With Liverpool still struggling in defence, the return of Martin Skrtel - LFC's most effective defender this season (and for the last three years) can't come soon enough. Alas, it looks like the Reds will have to make-do without the Slovakian for a little while longer.
In his pre-match press conference today, Liverpool boss Jurgen Klopp confirmed that the Reds have suffered yet another injury blow:
"We had a problem with Martin Skrtel. He got re-injured, so he needs another 2-3 weeks".
Skrtel - recently hailed by Arsenal legend Lee Dixon as 'absolutely outstanding' - has been out injured for 12 games so far:
* 12 games without Skrtel: 15 goals conceded and four games lost.
* 12 games with Skrtel (prior to injury): 14 goals conceded and three games.
There's not much difference, but these figures categorically refute repeated claims that Liverpool are better defensively without Skrtel.
This means that Klopp will probably persist with Sakho, who is currently in the midst of a period of shaky form.
As I've illustrated several times in the past, with Sakho in the side, the team leaks goals. Below is a comparison of the last ten games for each of LFC's senior central defenders:
* Sakho: 18 goals conceded (6 defeats/2 clean sheets)
* Lovren: 10 goals conceded (3 defeats/5 clean sheets)
* Skrtel: 12 goals conceded (3 defeats/3 clean sheets)
Sakho's disciples can spin the 'beast' myth all they like, but the facts don't lie: Liverpool lose more games, and concede more goals with him in the team.
Seriously, WAKE UP already: SIX defeats in the last TEN games with Sakho at the heart of the defence? That says it all, and if Klopp persists with him, it'll be managerial negligence (IMO).
Klopp should go with Lovren/Caulker against Sunderland. That partnership kept a clean sheet against West Ham, but instead of keeping it in place for Leicester, Klopp brought Sakho back, which was clearly the wrong decision.
If a defensive partnership keeps a clean-sheet, then surely it's best to keep that partnership going?
Author: Jaimie K
In his pre-match press conference today, Liverpool boss Jurgen Klopp confirmed that the Reds have suffered yet another injury blow:
"We had a problem with Martin Skrtel. He got re-injured, so he needs another 2-3 weeks".
Skrtel - recently hailed by Arsenal legend Lee Dixon as 'absolutely outstanding' - has been out injured for 12 games so far:
* 12 games without Skrtel: 15 goals conceded and four games lost.
* 12 games with Skrtel (prior to injury): 14 goals conceded and three games.
There's not much difference, but these figures categorically refute repeated claims that Liverpool are better defensively without Skrtel.
This means that Klopp will probably persist with Sakho, who is currently in the midst of a period of shaky form.
As I've illustrated several times in the past, with Sakho in the side, the team leaks goals. Below is a comparison of the last ten games for each of LFC's senior central defenders:
* Sakho: 18 goals conceded (6 defeats/2 clean sheets)
* Lovren: 10 goals conceded (3 defeats/5 clean sheets)
* Skrtel: 12 goals conceded (3 defeats/3 clean sheets)
Sakho's disciples can spin the 'beast' myth all they like, but the facts don't lie: Liverpool lose more games, and concede more goals with him in the team.
Seriously, WAKE UP already: SIX defeats in the last TEN games with Sakho at the heart of the defence? That says it all, and if Klopp persists with him, it'll be managerial negligence (IMO).
Klopp should go with Lovren/Caulker against Sunderland. That partnership kept a clean sheet against West Ham, but instead of keeping it in place for Leicester, Klopp brought Sakho back, which was clearly the wrong decision.
If a defensive partnership keeps a clean-sheet, then surely it's best to keep that partnership going?
Author: Jaimie K
0 Comments:
Post a Comment