate Sturidge doesn't mean I am a Torres fan and I would think that is true of a number of fans on here .. I think for once the board got it right in selling Danny and buying Ba

[Las7 951]

just because I don't rate Sturidge doesn't mean I am a Torres fan and I would think that is true of a number of fans on here .. I think for once the board got it right in selling Danny and buying Ba

It's not a matter of rating Ba over Sturridge - because Ba was not a Chelsea player until this January. I'm talking about the previous two years during which in the League Anelka; Drogba and Torres failed to find any consistency yet our board and managers failed to give even an ounce of opportunity to a player like Sturridge.

As I've said you might have not rated him, but he cannot be deemed a failure with the statistics I've pointed out and the fact that he was never given two games in a row in his preferred position.

Torres isn't the player Ba should be disposing - Torres should have been cut loose after his 24 hour barren spell last season. Fact is that Ba has a similar goal per minute to what Sturridge has showed capability of doing in a similar side like Bolton and Ba was also ineffectual when shafted out on the wing in favour of Cisse for 6 months last season. If we played Ba on the wing and he failed to become a good winger is it the fault of Ba or the board/management for playing him in a position which he is not suited to?

[YouNameIt 1,511]

There's none. Just like there's no video about him saying that he's pissed because he's being used on the wing position.

Some people have made up their minds up that Sturridge is a selfish, egocentric arse and they won't change them. They'll, now that he's playing for Liverpool, only find more and more quotes to make him look like the evil who hated Chelsea.

Couldnt have said it better myself.

[YouNameIt 1,511]

You, of all people on this forum, complain about namecalling? That's a funny one mate.

By the way, I have heard Ray Wilkins saying he had attitude problems, and one member (can't recall his name) on this forum also said that he experienced it during away matches.

Also, how do you know that Torres (also excuse me for calling him by his name, I must be a fanboy) was played because the board was delusional? Did you attend the board meetings? Do you know anyone from our board who you usually chat up with? Were you at the trainings seeing how they trained?

Also, how is it definite that we would have more points, or how is Sturridge twice the better player than anyone, if he, as you said, didn't get enough time to prove himself?

The fact is, you do the same as everyone else, every single supporter: you suppose things. Some do it this way, some do it in another. We suppose that he had attitude problems, you suppose it's because of the so called blonde cunt. Do i think you are a retard, or an inbred because I don't agree with you tho? No I don't, because I'm not in a positon to know the real truth.

You're obviousley pretty dumb asking those questions.

1) Give me ONE reason to why Torres should be given 10 times the playtime Danny's had? Give me ONE reason as to why Torres has been played upfront and Danny hasnt.

2) Because we saw Danny upfront for one game, even if he missed a sitter or two, he created space, he moved better, he played like a striker and we looked more dangerous. Considering that ONE GAME (and Danny played that after he was injured and hadnt really played much) - he looked FIVE TIMES better than Torres.

How can you even claim that Im wrong? You're just using a stuipid arguement-technique...

[Rambo 1,729]

No point discussing this now. The board had no faith in him from the start of the season and I don't blame Sturridge for resenting us for not giving him a proper chance up front. I'm confident Ba will help take the starting spot away from the #9 and hopefully make that number his own..literally.