Is Daniel Sturridge injured? After looking increasingly immobile, Sturridge got subbed off in the 56th minute of Liverpool's 2-1 victory over Chelsea, but according to Reds boss Jurgen Klopp, he didn't pick up an injury. This is obviously great news, but to be honest, I'm not buying it.
When asked after the game about 'exceptional' Sturridge's condition, Klopp told reporters:
“Daniel couldn't sprint any more, and we had a healthy striker on the bench, so I thought we should use him. The first half was really good from Daniel. It's not an injury, it's just a situation. Nobody told me about an injury.”
This sounds suspiciously like Klopp trying to cover up the fact that £30m-rated Sturridge is actually injured. Let's break it down:
* If a player can't 'sprint' anymore, there has to be a reason for that, no? In Sturridge's case, the most logical reason is that he picked up a knock and/or pulled a muscle.
* After leaving the field, Sturridge headed straight down the tunnel. This is not standard practice. Players who get subbed off always return to the bench and watch the rest of the game. Players who head down the tunnel are almost always off to get checked out by the medical staff.
* Klopp states that he had a 'healthy striker on the bench', which is arguably a Freudian Slip. Of what relevance is the 'health' of the player replacing Sturridge? Obviously, if the player is coming onto the pitch, he's fit to play (!) Klopp's choice of words give him away here (IMO).
* Klopp says it's 'not an injury, it's just a situation' (whatever that means), but then he backtracks a little (to cover himself later?), and states 'nobody told me about an injury'.
Long story short: Sturridge has probably picked up a minor injury, and given the fact Liverpool don't have another league game for 8 days, Klopp is possibly hoping that it'll resolve itself in that timeframe.
I can understand Klopp's reluctance to reveal the truth - he appears to be protecting Sturridge from the media negativity that will inevitably accompany the announcement of yet another injury, and for me, that's good management.
Or, Sturridge may not be injured, and Klopp is telling the truth!
When asked after the game about 'exceptional' Sturridge's condition, Klopp told reporters:
“Daniel couldn't sprint any more, and we had a healthy striker on the bench, so I thought we should use him. The first half was really good from Daniel. It's not an injury, it's just a situation. Nobody told me about an injury.”
This sounds suspiciously like Klopp trying to cover up the fact that £30m-rated Sturridge is actually injured. Let's break it down:
* If a player can't 'sprint' anymore, there has to be a reason for that, no? In Sturridge's case, the most logical reason is that he picked up a knock and/or pulled a muscle.
* After leaving the field, Sturridge headed straight down the tunnel. This is not standard practice. Players who get subbed off always return to the bench and watch the rest of the game. Players who head down the tunnel are almost always off to get checked out by the medical staff.
* Klopp states that he had a 'healthy striker on the bench', which is arguably a Freudian Slip. Of what relevance is the 'health' of the player replacing Sturridge? Obviously, if the player is coming onto the pitch, he's fit to play (!) Klopp's choice of words give him away here (IMO).
* Klopp says it's 'not an injury, it's just a situation' (whatever that means), but then he backtracks a little (to cover himself later?), and states 'nobody told me about an injury'.
Long story short: Sturridge has probably picked up a minor injury, and given the fact Liverpool don't have another league game for 8 days, Klopp is possibly hoping that it'll resolve itself in that timeframe.
I can understand Klopp's reluctance to reveal the truth - he appears to be protecting Sturridge from the media negativity that will inevitably accompany the announcement of yet another injury, and for me, that's good management.
Or, Sturridge may not be injured, and Klopp is telling the truth!
0 Comments:
Post a Comment