5 Sep 2014

Big Problem? Why LFC may have to sell 'special' £29m star to avoid £20m loss repeat

Aaagh! As noted many times, I absolutely hate meaningless international breaks, and one of the main reasons for this is the danger of injuries to Liverpool's key players. Well, this particular injury curse has struck again, and inevitably, it's the increasingly injury-prone Daniel Sturridge who is on the rack. Sturridge is undoubtedly a 'special' player, but his endless injury problems are becoming irritating, and it's a massively frustrating problem for LFC.

According to the BBC:

"Daniel Sturridge has been sent for a scan after he was injured in training on Friday.

"The FA has not revealed the nature of the injury and says Sturridge will be assessed by England's medical staff after his scan".


Since arriving in January 2013, £29m-rated Sturridge has suffered EIGHT separate injuries (including the latest issue):

* SEP 2014: Thigh (awaiting scan results)
* AUG 2014: Hamstring
* APR 2014: Hamstring
* NOV 2013: Ankle Ligaments
* SEP 2013: Hip/Thigh Injury
* MAY 2013: Ankle Ligaments
* FEB 2013: Hamstring
* FEB 2013: Hip/Thigh Injury

Including his pre-LFC career, Sturridge has suffered FOURTEEN injuries since 2011, which is a Daniel Agger-style rate of injury. And it's not just one issue; it's 4 or 5 different problems that keep recurring. It's maddening! Why is Sturridge so injury prone? Why can't Liverpool (or England) manage his susceptibility to injury in a more effective manner?

Sturridge is well aware of his penchant for injury, and he admitted this last season, when he told LFC.com:

"I'd have his [Suarez's] fitness. He must be a man of steel or something. He gets so many kicks and he doesn't seem to feel it, whereas I get a few niggles here and there and it's very frustrating because it kills the momentum I'm having."

To be fair, it's easy to blame England duty for this latest issue, but the reality is that Sturridge himself (or more accurately, his body) is mostly to blame. He is injury prone, and suffers problems that wouldn't affect the average, robust footballer.

Sturridge is an amazing player, and I'm one of his biggest advocates (and continually reject spurious rumour-mongering about his alleged attitude/arrogance issues), but he is, sadly, unreliable, and this may have a knock-on impact on his future LFC career:

* If the regular injuries continue, LFC may be forced to sign another, more reliable striker, which could lead to Sturridge falling down the pecking order. Given his superb goals/assists rate, I'd hate to see that happen, but the team has to come first, and if Sturridge can't remain consistently fit, then the issue should be addressed.

* It's hard to build a team around a player who is constantly injured, and if Sturridge is not careful, he could go the same way as Agger, who was gradually phased out of the team. Granted, the Dane's form is one of the reasons he's no longer at the club, but his atrocious injury record is another major reason.

* The club may also decide to cash-in on Sturridge at some point to take advantage of his high transfer value, rather than watching his value decline as a result of repeated injuries.

Again, Agger is a good comparison here. In August 2012, Liverpool rejected a £20m bid from Man City, which the club obviously should've accepted. Fast-forward two years, and Liverpool scraped in a paltry £3m for the defender, which represents a major retrospective financial loss.

As such, the club surely has to learn from the Agger situation, and Sturridge could be a victim of a more prudent and pre-emptive approach to transfers relating to injured-plagued players.

Recently, I've argued several times that Rodgers should've signed yet another striker in the transfer window, and this is why. Liverpool have Balotelli, but apart from that, there are no other top-quality options at Anfield. What if Balotelli now gets injured?

Fingers-crossed for the scan, and here's hoping Sturridge's injury issues recede over the next year.

Author:



74 comments:

  1. I hatE LFC players playing for a rubbish England team under Roy Hodgson that will never win a sausage - every bloody time there is a friendly Sturidge or some other L F C star gets injured - STOP them from playing stupid friendlies B R - like Fergie always did - ITS A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME -England are total no- hopers

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good points Jaimie and food for thought...

