Liverpool FC Forum

[Owzat]

The injury myth is quite popular, aided by Torres and Gerrard missing games recently, but how many games have we had key players missing?

We've played 23 games this season, there's no point including the two Carling Cup games as we put out second strings anyway, and little point including the dead rubber against Fiorentina, so that leaves 20 games (nice round number)

I've left out Aquilani as signed injured/unable to play until recently. Jury is out as to our best LB, Insua and Aurelio started at least five each of the last 11 Premiership games of last season when we won 10 out of XI. I've included Agger although his absence is generally accepted given his injury record.

Games ('key' players absent in brackets)

Tottenham 8/9 (Lost) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger)
Stoke 8/9 (Won) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger)
A Villa 8/9 (Lost) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger)
Bolton 8/9 (Won) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger)
Burnley 7/9 (Won) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger, Mascherano)
West Ham 8/9 (Won) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger)
Hull City 8/9 (Won) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger)
Chelsea 8/9 (Lost) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger)
Sunderland 7/9 (Lost) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, Agger, Benayoun (GERRARD, TORRES)
Man Utd 8/9 (Won) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, TORRES, Agger, Benayoun (GERRARD)
Fulham 6/9 (Lost) : Reina, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, TORRES, Benayoun (Johnson, GERRARD, Agger)
Birmingham 7/9 (Drew) : Reina, Johnson, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, Benayoun (TORRES, Carra suspended)
Man City 7/9 (Drew) : Reina, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, Benayoun (Johnson, TORRES)
Bitters 8/9 (Won) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, Benayoun (TORRES)
Blackburn 8/9 (Drew) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, Benayoun (TORRES)

So only in ONE league game did we have three key players missing. Torres has missed five league games in which we lost once, won once and drew three times. Gerrard has missed three league games of which we won one and lost two, both defeats away and to Fulham and Beachball, with us winning without him against the mancs. I think what it does show is we are too dependant on those two, and with one or other missing we can look very ordinary come dreadful

To complete the 20 games here is the same again for Europe

Debrecen 8/9 (Won) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger)
Fiorentina 7/9 (Lost) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Kuyt, GERRARD, TORRES, Benayoun (Agger, Mascherano)
Lyon 7/9 (Lost) : Reina, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, Agger, Benayoun (TORRES, Johnson)
Lyon 7/9 (Drew) : Reina, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, Agger, TORRES, Benayoun (Johnson, GERRARD)
Debrecen 8/9 (Won) : Reina, Johnson, Carra, Mascherano, Kuyt, GERRARD, Agger, Benayoun (TORRES)

Cue the argument "Torres wasn't fit when playing, well that would still not drag our team down to bare bones and injury crisis. The most common absentees from our key players pool are Torres and Agger (injury prone, nearly didn't include him for that reason) Others have missed games, but the odd one or two and certainly not as many as many of the claims would suggest with talk of injuries affecting our season. Why don't people just say "Torres has missed games and Gerrard", that is the sum of it. Reason they don't is people will then say we're too much of a two man team which is worryingly true based on facts.

I could have included Aquilani and a choice of LB, that would have completed a strongest XI rather than nine 'key players'. Insua is arguably the Rafa choice of the moment now, but some still feel Aurelio is better. Lucas hasn't been absent through injury, but most would rather see Aquilani and had he been bought fully fit, or at least sustained an injury at this club, then I could have justified his inclusion.

[maypaxvobiscum]

where on earth do you get all these stats from   very impressive

[Sabre]

I've left out Aquilani as signed injured/unable to play until recently.

Yes if you do this it's easier to defend that injuries are a myth.

But I think you should have included him because he has been THE injury, we've been waiting for him all the season.

I think that losing Alonso required a signing up, and in a different role, Aquilani was the man.

I'd include him in the brackets, other than that, it's interesting data.

[LFC2007]

Neither Gerrard or Torres have been at all close to full fitness throughout the season as they've been carrying long-standing problems. Riera, a player at least on Benayoun's level hasn't been included in the assessment despite struggling badly with injuries and also Aurelio was out for a consistent spell and he's our best LB. That's our best left-sided pairing, IMO. Players who haven't been unduly burdened by injury are the likes of: Reina, Carra, Skrtel, Insua, Johnson, Masch, Lucas, Benayoun, Kuyt, Ngog. Players who have: Agger, Aurelio, Aquilani, Riera, Gerrard, Torres.

[Emerald Red]

So injuries in our squad is a myth now? What a load of bollox! Too much time on your hands, lad.

[Zidane]

It isn't the only reason we are where we are but the fact of the matter is that it has had a pretty big negative impact on our season.  No myth or mystery there.

[bigmick]

I think the injuries have been very significant. We aren't on our own in having them of course, the Mancs injuries are probably worse than ours and Arsenal aren't far behind, but there's no question that the injuries have made us a team which is easier to beat.

That is hardly a surprise though in fairness, and by that I mean the injuries themselves and the impact they've had. If you go into a new season with Fernando Torres as your main striker, it's reasonable to expect that at some stage he will get injured as explosive strikers like him do from time to time. It really was a question of when rather than if, and it would be no surprise if we lost him again before the end of the season. Equally unsurprising is the situation that when he gets injured, the fact that we haven't got a credible replacement is going to have a huge impact on us. Many people talked about what would happen if Torres got injured long before he actually did get injured and it did happen, so once again it was hardly a surprise.

