Yep. They have fallen from 1st to 4th in a couple of weeks. They will probably be around 6th in another couple of weeks.
Sturridge vs Welbeck
- Thread starter Robbie Boy
- Start date
Yep. They have fallen from 1st to 4th in a couple of weeks. They will probably be around 6th in another couple of weeks.
Sturridge has 11 goals and 3 assists in 14 games.
Welbeck has 8 goals and 1 assist in 16.
That's only including league games.
Welbeck has 8 goals and 1 assist in 16.
That's only including league games.
No matter which way the stats are told, there is no doubt Sturridge has been the better player this season.
That's entirely based on assumptions though. I don't doubt that the stats make Welbeck look worse than he really is goalscoring wise, but Sturridge is undoubtedly the more prolific player at the moment and not only that, but he generally has been in previous seasons as well.
Alastair made a good point in the last page in that if Sturridge played for us and Welbeck played for Liverpool, people wouldn't even be having this debate.
@BarneyLFC
Welbeck has 8 goals and 1 assist in 12 (4)
Sturridge has 11 goals and 3 assists in 12 (2)
Sturridge is obviously having a better season in a team that is performing better but the way that you posted those stats was a little disingenuous. As an England and United fan I can't get excited about Sturridge. He is an international stage bottler for me and I can't stand Liverpool................obviously.
Welbeck has 8 goals and 1 assist in 12 (4)
Sturridge has 11 goals and 3 assists in 12 (2)
Sturridge is obviously having a better season in a team that is performing better but the way that you posted those stats was a little disingenuous. As an England and United fan I can't get excited about Sturridge. He is an international stage bottler for me and I can't stand Liverpool................obviously.
I quickly added up the number of minutes each has played in the league and I got 1099 for Sturridge against 1096 for Welbeck- with a substantial amount of that playing wide or 'doing a job'.
@Cheesy I'm fully aware that fans are biased towards their own players- I don't think people are justified in thinking there's a huge gap between them. Context is important when assessing players, it may be theoretical- but in general strikers score more goals in better attacking sides.. United have been awful going forward this season, and Welbeck still managed a goal every 137 minutes with a chance conversion rate of 24%
Last edited:
See, your first sentence is entirely reasonable and fair.
And then you ruin it by throwing in completely pointless hyperbole. As if the difference between Sturridge and Welbeck is anywhere near the difference between Cleverley and Wilshere.
I can remember three Welbeck assists off the top of my head in the league. Spurs, West Ham and Hull. And transfermarkt, where I get my stats, confirms that. But I believe the main topic of discussion is Sturridge being a better goalscorer.
The number of games is kind of irrelevant compared to the number of minutes they've played in the league, and the difference there is that Sturridge has played five more minutes (1099 vs 1094). So, as it stands, they've played near enough exactly the same amount of minutes in the league and Sturridge has scored three more goals. By that logic Sturridge is a somewhat better goalscorer. But whereas every single minute Sturridge has played has been up front, Danny's been shunted out on the left, usually with a defensive brief due to the opponents, for 281 minutes (three starts and three sub appearances).
So, if we knock off the minutes Danny has played out wide (and not scored a single goal), then our final stats for goals per minute in the league are:
Sturridge: 1099 minutes, 11 goals: A goal every 100 minutes.
Welbeck: 813 minutes, 8 goals: A goal every 102 minutes.
So, in conclusion: when played up front this season Danny Welbeck is almost exactly as likely to score a goal as Daniel Sturridge.
So, I shall ask yet again. In what possible sense is Daniel Sturridge on 'another level' to Danny Welbeck at this moment in time? I'm not even being incredulous, I just want an actual description of those attributes of his which are far in excess of his less dance-prone namesake.
Apart from all the posts in the united forum that insist that welbeck can only really play up front and is useless on the wing or as the withdrawn forward.
Because you're using a very small sample of games to judge forgetting that Sturridge has scored 25 goals in 33 games.
There's so much clutching at straws in this thread it's ridiculous. Sturridge has scored 25 goals in 33 apparances for Liverpool in all competitions, and he's been moved around a bit and had a few injuries as well. Don't forget that they have Suarez as well to lead the line. Welbeck had a good run but you can't just discount all his apparances that weren't up top. They still happened. He's a good player but Sturridge is on a different level IMO. People saying he's a better footballer and better outside of the box isn't that true either. Sturridge has a much better shot on him and it's not like welbeck is some really creative player or is good when playing somewhere other then striker. He's a decent passer, but so is Sturridge. Welbeck is currently just a lot more raw then Sturridge is.