    ReplyDelete
  3. There is a possibility that this could happen once Origi arrives and settles in at Liverpool over the next couple of seasons.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Nevergonnacrackthecode5:58 pm, September 05, 2014

    i dont know
    augero gets injured as does ronaldo recently but madrid and city will not sell them even stevie g in his rafa years

    ReplyDelete
  5. There's no real comparison. Ronaldo rarely gets injured, and the bulk of Aguero's injuries have come over the last year. Sturridge has 14 injuries in 3 years.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sturridge is injury prone because of his pace. Fast players tend to pick up minor knocks. You can't discredit the fact that he has scored 36 goals in 50 games. If he picks up a minor injury, we would play with a lone striker(balo) up front. That's why we need a big squad.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I still wonder what the hell we were doing rejecting Remy on medical grounds whilst other teams seem to have no issues. Remy for £8m was still a no brainer and gave us the depth we needed with such an injury prone no 1

    ReplyDelete
  8. What the hell is Hodgson thinkin making most LFC players play 90 mins on Wednesday after liverpool played on Sunday. Hodgson doesn't care about players' club careers only his international one.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Maybe this was in Borini's mind when he kept making excuses for not moving..

    ReplyDelete
  10. England Twitter says he's out of the game v Switzerland. Ominous

    ReplyDelete
  11. Good point.. If Studge is not fit for the Villa game, Brendo could do a U-Turn and start Balo and Borini. Both Italian and know each other well. Secret weapon? Maybe..

    ReplyDelete
  12. It must not have been a medical issue because his heart issues were well documented even before we were interested and we still tried to sign him. Something behind the scenes must have taken place...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Nicolas Chamberlain6:19 pm, September 05, 2014

    Yeah good idea, sell our most prolific and free scoring striker because he gets injured for time to time...
    Hodgson should have used more substitutes like Norway did. It doesn't make any sense to play your strongest line up for 90 minutes in a friendly just before a much more important match and just two full days after playing a PL match. This solely to blame on Hodgson. LFC are paying the price for his inconsiderate behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Sturidge must be told he does not play in England friendlis - FULL STOP

    ReplyDelete
  15. Does Anyone on earth think England will win anything with WOY in charge- NO CHANCE

    ReplyDelete
  16. What if it rains tonight?, I get wet......... :-)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Read the LFC played Wolves in a friendly at Melwood today. Lallana played...and he scored. So that's some good news after Studge's news.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Nevergonnacrackthecode6:50 pm, September 05, 2014

    if sturridge was never injured last season
    raheem sterling would never be the player he is now as sturridges injury gave him the chance to get an extended run in the side




    maybe now it is lazars chance

    ReplyDelete
  19. Balotelli, Sterling, Lambert and Borini and even Markovic can play as a striker if needed. We do not yet know how serious the injury is but we have adequate backup.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Typical..!!! Why didn't Welbeck replace Studge, Rooneys captain he should play all game..nice one Woy! Doesn't help Danny's made of glass..! Up to you know Mario lets see you centre stage...

    ReplyDelete
  21. if memory serves me correctly, he missed about a month or so last season. November or December.

    ReplyDelete
  22. It would be interesting to know how many actual |Premiership matches he has missed due to injury compared to, for example, how many matches Suarez missed through suspension.

    ReplyDelete
  23. daily mirror say he is out for three weeks maybe 4 but sturridge is quick recovering
    so he may miss west ham, villa,everton ,qpr and hull
    they are the teams we need liverpool to win so no sturrodge is a big miss
    lazar comes in:


    ......................................................balotelli
    markovic.........................................coutinho.................sterling
    ...........................................henderson............gerrard


    maybe lallana as well

    ReplyDelete
  24. Bit of an over reaction. Since Sturridge joined LFC in Jan 2013, Liverpool have played 58 League matches. Sturridge has played in 43 of those. That's 74%.