Equally, if we sell Alonso and don't have anybody to replace him then we are going to feel the impact of that action. Not surprising really, neither is the fact that the Lucas/Masherano axis doesn't provide enough creativity, particularly when you've got a bloke who runs about a lot on the right side of midfield.

The Lucas/Masherano axis will do well against arsenal though in all probability, breaking up their passing movements and the like. Now Torres is semi fit as well he'll probably scopre a goal or two and we'll probably win as well. The board will be flooded with people then who ask "so Rafa's not such a mug now is he you c...s?" which of course they're entitled to do. When Torres gets injured next time though and we can't buy a goal for love nor money, or when we play against a park the bus team and we suddenly realise after 75 minutes that we haven't had a shot, anybody who metions it will be accused of all sorts, not least of only piping up when things go wrong. 

We've been unlucky with injuries it's obvious. The problems we have encountered were obviously going to happen too. The problems we will encounter are equally clear. It's what the people who call the shots do about it which will dictate the course of events.

[fivecups]

There have been a lot of factors that have led to our cataclysmic decline from genuine title contenders to 4 place scrappers and they've be well documented on the forum. I'm surprised that anyone is arguing that our injuries have been a myth? They've undoubtly contributed to our disastrous start to the season.

I think the OP would have been more useful if you've just listed the injured players for each match than selecting certain ones. Aquilani and Reira are two obvious omissions. Yes we bought Aquilani injured (clearly another factor in our decline) but he was supposed to be fit by October when he arrived, not December and no-one can argue our second most expensive purchase is an important player. It's been well documented that Gerrard has only been partially fit and playing with the aid of pain-killers recently. Anyone who watched some of our recent matches could see how unfit he was.

[damjan193]

Myths or not, we are missing players and loosing games (and titles, and it's not even half a season).But then again Man Utd doesnt have a defense at the moment and they were still able to beat Wolfsburg.

[damjan193]

There have been a lot of factors that have led to our cataclysmic decline from genuine title contenders to 4 place scrappers and they've be well documented on the forum. I'm surprised that anyone is arguing that our injuries have been a myth? They've undoubtly contributed to our disastrous start to the season.

I think the OP would have been more useful if you've just listed the injured players for each match than selecting certain ones. Aquilani and Reira are two obvious omissions. Yes we bought Aquilani injured (clearly another factor in our decline) but he was supposed to be fit by October when he arrived, not December and no-one can argue our second most expensive purchase is an important player. It's been well documented that Gerrard has only been partially fit and playing with the aid of pain-killers recently. Anyone who watched some of our recent matches could see how unfit he was.

And yes, I agree, Gerrard is totally unfit.I'd rather have Spearing on the team insted of him than see him play so bad.

[Penguins]

I think the injuries have been very significant. We aren't on our own in having them of course, the Mancs injuries are probably worse than ours and Arsenal aren't far behind, but there's no question that the injuries have made us a team which is easier to beat.

That is hardly a surprise though in fairness, and by that I mean the injuries themselves and the impact they've had. If you go into a new season with Fernando Torres as your main striker, it's reasonable to expect that at some stage he will get injured as explosive strikers like him do from time to time. It really was a question of when rather than if, and it would be no surprise if we lost him again before the end of the season. Equally unsurprising is the situation that when he gets injured, the fact that we haven't got a credible replacement is going to have a huge impact on us. Many people talked about what would happen if Torres got injured long before he actually did get injured and it did happen, so once again it was hardly a surprise.

Equally, if we sell Alonso and don't have anybody to replace him then we are going to feel the impact of that action. Not surprising really, neither is the fact that the Lucas/Masherano axis doesn't provide enough creativity, particularly when you've got a bloke who runs about a lot on the right side of midfield.

The Lucas/Masherano axis will do well against arsenal though in all probability, breaking up their passing movements and the like. Now Torres is semi fit as well he'll probably scopre a goal or two and we'll probably win as well. The board will be flooded with people then who ask "so Rafa's not such a mug now is he you c...s?" which of course they're entitled to do. When Torres gets injured next time though and we can't buy a goal for love nor money, or when we play against a park the bus team and we suddenly realise after 75 minutes that we haven't had a shot, anybody who metions it will be accused of all sorts, not least of only piping up when things go wrong. 

We've been unlucky with injuries it's obvious. The problems we have encountered were obviously going to happen too. The problems we will encounter are equally clear. It's what the people who call the shots do about it which will dictate the course of events.

I agree with everything you say(never thought I'd say that) but I don't put the blame solely on Rafa that we haven't got anyone close to Torres if he is injured. For the same reason I don't think Rafa would have bought the Greek if more money was available to buy Turner, Shawcroft or someone else...

Even if I think a sytem with 1 striker can be good for the team it is a bad system if you want to attract good strikers to a  club.
Good strikers want to play and every striker in the world knows that if Torres is healthy it is the bench and that can be for 30 games during the season. Which striker would like that scenario?

[JoeTerp]

Neither Gerrard or Torres have been at all close to full fitness throughout the season as they've been carrying long-standing problems.

Although I agree with the whole bit, this really cannot be overstated. Even though Gerrard and Torres have started some games, a lot of the time they have looked short of fitness and sometimes even gone off very early in matches

And I think Johnson could actually be placed in a middle category. Although he hasn't been as bad as the others he has had a fair amount of trouble, and it really hurts us when he is out because of how short we are at cover.

Johnson missing both Lyon matches was huge. And he was also absent for one of the lowest moments of the season, against Fulham. I think we were also fortunate in that I think one of his injury spells overlapped with an international break.