@Chabon I'd say that Sturridge does strike the ball better from distance than Welbeck does, I rate Danny highly but his long range striking is awful. He's a better technical dribbler, and he takes more risks on the ball.
I think that a lot of why Welbeck doesn't get the respect he deserves is because when he messes up, he does it really badly and it sticks in the mind.
@B20 Cristiano Ronaldo is one of the most complete footballers in the world, but yet he's far more effective as a wide player than as a striker.. it's about movement and instinct- Welbeck is more of a back to goal type player so he's better operating higher up the pitch- his tactical understanding is very good- blocking passing options, pressing and so on, he's an excellent man marker, got good feet and ball manipulation when holding the ball up and can pick a decent pass, particularly short first time or out wide from a slightly withdrawn position- I think that is why he is far better up front than he is out wide. Just to add, I don't think Sturridge can't or doesn't at least some of those things- Welbeck is generally better at it.
to all the people saying use a longer time period, Welbeck spent last season out wide and is a year younger than Sturridge- Sturridge was only just coming into the period he's been demonstrating his level at this time last year..
I think that a lot of why Welbeck doesn't get the respect he deserves is because when he messes up, he does it really badly and it sticks in the mind.
@B20 Cristiano Ronaldo is one of the most complete footballers in the world, but yet he's far more effective as a wide player than as a striker.. it's about movement and instinct- Welbeck is more of a back to goal type player so he's better operating higher up the pitch- his tactical understanding is very good- blocking passing options, pressing and so on, he's an excellent man marker, got good feet and ball manipulation when holding the ball up and can pick a decent pass, particularly short first time or out wide from a slightly withdrawn position- I think that is why he is far better up front than he is out wide. Just to add, I don't think Sturridge can't or doesn't at least some of those things- Welbeck is generally better at it.
to all the people saying use a longer time period, Welbeck spent last season out wide and is a year younger than Sturridge- Sturridge was only just coming into the period he's been demonstrating his level at this time last year..
Just throwing it out there but i'd like to see how many of those games were up top for Welbeck. I'm a fan of Welbeck and think he has great potential that will surpass Sturridge as I believe Sturridge is right now reaping the benefits of playing in his natural position and in a team that's doing well.
This thread is ridiculous because some people from unknown reason think they are in Welbeck vs Ronaldo thread, and not Welbeck vs Sturridge. If the difference is so big why the hell Sturridge end up at Liverpool and why he didn't become first choice at Chelsea or City? People are forgetting that Welbeck is one of the first names on teamsheet by three managers that trained him(Woy, Fergie, Moyes) while Sturridge needed to end up at a team like Liverpool to become first choice striker. If Sturridge is so much better than Welbeck why is Welbeck first choice striker for England and not him? If he is so much better then how such an "average" player like Welbeck performs better when placed in the same team(England)? Even if he is better(and he isn't), difference is marginal, only thing that puts him above Welbeck are stats, and even his stats aren't that better, which is proved in many posts before. And even if his stats are much better, what difference would that make? Rooney's stats are much better than Iniesta's, bigger difference than Sturridge vs Welbeck, and I am yet to hear anyone saying that Iniesta can't be even compared with Rooney.
I can understand Liverpool fans rating him higher because he plays good for Liverpool, but people who are neutral or United fans are either being WUMs like Alastair, or the usual sort of people who thinks every player who plays for our rivals is better than any of our player.
I can understand Liverpool fans rating him higher because he plays good for Liverpool, but people who are neutral or United fans are either being WUMs like Alastair, or the usual sort of people who thinks every player who plays for our rivals is better than any of our player.
The england example is a shit example. Many england players perform shit over the years despite being vastly superior players then whoever else was in their position (see Scholes). And Welbeck is most definitely not one of the first names on the team sheet. Last season he was 4th choice striker behind Hernandez, RVP and Rooney and Kagawa also played in the hole pretty often when one was out so Welbeck was shunted out wide whenever he did play and he was pretty disappointing most of the season. He's a good striker but he's not versatile and can't play in other positions to a high standard. Welbeck is rightly behind RVP and then Rooney for striker position, and when one of them is out we'll see Mata behind the other now.
