09 Jan 2016 23:10:01
Rumours saying we will listen to offers for sturridge? Surely not!

1.) 09 Jan 2016
09 Jan 2016 23:45:16
I hope not.

2.) 09 Jan 2016
09 Jan 2016 23:46:03
Why not? He's an undoubted talent when fit but when fit is the big point. He's a player lfc can do without having to carry for most of the season.

3.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 00:40:03
If someone offered us 25m for him i'd bite their hands off.

4.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 00:40:56
There are only a handful of clubs that could afford his wages and I really can't see any of them being interested so it's sort of a moot point whether we would or wouldn't.

5.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 00:57:43
If an offer came in and he wanted to go let him. Other than that honour our contract.

6.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 01:28:15
Dorset I feel Suarez has rubbed off on you during his time here lol.

The whole Sturridge thing is a tough one. Love the man to bits but if he is not going to be fit what else can we do.

7.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 01:39:05
Sell Sturridge, buy Pato and bring Balotelli back.

Makes perfect sense 🤔.

8.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 01:56:40
Seriously, what club owner, DOF, chairman or manager, in the EPL, would spend money on Sturridge right now?

Would you? in the January transfer window buy somebody's problem, big transfer fee, taxes, agents fees and colossal wages to warm the physio table with no evidence of remediation?

Even if he were officially up for sale, which he clearly is not, it doesn't make one iota of financial sense for any club to be slightly interested, it's not viable nor feasible.

9.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 02:02:23
Depends on what the money would be used for after the sale.

If you sell Sturridge to buy Lacazette or Aubameyang, then it may be justifiable. But if you're selling him to buy another static ill-fitting target man, that requires "service" to succeed, then no.

10.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 08:52:35
In a way it is academic. Sturridge seems to be permanently injured.

That report comes from the Mirror.

He is very good, but, if he doesn't want to play for us?

I have heard Tottenham like him and he wants to go there.

{Ed001's Note - did you wake up after you heard that about Spurs?}

11.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 09:13:56
Ed where has all this talk of Sturridge being sold come from all of a sudden?

{Ed001's Note - no idea.}

12.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 09:17:44
Are there any clubs in the Premier league desperate for home grown players to make up their quota with more money than sense available?

If a club had a large squad also maybe it would not have such an affect or be so reliant on Danny having to play each week.

The SaS - Sturridge and Sterling double act?!

{Ed001's Note - they don't need players to make up any quota. Where did you get that from? There is no requirement to have X amount of home grown players in the Prem.}

13.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 09:59:25
I assumed you had to have a squad of 25 players with at least 8/ 9 of them homegrown. On top of that as many U21's players any team wants regardless of nationality? Apologies if I've got that wrong. I assumed that was why City chased the likes of Delph and kept Richard Wright on the books.

{Ed002's Note - It works the other way around Tel. A club is limited to 17 players over 21 who are not homegrown. There is no requirement to have any homegrown players at all unless you have a squad of between 18 and 25 players over 21.}

14.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 10:05:13
In this moment Sturridge is unavailable, and it remains to be seen whether he will become available anytime soon. How long is long enough to wait for him to regain strength and conditioning, at the bare minimum it's the start of next season before we see him fit and firing, injury free for six months. Then there's no guarantee that he remains that way. But what if he does? I can honestly say that when he is fit there is not a single striker in the prem I'd swap him with, I've no doubt that if he didn't have these injury issues he would be on his way to being up there with the greatest strikers we have ever had.

It's getting harder to see the light at the end of the Sturridge tunnel, but it's still there. Have we got 18 months to wait to find out? Do we have the required back up? Can we purchase a striker that gets 1 in 2 or even 1 in 3? In ways I'm glad it's not my decision to make, but do I trust the club with this decision?

I don't want to see him go as its one of those that if he leaves he will become fit and score loads, but if he stays he will remain injury prone, it's the way of the football gods. I guess for me it's the feeling that we can not replace his talent, we can't replace his goals, fair enough there's bugger all in this moment but we know what he can do, we also know and have seen the many failed attempts by the club and previous management that they can't pick a goal scorer like him. Does this change with Klopp? I hope so, as we have always had prolific strikers and this just isn't the way it's meant to be.