    He may get lots of knocks, but they aren't serious enough to keep him out for long.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Nevergonnacrackthecode7:45 pm, September 05, 2014

    last time he got injured it was a blessing in disguise
    because sterling played after not starting a game for 8 months he started at hull because stuzza was broken






    now lazar markovic will get his chance he is not a cameo player

    ReplyDelete
  26. Nevergonnacrackthecode7:45 pm, September 05, 2014

    give a recommend then

    ReplyDelete
  27. I thought he was injured in training and we can't tell him not to train COMMA can we?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Nevergonnacrackthecode7:48 pm, September 05, 2014

    sturridge should only play once a week
    his body cant handle two games


    that is why he is injured

    ReplyDelete
  29. Suarez missed 19 games for LFC through suspension (and it would have been 9 more, if he'd stayed). Sturridge has missed 15 through injury so far, although that might go up after this one.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Pretty much what I suspected. Cheers ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  31. Nevergonnacrackthecode7:49 pm, September 05, 2014

    roanldo has been playing through injuries little niggles he even admitted to
    diego costa been playing through a hamstring injury


    but sturridge does not ahve the resilience to do so

    ReplyDelete
  32. I think Lallana WILL come in

    ReplyDelete
  33. Interesting theory and a bit worrying (if true) now that we are in the CL

    ReplyDelete
  34. Maybe but Coutinho seems more of a safer option. We could try Coutinho for home games and Lallana for away games.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Some player's careers are ended early and some are virtually crippled after they have finished playing.

    ReplyDelete
  36. so is it true that balotelli kicked some wolves player in the head in that closed doors friendly match. i read it in some trashy football site so i dont really trust them.

    ReplyDelete
  37. It is NOT true:
    http://www.thisisanfield.com/2014/09/balotelli-lallana-feature-friendly-win-wolves/

    ReplyDelete
  38. Why is it a meaningless international break?

    ReplyDelete
  39. Nobody agrees with me but nobody wanted B R either - Falcoa is DEADLY

    ReplyDelete
  40. I like the way you think.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Its more Fernando Torres than Daniel Agger, but the point is still the same Sturridge is made of paper.


    Has anyone else has been impressed how Rickie Lambert changed the tide of the first two matches when he came on?


    Last but not least Fabio Borini is licking his lips now that Sturridge is injured, he's gone from not into the squad to still not in the squad but with a slight possibility of getting onto the bench

    ReplyDelete
  42. We always get injuries to key players during Internationals breaks.How many times have we gave England the keys to our Ferrari/Sturridge and they've returned it/him crashed with no petrol.
    Nobody at this point in the season is really interested in International football.The attendance for Norway match reflected that.Listening to TalkSPORT a cooking show called something bake off had a higher number of people tune in.Friendlies should be scrapped.Only tournament qualification matches should be played, but not 3 games into a season.The WC just ended FFS!

    ReplyDelete
  43. There seemed to be a touch if destiny about Borini refusing to go. If sturridge is out injured a lot then I'm definitely happier to have Balotelli, Lambert, AND Borini than just the first two. If Balotelli was to get injured or suspended we'd only have Lambert as a recognisable striker without Borini. He's a decent player and we might well be glad of him yet

    ReplyDelete
  44. I was holding my breath this international break....figures. Meaningless, stupid internationals. Why was Sturridge played 90mins against Norway? Yeas, injured in training but the added stress on the body after playing on Sunday....stupid. Farging Woy....clubs should just say "no" to unnecessary internationals. Now we will be without him...for a month. Hold breath for Stirling...Woy will probably play him in goal and make him carry the water and practice balls. Freaking, Stupid internationals!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  45. colonel cocknocker1:01 am, September 06, 2014

    Noooooooooooo! They're saying four months? I really really hope that's just journos scaremongering......