What exactly does Welbeck do that is so much better then Sturridge? He's decent at everything, but you make it sound like Sturridge is shite at everything other then striking the ball. Sturridge is a lot more developed then Welbeck and is a more complete player at the moment, because he has had more chances. You can't say he isn't better though. Welbeck had the best run in his career just now in December where he scored a few goals and everyone has been going crazy over him. He was good but he wasn't amazing either. Sturridge has had the same form since he joined Liverpool.
You say he had to join a club like Liverpool to be first choice up front but that's exactly what Welbeck would need to do if he wants to be first choice. He definitely isn't good enough right now and perhaps won't ever be (remains to be seen). He's nowhere near Van Persie though, that's for sure.
"Last season he was 4th choice striker"- the season before that he was first choice when we lost the league in the dying minutes of the last game. He's far better now than he was then- only problem is that the team is much worse.
Hopefully with Mata signing and Rooney being back soon we'll start to see some real quality surrounding the lad, so people will appreciate how good he is again, as well as get back to winning football matches.. another thing that colours people's opinions of players..
Hopefully with Mata signing and Rooney being back soon we'll start to see some real quality surrounding the lad, so people will appreciate how good he is again, as well as get back to winning football matches.. another thing that colours people's opinions of players..
Precisely. Indeed, what I was going to say before actually checking the numbers is something like: Suarez is 'on another level' to Welbeck, Aguero is 'on another level' to Welbeck, but Sturridge is merely part of the same group as Welbeck, ie CFs having very strong but not exceptional seasons. Remy, Giroud, Lukaku, and Negredo being the obvious names.
Actually, in reality both Welbeck and Sturridge have played rather fewer matches than those players and so I think you'd have to say they're actually both having exceptional seasons.
It's every minute they've played in the PL as CFs this season. Welbeck's only previous season with a remotely significant number of games up front in the league was when he was 20, and I'd suspect he was scoring at something like a goal every 200 minutes up front.
I know what you want to do is take it from the moment Sturridge signed for Liverpool so you can discount his failure at Chelsea and ignore his inability to make a mark in Europe or at International level (standing in stark contrast to Welbeck), but how about this. Sturridge was 23 years and four months old when he signed for Liverpool and finally began to show some consistency in his goalscoring, Danny Welbeck isn't that age for another two months.
Last edited:
Yep. They have fallen from 1st to 4th in a couple of weeks. They will probably be around 6th in another couple of weeks.
Are we playing Chelsea and City away again in that time for that to happen?
(Sorry about repeating but this key question is always sidelined in sarcy posts like yours above)
All i'm saying is that Sturridge has been incredible for a year now, i don't doubt that Welbeck is talented but i will wait till he can show the consistency he has been showing in the last 10 games, over a period of the next 30, 40 games before i could rate him on Sturridge's level.
No different from what many posters were saying earlier in this thread in regards to Sturridge having a purple patch, Welbeck has shown good form in the last few months but he is still yet to prove to me that he can maintain that type of form for the next year or so, 25 goals in 33 games is a much more impressive feat than 8 in 14.
Put it this way, if you asked a group of non Liverpool or Man Utd fans who they'd have I think pretty much all of them would say Sturridge. He's better and it's quite comfortable.
Wellbeck has RVP and Rooney in direct competition, he has had a good run recently and it's shown in his form. Sturridge on the other hand is a nailed on starter so of course the consistency is there. We will get to see just what Sturridge is made of next season when he is the main striker.
I don't remember Scholes being shit even when he played wide, he had some good performances there even though that is nowhere near his best position. He wasn't good as he was for United, but he was nothing worse than some players who had the honour of playing in their favourite positions. If one player is so much better than the other, then there is no system in which he should perform worse than the other player if they are playing in same position, and that's the case with Sturridge and Welbeck for England, and even there Welbeck played quite often out of position and still performed better than Sturridge did at his favourite position. Rooney usually performs worse for England than he does for United, he is almost like a different player, but even shit Rooney is better than the likes of Milners, Barrys. Why? Because he is clearly superior player. That's what superior players do, they usually perform better than rest of players from who they are much better. If the difference is sooooooo big, then Sturridge should have performed at least around the same level as Welbeck.
