19 Oct 2016

Collymore insists: 'Brilliant' £30m attacker is 'a better player' than Divock Origi. Agree?

Sturridge vs. Origi: Who is the better striker? According to ex-Red Stan Collymore, the answer is obvious.

When asked this week to answer the Sturridge vs. Origi question, Collymore insisted:

"Sturridge. He’s a better in-box player. Sturridge has proven what a very good goalscorer he is [and] his conversion rate is as good as there is in the league".

This is not even a question worth asking because the answer is so blindingly obvious. When it comes goalscoring (a striker's primary role) £30m-rated Sturridge is in a different universe to Origi.

That said, at some point, Liverpool fans (myself included) will have to stop living in the past as Sturridge's prolificity is clearly on the wane. Like Torres and Owen before him, injury has ravaged Sturridge's career, and as much as a I hate to admit it, he appears to be in terminal decline.

Sturridge has lost his pace; is no longer willing to run in behind defenders, and is (understandably) timid on the field due a probable fear of picking up another injury issue.

Is 'brilliant' Sturridge finished at Liverpool? Probably. The aforementioned issues mean he isn't suited to Klopp's high intensity pressing game, and sooner rather than later, he'll inevitably follow Benteke and Balotelli out the door.

Owen and Torres were never the same after their injury woes, and history is repeating itself with Sturridge.


Post a Comment