    ReplyDelete
  46. Spirit of the Shadows2:24 am, September 06, 2014

    We have enough cover, but saying he should be sold is a bit of an overreaction. He puts out a good performance everytime and has an amazing scoring rate. I am now worried about sterling and hendo. Stupid Roy will probably run them for another 90 minutes. What is he thinking? Absolute joke of a manager...

    ReplyDelete
  47. Sturridge being injured seems to be regular news

    ReplyDelete
  48. Maybe he still holds a grudge against LFC for being sacked by Livery!!!

    ReplyDelete
  49. He suffers from a lot of "knocks" which tend to mean physical contact. Corked thighs, bruised ankles ... stuff like that. In those instances it's not quite right to say he's just injury prone, most players would have time off if they had to suffer that same contact. Other injuries like strains and muscle tears are a different story and point more to a long term susceptibility. I think he gets about half and half knocks vs strains so while there is good evidence that he might be a risk some of it is just plain bad luck. Suarez is a different kind of physical specimen altogether, he's just built like no other player and isn't really a fair benchmark. Trying to find another player with his physical endurance would be as difficult as finding another player with his skill level or mental determination. Sturridge is also no Agger. Agger had well documented back problems and those are the kind of long term problems you can't do anything about. I wouldn't say Sturridge is at all like Agger apart from having lots of episodes of injury.


    I'm not overly concerned about his injury history. He is frequently out but not often for particularly long times. He's never ruptured an ACL or had a disc in his spine put him on his ass for 3-6 months. His injuries are small and persistent, not long and potentially career ending. For all that he has lots of problems he still plays a good number of games each year and there is no question he is worth persisting with. No, you can't expect him there every match and that's not great, but when he plays he's good for the team and I think we have a squad depth these days that being in and out of the team isn't such a problem.


    I'm mostly not worried because of last season. Sturridge had his usual injuries, Suarez played most games and there were few problems. Balotelli will be fine as a lone striker if needed, Lambert can play a few minutes and then when Sturridge is fit he can play. No different from last year when he had 20 goals and was still a very important player. Why does this season need to be different? We can say Sturridge needs to step up in the absence of Suarez but I don't agree. Let's just have him be the same player he's been all along. It's been good enough so far, why is it suddenly not good enough now?

    ReplyDelete
  50. Yeah, this is the whole reason why Borini wasn't a total fool to not leave the team. He'll get time on the bench and, depending on the opposition, a couple of starts. I hope he takes the chance and does well, it would great for everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Agreed. There is a difference between lots of minor injuries and lots of long term injuries. Agger had lots of serious issues, particularly with his back, an impossible area to manage properly as a professional athlete. Sturridge just gets beaten up a lot but he recovers well.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I supported the 4th striker concept all along because the best teams have four to cover the grueling high level schedule. Why we didn't go for Bony is beyond me. Now we pray for Daniels health. Otherwise one of our attacking wingers gets called into action as a striker......

    ReplyDelete
  53. This biggest hole in your argument Jaimie is the following:


    1) Over reacting and somewhat sensationalist headline suggesting that we should sell Sturridge regardless of his goal return or overall team contribution


    2) Suggesting that for god knows what reason that we build a team around Sturridge, ignoring the fact that we play a system and no player under Rogers will have a team built around them


    Apart from that you make some good points

    ReplyDelete
  54. resilience? did u c costa last season, getting subbed after mins of play, dat effectively leaves the manager with 2 subs, dats stupidity not resilience.

    ReplyDelete
  55. jop i thin kthat decision is gonna haunt us this season

    ReplyDelete
  56. Agree mostly re Sturridge but the Agger thing. I think the club did a great thing selling Agger so cheaply to his boyhood club. Hr didnt want to play for another premier league club and Brondby couldn't afford him. We got a lot of stick for various things over the past few years and we do something good and that is seen as a negative.