Welbeck was never fourth, let alone fifth choice for us last season, why are people insisting on that? He was starter ahead of Hernandez in pretty much every bigger game, and I am not talking just about games against Real Madrid and City where Chicharito played 6 minutes in four games, but also about games against the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, and Spurs in premiership where he played exactly 46 minutes of football in total, in 8 different games! Welbeck? Started pretty much every of those games when he was fit, including the games against Real Madrid where he played ahead of Wayne Rooney, arguably our best player.
Saying he isn't better than van Persie means nothing, you can count on your fingers better strikers than van Persie, but he performed better as a striker in those 6 or 7 games in a row than van Persie did in double number of games at start of the season, and that is saying something. And saying he isn't good right now when he was pretty much our best player in last month and a half is seriously underrating Welbeck, because he is clearly one of our best players this season. He is playing much better than most of our players. As the matter of fact, I would say only Rooney and de Gea are better this season than him, and I dare to you to few others? How can you say he isn't good enough at the moment, it's ridiculous, that's just being unrealistic and having an agenda against Welbeck, nothing else.
I never said Welbeck is much better than Sturridge at any thing, that's my whole point, it all started by few of you saying that Sturridge is so much better/more developed/better all-around when it's obvious that apart from goals, you can hardly name single attribute where Sturridge beats him.
And so when RVP and Rooney return and Danny inevitably doesn't play every week (what with those two being amongst the best players on the planet) and a fair chunk of his games come out on the left you'll all come back into this thread giving it large about how useless he is. I (and many others) always said if you give him a run in his natural position he'll be prolific, and he's proven that with bells on. He's going to have to wait a little longer to get a full season there, but that's often what happens when you play for a truly top club.
Sturridge is better right now.
We saw what he was like as the main striker at the end of last season and the start of this season. He was even more productive.
Our first three games of the season if Welbeck played for us:
Stoke 1-0 (Welbeck)
Man Utd 1-0 (Welbeck)
Aston Villa 0-1 (Welbeck)
Yeah right.
Stoke 1-0 (Welbeck)
Man Utd 1-0 (Welbeck)
Aston Villa 0-1 (Welbeck)
Yeah right.Sturridge Is better all round player IMHO. welbeck works harder but despite my best efforts I still don't think he is good enough for us, a willing home grown player but at best a squad player.
That doesn't really prove anything, before english fans in general realised that being able to pass was a good thing, Scholes wasn't rated particularly highly by non-United fans.
I do remember them both playing together for England U21s actually, did alright together. Sturridge set up a couple of Welbeck's goals I think.
You count already half of the season for Sturridge, and just 10 games for Welbeck, even though Sturridge played just 14 games this season in premiership, and he spent just 5 more minutes on the pitch than Welbeck this season. How can you count him as playing good for half a season, and Welbeck just for 10 games then?
He can be a first choice player if he works on certain aspects of his game.
Sturridge just has that technical quality, though, by which he can tear defenders apart. Welbeck doesn't have that right now,
Still, let's judge this in a few years.
In relation to your Chelsea and Liverpool points, I could easily ask why did Fergie sign RVP to play up front if Welbeck was apparently one of the first names on the teamsheet. He features regularly for us and is a key player, but in his best position, as a striker, it's clear that he's not first choice here and that he's unlikely to be so for a few years to come. City discarded Sturridge when he was fairly young and it was clear that their preferred move was to buy big stars instead of developing him. Chelsea didn't seem to particularly want him, but then again Chelsea have just sold us one of the best players in the league over the past few days. To make this a valid point, you'd have to ask whether Welbeck would be regularly starting for City and Chelsea respectively when Sturridge left either club. It's unlikely in either case.
His stats clearly are better. They're marginal based on this season alone for time played, but he excelled when he moved to Liverpool last season, while Welbeck was poor productivity wise. As a goalscorer, which is what you'd expect to be both at, Sturridge is clearly a lot better than Welbeck. I find a lot of the obsessing over stats here a bit tedious though to be honest.
