Liverpool's transfer policy is absolutely hilarious at times. Did they really look across Europe and decide that Sturridge was the best value they could find at £12m? They never seem to learn that this is precisely why they find themselves in 9th.
Liverpool sign Chelsea striker Daniel Sturridge on long-term deal
- Thread starter Suedesi
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
- Status
It does seem like they overpaid by about £5m, otherwise it looks a good signing to me. But then I thought the same of Borini who I think is a pretty similar & slightly superior player, without the same ego. Their forwards should be able to interchange quite well, but I do think they'd be better with Suárez playing more on the right of the three.
No-one has said Welbeck is better than Sturridge simply because he works harder and if that's seriously all you can see that goes in Welbeck's favour then you're clearly completely overlooking the reason Welbeck is even at the club. He's here because he's very talented not because he's hard working.
He's been alright. He does better than most as he looks as if he actually enjoys playing for the team. I just wonder to what extent even Ferguson rates him when he prefers 3 other(admittedly very good) strikers to him. It doesn't seem like he's ever going to be a United first team player from how I see it, but I get slaughtered for this view on the Caf.
I do think he has talent, yes, but Sturridge is more talented. Welbeck's work rate is far superior to Sturridge's which draws him a lot closer, but I struggle to see what makes Welbeck a more talented footballer than Sturridge.
How is it irrelevant? Random people aren't picked off the street to play for England you know, his selection was a result of months and months of promising play and form for the best club in the country, it counts for something.
Sturridge wasn't picked to play because he's shown nothing like what Welbeck has so far.
Very good? All of those strikers would walk into Arsenals team.
He was a first team player last year, this year he has RVP to contend with so opportunities will be more scarce.
agree.
pair him with Rooney or RVP and he does well.
He needs games for sure. We will see him at West Ham with Chicho.
They spent twelve million on Borini as well. Would have been better off spending twenty four million on a top striker (or as close as they could get) than solidifying the sort of standards they have now with those two. It would be better having a small but talented squad to keep adding to, than to have a large and average squad.
I love how people are honestly trying to use this as an argument when England's selection, including that ridiculous number of Liverpool players, was slaughtered back in the summer. Again, people will manipulate arguments to however it suits them.
The idea that Welbeck was picked because of the season before because hed shown a lot more and been better would work...except that he wasn't. The two men had fairly similar seasons, with Sturridge holding a better league goalscoring record in a side that probably suited him less.
The point is that you signed RVP and killed any hopes Welbeck was ever going to have of getting a first team spot consistently. Which raises questions about how good Welbeck is construed to be.
Intelligence alone marks out Welbeck as the superior player. Sturridge is almost the scientific definition of stupid - doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
Sturridge will be a giant test of Rodgers' belief in his own ability and his " project". Getting through to Sturridge to get him to try to do the right thing on the ball would represent the greatest achievement of Rodgers' short career. There's no such concerns over Welbeck.
Again, the problems you highlight with Sturridge can quite easily be worked on. He's not 'stupid' either. He's merely quite greedy and became frustrated at Chelsea when they constantly forced him out of position onto the wing.
Welbeck is more intelligent as a player, but it's hardly the be all and end all. He's hardly a footballing genius either. Being hard working and a team player do not mark you out as an incredibly intelligent player.
Again, people are taking one attribute and trying to say that it alone marks out Welbeck as the better player which is ridiculous.
Ok then, I won't use England selection to substantiate anything. How about the fact that the best manager in the world consistently picked him last season to play up front for the biggest team in the world, and in contrast Sturridge has been offloaded by a worse team than Welbecks to an even worse team?
Also, in your quest to appear as the most unbiased on the cafe I think you failed to notice that Welbeck had a better season than Sturridge, and its not only us with red tinted glasses that recognise this.
Hardly, Welbeck isn't even close to his full potential yet, so it made sense to sign a WC player to play in the meantime.
What is his full potential? What type of player is he on the same level as? I have to say - I don't seem him as any more talented than someone like Michu myself, and a worse finisher.
Think it is a step backwards for them, mainly as he reminds me of Bellamy for some reason.
Difficult to say really, I think he has it in him to be a first team regular for Utd.