    ReplyDelete
  57. i agree mate, we would not be panicking this much if we had Remy there. However Brandan has openly said when he speaks to a player and if he does not see 100% commitment then they will not go ahead with the transfer. I have a feeling it was something along those lines.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Yes, I was proud of how they dealt with Agger too. Shows the club as a whole has a conscience. Also proud of Agger too for showing the club so much respect.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Irrespective of how the injury occurs, or its nature, the end result is the same: a player who is regularly missing from the team.

    ReplyDelete
  60. There is obviously a difference if some injuries mean a shorter spell out of the game when compare to others. It's also an indicator for the future. Picking up an ankle injury from a bad tackle doesn't suggest the same thing will happen again in the future, it's just bad luck. Tearing a hamstring when there is no contact involved indicates a susceptibility that may happen again.


    Some of Sturridge's injuries come from incidents and contact, some don't. So while he clearly is susceptible to breaking down for no discernible reason that doesn't account for all his injuries. That would need to be taken into account when making some judgement on how likely he is to be injured again in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Exactly, same thing happened with Michael Owen.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Of course he is, because he is injured, the whole point of this article.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Lol, I see what you did there.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I don't see why any of this matters. There may be a difference in how he picks up knocks, but the end result is exactly the same: Sturridge is consistently missing from the team through injury. He's had 14 separate injuries since 2011; the whys and wherefores don't matter.

    If someone suffers 14 injuries in 3 years, it's arguably more than just bad luck.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Sturridge when he gets injured misses a maximum of 4 matches in a row, yes it's bad for him, but it's not necessarily bad for the team. We aren't a team with bad squad depth anymore, Rodgers saw to that this window, we will cope. As far as being problematic, Sturridge will only be problematic injury wise if and when the injuries he sustains are long term injuries instead of niggles. You say Aguero has only had injuries this past season and whether it's 1 or 2 seasons that he has been beset with injuries, his injuries have been serious injuries, not niggles. This would be more worrying for Man City than Sturridge is for us.

    ReplyDelete
  66. We have 4 strikers though, Sturridge, Balotelli, Lambert and Borini.

    ReplyDelete
  67. How come there's no better description out there other than 'a thigh injury?' WTF does that mean? A charley horse? A pulled quad? A hammy?

    ReplyDelete
  68. Could be a good opportunity to see barotelli & lambert up front for lfc as br will need more than 1 strike partnership to effectively challenge on all fronts this season.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Of course it matters. If a player picks up a series of injuries because of bad tackles that's got nothing to do with his long term fitness or susceptibility to future injury. Having an injury because someone drove their studs through your ankle doesn't make you "injury prone". I count at least two of Sturridge's injuries that were the direct result of a tackle, one of which was a yellow card. Part of the equation here is how likely he is to pick up an injury again in the future. To make a guess on that the whys and wherefores are very important.


    It also matters because many of Sturridge's injuries are not long term. There is quite a difference between 2-3 weeks for a thigh strain and 2-3 months for a rib injury.

    ReplyDelete
  70. The comparisons with Agüero may not fit your proposed idea but is much more valid than the comparison with Agger. Both are high scoring strikers in the prime years of their career. Agger a decreasingly effective centre back whose injury problems were worsening by the year. It has also been made clear that he would never move to another English team making the Man City bid irrelevant. Arsenal also bid for him this summer, surely for more money but he rejected the move. Also, Agüero's injury history is possibly even worse than Sturridge as shown here: http://www.physioroom.com/news/english_premier_league/players/2873/sergio_aguero_injury.html

    ReplyDelete
  71. Except that, asI pointed out, he doesn't regularly miss games. He's played in nearly three quarters of all our league games since he joined. Despite his occasional layoffs, he plays more often than most of the rest of the squad.

    ReplyDelete
  72. I doubt it would be a hammy as JK has specifically mentioned a hamstring injury.

    ReplyDelete
  73. if balotelli injured , still hv lamberth n borini... lambert will be more motivate to ply better . because the opportunity to ply will enhance him to raise his perfomance...

    ReplyDelete