Besides, people here seem to be reducing Sturridge to someone who's good for kicking the ball into the net and nothing more. He's a good player and while Welbeck is much more of a worker than Sturridge, I wouldn't say he's a much better player technically than Sturridge. They're probably fairly similar in that regard.
@Amar__
I'm not saying he's shit by any means. He is performing decently overall this season, and is one of our better players (after Rooney, De Gea, Januzaj and maybe a few others) this season but that's more because everyone has been shit. How can I say he isn't good enough to start for a title winning team? Well first of all, this period that he has been starting all the time we've lost quite a few games. We're currently 7th in the league, do you think we'd be in that position if Welbeck was good enough to consistently start at a team like United? He might have the potential to get there, but don't get ahead of yourself thinking he's at a top level right now. He is very inconsistent, a raw player, and despite having great december he's been pretty shite these last few games (as we've all been). This season overall he was pretty shit until he got the run up front. How can that be seen as having a great season? He had a great month and is having a decent season but before the run when RVP and Rooney got injured, he was almost always on the wing when he played and he was playing as bad as Young was out there (because he isn't a winger).
How much did Welbeck play as a striker last season? He had a pretty shit season and only ever played on the wing, so if he had more starts it was for that reason. When it came to the striker position, it was pretty universally accepted on here that Hernandez was 3rd choice striker. He had 36 appearances scoring 18 goals. Welbeck had 40 scoring 2 goals. The vast majority of those games on the wing, and plenty as subs.
Also on your last point, what does Welbeck have that is so much better then Sturridge? Pretty much everything to do with being a striker, Sturridge beats him. He's quicker, he's a much better finisher and a better shooter from range, he knows how to use his body better, he's more composed, he doesn't slip and fall over all the time, and then the rest of the stuff on the ball their pretty similar. Give Welbeck a loan to a mid table team where he can start every week up front like Lukaku has right now and I'm sure he'll come along leaps and bounds but unless we get a few injuries, he won't be getting that much of a look in as a striker anymore. Anyways, overall, if you take away the goals/finishing ability/striking a ball, then they are pretty similar players. However, seeing as that is the most important part of a strikers game, Sturridge is far better then him in those aspects and so he's a better player at this moment in time. We'll see how he does for England because before he joined Liverpool he was in and out of the team at Chelsea and just a normal young player, while Welbeck was getting more games because we at United give more chances to youngsters.
I'm not saying he's shit by any means. He is performing decently overall this season, and is one of our better players (after Rooney, De Gea, Januzaj and maybe a few others) this season but that's more because everyone has been shit. How can I say he isn't good enough to start for a title winning team? Well first of all, this period that he has been starting all the time we've lost quite a few games. We're currently 7th in the league, do you think we'd be in that position if Welbeck was good enough to consistently start at a team like United? He might have the potential to get there, but don't get ahead of yourself thinking he's at a top level right now. He is very inconsistent, a raw player, and despite having great december he's been pretty shite these last few games (as we've all been). This season overall he was pretty shit until he got the run up front. How can that be seen as having a great season? He had a great month and is having a decent season but before the run when RVP and Rooney got injured, he was almost always on the wing when he played and he was playing as bad as Young was out there (because he isn't a winger).
How much did Welbeck play as a striker last season? He had a pretty shit season and only ever played on the wing, so if he had more starts it was for that reason. When it came to the striker position, it was pretty universally accepted on here that Hernandez was 3rd choice striker. He had 36 appearances scoring 18 goals. Welbeck had 40 scoring 2 goals. The vast majority of those games on the wing, and plenty as subs.
Also on your last point, what does Welbeck have that is so much better then Sturridge? Pretty much everything to do with being a striker, Sturridge beats him. He's quicker, he's a much better finisher and a better shooter from range, he knows how to use his body better, he's more composed, he doesn't slip and fall over all the time, and then the rest of the stuff on the ball their pretty similar. Give Welbeck a loan to a mid table team where he can start every week up front like Lukaku has right now and I'm sure he'll come along leaps and bounds but unless we get a few injuries, he won't be getting that much of a look in as a striker anymore. Anyways, overall, if you take away the goals/finishing ability/striking a ball, then they are pretty similar players. However, seeing as that is the most important part of a strikers game, Sturridge is far better then him in those aspects and so he's a better player at this moment in time. We'll see how he does for England because before he joined Liverpool he was in and out of the team at Chelsea and just a normal young player, while Welbeck was getting more games because we at United give more chances to youngsters.