I can say I want him to remain no doubt, I can't say let's sell and replace, without being full of doubt and fear that it's goes horribly wrong. With the talent he is and what he is capable of I'm willing to give him 18 months, we have given a lot worse a lot longer to get it right.

In this moment, I Believe.

15.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 11:50:09
Pay as you play!

16.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 11:58:44
Just to be clear Ed02.

You can have 17 players not homegrown in a squad 18-25 players. I recall Chelsea only using 20 players last year as they only had 3/ 4 homegrown players. If a squad wants to use the maximum 25 players they need to have 7/ 8 homegrown players I think. In effect a sliding scale where the bigger squad you use/ register the more homegrown players needed. Does that make sense what I'm trying to ask?

{Ed002's Note - That is not how the rules are written, they are much simpler. Maximum squad size = 25 over 21s. Maximum non-HG - 17.}

17.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 12:14:06
In response to the original post, I'm sure Ed002 can assist our understanding (again) - but my understanding is the club is not in a position to "not listen" to any offers.
Why would they? If someone offered £80m for Sturridge they'd be fools to say "blah blah blah we're not listening".

Every player has a value, every player is for sale if the right offer came in.

{Ed002's Note - I went through this in November - you should be able to search.}

18.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 12:14:06
In response to the original post, I'm sure Ed002 can assist our understanding (again) - but my understanding is the club is not in a position to "not listen" to any offers.
Why would they? If someone offered £80m for Sturridge they'd be fools to say "blah blah blah we're not listening".

Every player has a value, every player is for sale if the right offer came in.

{Ed002's Note - I would not expect to see Sturridge sold in January - you need to go back to around November in the search engine where I explained that it is time for him to move on. I don't see any significant offers for players coming in this month. The club were relaying on loans-to-buy balancing the books in June

19.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 15:18:40
I cannot see anyone offering more than 10-12 million for him currently. Real shame he has had such a bad injury list.

20.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 14:51:05
theres no doubt that he has a talent, but that's when he is fully fit not just 98% or 99% but a 100% because he won't play if he is only 99% fit, again we all know he can score goals when he is fit but he is never fit i would rather him be in some one elses sick room instead of in ours all the time, if he would play through some pain after being told he is fit to play then i would say givve him a chance but he won't even do that so i would sell him let him drain an other clubs wages for not playing and with the money i would get from the sturridge deal i would put it towards another top scorer.

21.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 18:17:38
I think if we are to sell him, and most likely we will, then it should be done in the summer. I have no doubt Sturridge will become super fit in April where he will play most games till end of season, he'll score few goals and get himself in the England Squad for the Euros.
Then we should sell, because I'll have no doubt he will come back from the Euro's injuried and he will miss half of next season.

22.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 19:40:14
Stuff is of no use to us if he can't play. In fact, he can't even train consistently for a week. People keep saying when Studge gets fit, this and that will happen. When will that happen? Do people think Klopp has time to wait and see for the next eighteen months to see what happens? In that time, I expect him to be sold if he can't sort himself out, physically and by all accounts, it's not looking good for him. I'm with Ed, time to cut bait with him.

23.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 21:34:11
For the wages he is on, we need to know he will play 2 out of every three games minimum. He is far to inconsistent and injury-prone and we would be better of selling him.

However like most of the supossedly 'big' players we have got, they aren't worth anywhere near what we paid for them (Benteke, Lallana, Sturrisdge, Markovic etc etc) . In Sturridge's case we would be lucky to get £10M for him.

24.) 10 Jan 2016
10 Jan 2016 23:24:54
I agree with Roy.
How annoying if Sturridge gets himself fit to make the England Euro Championships team . in maybe April.
I feel so sorry for Klopp and what he's had to contend with.
How much longer is he supposed to wait for Sturridge?

25.) 11 Jan 2016
11 Jan 2016 00:42:36
Think sturridge better off in less physical league like italian, Spanish league.

Middle east football also possibility.