I'd also rate him higher than most of Arsenals attacking players.
Yes at 22 he's no better than Michu, one of the best strikers in the league this season and someone who would start for Arsenal. Oh no
Fergie picked him a lot because it was either him or Hernandez. Hernandez wasn't having the best of seasons and wasn't scoring; when he isn't doing that he's not got much to offer. Welbeck had a good season, yet he hardly lit the world alight. His goalscoring record was decent but not spectacular.
I'm not trying to appear unbiased; I'm just giving my opinion which would hardly be rare among neutrals. Welbeck didn't really have a better season than Sturridge either. In the league, Strurridge finished with a goalscoring record, and that's before we remember that he was in a team that didn't really suit him, unlike Welbeck, and he was often shifted out onto the wing, unlike Welbeck who spent most of the season in his preferred position.
Using the fact that Fergie picks him as well doesn't mean anything unless you can prove that he'd pick him ahead of Sturridge if he was here, which you can't for obvious reasons. If you're using that, then by that logic you could try and claim Van Persie and Rooney are the two best strikers in the world because Fergie picks them regularly; that Carrick is world class for that same reasons, and the same with every player in our team when it's not a legit argument.
Actually compare the two players as footballers instead of coming up with these nonsensical arguments which are fairly irrelevant.
Technically the only thing Sturridge has over him is a better strike and when it comes to intelligence Sturridge gets put to shame, IMO. Workrate doesn't come into it. Sturridge is crying about not getting enough games up top but that's because he doesn't have the intelligence or physique to play there while Welbeck's already excelled in the role at every level because he's better off in both. He was very good as a target-man for us and England last season and he's great in the build-up. That's talent. Scoring a few nice goals after taking loads of shots doesn't take much talent even if it looks better in a highlight reel. Sturridge scored just two more goals despite starting a fair few more games and taking a fair few more shots. Him playing as a "winger" has nothing to do with it given it didn't hinder him in any way as he took more shots from that role. And he clearly offers far less in the build up.
Welbeck wouldn't start for Arsenal. I really don't believe Wenger would swap him for Walcott, Podolski or Chamberlain. The former two are better than him and the latter's ceiling is a lot higher.
I have compared them as footballers, and think Welbeck is the better player. If you don't want to hear me try to validate my opinions then leave the thread, personally I think it says a lot that he was trusted so much so by SAF last year ( we could easily have played Rooney alone ) and that for nearly a year he has looked like the national teams most promising player. I also think it says a lot that Sturridge has looked pretty shit most of the times I'v seen him, and that a club with lower standards than ours, with perhaps the worst set of strikers in the league, chose to get rid of him.
Ray Houghton was on Talksport saying that by age 23, with most players, you know what you are going to get from them long term or if they are worth persisting with. His point that Chelsea selling Sturridge when they have only one striker says a lot about what they think of him, which is not much.
He also said that SAF should be able to do what he wants as he 'has earned it', which I am sure went down well with Liverpool fans.
He also said that SAF should be able to do what he wants as he 'has earned it', which I am sure went down well with Liverpool fans.
Michu. Michu would start at Arsenal.
Welbeck? Well I wasnt suggesting him but thinking about it I'd imagine he'd have gone a fair few starts as a striker this season. I mean Gervinho did... Now that Walcott has shown he can be a good striker I'd imagine Welbeck would be rotated with Chamberlain on the right.
Sturridge has more individual ability but Welbeck is a far better team player
I do think Sturridge and Welbeck were a similar level 18 months or so ago. But Welbeck has clearly developed more and gone to the next level or two, whilst Sturridge still needs to do that. But having said that I think a lot of it comes down to the different situations they had at their clubs.
Sturridge left the club that developed him from 13 years old and joined a club that only cared about on the field success and not young players. So while Welbeck has been carefully and properly developed, Sturridge has I'm sure been left to manage his own development and hasnt been shown the same patience and loyalty that United have with Welbeck
Sturridge left the club that developed him from 13 years old and joined a club that only cared about on the field success and not young players. So while Welbeck has been carefully and properly developed, Sturridge has I'm sure been left to manage his own development and hasnt been shown the same patience and loyalty that United have with Welbeck
Welbeck's clearly a better centre forward than Walcott for me and even though he'd score less he'd improve Arsenal's play because he's the mobile target man they're lacking. Walcott's lack of intelligence and presence made Arsenal completely toothless last night as it has done before. Welbeck lead the line for us very well last year.