Our first three games of the season if Welbeck played for us:
Stoke 1-0 (Welbeck)
Man Utd 1-0 (Welbeck)
Aston Villa 0-1 (Welbeck)
Our last five games(pre Chelsea) if Sturridge played for us instead of Welbeck:
Villa vs Man Utd 0:3 (Sturridge x2)
Man Utd vs West Ham 3:1 (Sturridge)
Hull vs Man Utd 2:3 (Sturridge-assist)
Norwich vs Man Utd 0:1 (Sturridge)
Man Utd vs Tottenham 1:2 (Sturridge)
Man Utd vs Swansea 2:0 (Sturridge)
Yeah right.This wouldn't be a debate anywhere outside a United forum. Whatever about potential, Sturridge is clearly better now.
I like Welbeck but we definitely overrate him here sometimes. People seems to forget all the games where he looks shockingly ordinary. All the talk of his intelligence, movement and work rate makes it sound like we think he's a small improvement away from being Thomas Muller.
I like Welbeck but we definitely overrate him here sometimes. People seems to forget all the games where he looks shockingly ordinary. All the talk of his intelligence, movement and work rate makes it sound like we think he's a small improvement away from being Thomas Muller.
You can say the same about other players, why did Fergie sign van Persie when we had Rooney, Kagawa, or Hernandez? All capable of scoring goals. He signed them because we are big club and we need numbers and everyone needs world class players, we always had good depth even in position where we were really good, and after all, it's not like he expected him to play for 10 more years, he was signed to give his impact for first one or two seasons, and I don't think he expected from him to be our fisrt choice while is 33 or 34. Welbeck isn't our first option, but he is pretty much second option when van Persie is injured, because Moyes clearly rates Rooney-Welbeck higher than Kagawa-Rooney, or Rooney-Hernandez.
Do I see Welbeck being regular for Chelsea and City at that time? Hard to compare, but probably yes, because at the same time when Sturridge was struggling to become regular for Chelsea(who finished sixth and third season after), Welbeck was more than squad player for champions, almost a regular starter and he had Rooney, Hernandez and Berbatov to compete against, and he was more than a year younger than Sturridge.
Liverpool woulld rather have Sturridge and the United fans in here clearly would prefer Welbeck so she shouldn't be a debate everyone's happy.
He was pretty much regular starter for us in last three years, not just this season when we are shit.
He may be 8th choice striker, but he is ahead of the likes of Kagawa, Hernandez, Young, which makes him better player than any of them. It's like saying Rooney is our fourth choice striker because he rarely on the strikers position. Welbeck is pretty much our first choice player, I don't care if he is 8th choice striker when he plays much more than most of others, that just proves how managers rate him,. And if anything, Welbeck wasn't collecting apps as a sub, Chicharito was the one. Welbeck played 1301 minute last season in premiership, and Hernandez only 953. This season, he is on 1000, and Chicharito on 500.
Sturridge is quicker than Welbeck? I am off.
Try taking off the United tinted glasses. He's a good player. I'm not saying he isn't But how the feck can a player be first choice or one of the first names on the team sheet when he is only a striker (proven by even his biggest fans admitting he's pretty shit on the wing) and as a striker, he is behind Rooney and Van Persie? The 3 of them can't play striker at the same time you know. And yes, Welbeck played more then Hernandez last season, because he played on the wing. He scored only 2 goals in 40 appearances last season, which is awful whatever way you look at it. Whenever it came to somebody else playing up top that wasn't Van persie or Rooney, it was Hernandez.
As for their pace, they are probably pretty similar, both fast, but Sturridge knows how to use his body to his advantage and out runs players, and can outmuscle them. Welbeck falls over almost every time he strikes the ball ffs, and he just doesn't know how to make full advantage of his physique. That's not even arguable.
Sturridge vs RVP on the other hand eh Barney
I'd rather have Sturridge- I rate him. I like Danny, nice lad and all that but he isn't good enough. Has no first touch and just like a jigsaw, he falls to pieces in the box. I really wanted him to be a United great but it is not going to happen no matter how many games he gets.