All Danny truly lacks is a striker's killer instinct; greed, by another name.
Right, so he wouldn't be a first team player then. He'd obviously get into our squad since he gets into yours.
I'm just not having this stuff about how good Welbeck is. He's 4th choice at United for the considerable future and that's the long and short of it. In order to play football he might go out to a mid-table team and stay there.
Chelsea sold Sturridge when they only have 1 striker on their books it kinda says it all to be honest. I remember when he was at City my mates were complaining about how greedy he was then, 3-4 years later he's not lost that from his game. He's never going to be playing week in week out for a tittle challenging team in my opinion and £12m is a good bit of business for Chelsea.
What has Podolski done? He's a slightly better David Healy. Good at international level, shit at club level.
What makes you say that for me Welbz looks a much more accomplished footballer. Sturridge dribbles with the ball a yard ahead of him, he's got a decidedly poor first touch and his finishing isn't great either. Sturridge's great gifts are pace, a strong shot and a stupid amount of self-belief which encourages him to try outrageous stuff that every now and then coymes off making him proper YouTube material. Sturridge has never impressed me even in his good run under AVB and he was all over the shop in the Olympics. If Sturridge is meant to take the weight off of Suarez all I can do is laugh. He's simply not a top 4 player.
I dont know if thats true. He can continue to be a team player and if he improves his off the ball movement in the box to RVP and Hernandez levels, then there will be more than enough chances to score lots of goals and set up his teammates too
He's been good for us this season. 9 goals that you can reasonably double to 18 and that would be a great return for a wide man. Not top top class, but better than Welbeck. But this is heading off topic.
That's silly, every single one of your strikers would be fourth choice here too, and none are even guaranteed to start every game for your team.
A lot of silly comments on this thread. Sturridge is talented but just a bit greedy and needs to learn how to be a team player. That's something that comes with some experience, as with most players in a similar position. I love how so many are calling him average when he's about as good as, if not slightly better than Welbeck who's been hyped up so much on the forum.
Agreed.
A lot of people behaving like RAWK and seeing through their re-tinted glasses.
He is a young talented player who could or could not turn out very good. But there is certainly no certain average or flop thing about him.
And 12 mil for a young English player is not bad.
I disagree that it's all Sturridge holds over him technically. I personally rate Sturridge when it comes to his ball control and dribbling, and think he's generally better than Welbeck with the ball. Welbeck's showed glimpses of how good he can be with it, but for me his touch for example can be very erratic and unpredictable.
I don't think the not getting games comparison is particularly fair when Sturridge was always going to be hindered by Chelsea's system. They played with one man up top, and he would've probably played for them if they'd gone 4-4-2 like us. Like that, if we had stuck with a 4-3-3 for most of last season, then Welbeck's game time would have been a lot more limited.
He did a decent job in the target man role last season, but like I say that's it. He was decent without being spectacular as some would try to make out with some of the comparisons in his thread last season.
They played a very similar amount of games in the league last season. I'm not sure of the exact figures, but I know that it wasn't too dissimilar and they may have even featured in the same number of games.
Him playing as a winger clearly does hinder his game because it's not his position. He may have taken the same number of shots, but he'd have been a lot mroe comfortable as a striker and it's daft to say he wouldn't have scored more goals in his preferred role, the same way Welbeck would naturally score less when shifted onto the wing.
I disagree if he became greedy he'd just be a better Sturridge. What Welbs needs to do is perfect his accuracy and consistency in shooting. Just shooting for kicks would be senseless but what we do need to see from Welbs is the ability to make it count when he's in great positions. His composure in front of goal needs to improve if he's gonna be England's nailed on number 9 at Brazil 2014. If Welbs just drills himself in the art of striking it hard, low and accurate he could be the next Dwight Yorke cos as a player he's got the raw goods.
- Status