ECHO Comment: "Fears of Witch-hunt Against Liverpool FC" part 3

[number4.]

I haven't got time to double check either, but those numbers look way off what the Athletic was reporting, and just look at feel way out. I've also seen it reported that Palace have had 15 odd players out this season, Southampton have regularly had 10+ out, the numbers just don't make sense. I've seen reports of Palace having the most games out and us having the most players out.

If it was slight adjustment, with Liverpool a bit ahead and us on circa 150-200 games I'd sort of go, yes that feels intuitively about right. But us sitting on about 80 games out, when I've listed injuries off the top of my head getting us to 150 games missed, means the whole chart looks way out, and should probably be discarded as inadmissable, and the company who collate their data need to probably look for another area to report on!

The chart just looks wrong

Well I have no reason to doubt it. I would imagine one might include total numbers (Inc CL) the other just PL, but if you look at them compared to the mean average in either, it is very similar. As I said in the other post, Im not getting sucked into this point, you asked for a source, I shared.

(and then nearly signed this off as a work email )

 

[Jebus_lives]

Interesting - not sure of the date it was published, but shows a very similar split to the other table published above.

I would imagine the wider number includes CL games as they day's rest (Y axis) suggests that this is included

Anyway, im not here to run through data, I was challanged on a stat I mentioned and presented the source.

Those stats are the ones that @catcherintherye mentioned to you.

 

[number4.]

I really wanted to add ‘I await to be corrected by Number4’ at the end of my post but CBA.
I didn’t say that the data isn’t collected but I can’t remember it ever being discussed in such minutiae in previous seasons. The plight of Soton and Leicester has been brought up but we know who made the issue trendy.

perhaps - and apologies for replying ;-)

My gut is its not a new phenomena, possibly more topical as it is the league winners collapsing & there are more injuries due to nature of the season, but from memory Spurs got similar coverage last year when they had no players pre lockdown

 

[PITA]

That chart looks like a Kopite has had too much time on their hands.

Regardless of that though, if a club is thought to be an elite club - and regards itself as such - there can be no excuse for bringing up days lost through injury for 2/3/4 usual first team players. Elite clubs have elite squads (or should have given the cash they spend). If they dont, then that's just tough. It's a reflection of how poorly governed that club is.

For me it;s clear to see what happened: Klopp and LFC's owners bought into a belief that the youngsters coming through were going to be slotted seamlessly into the first team squad and pick up starting places. They overestimated badly how good those youngsters were and didn't press on beyond Jota and Thiago to strengthen when they should have done in the transfer market.

Cry me a 'kin river over injuries. They aren't Tranmere, they profess themselves to be a global elite club. So let's hear none of this "injuries robbed us" BS. They are just a second rate governed organisation.

It seems that their woes are our fault. Maybe losing to their weakened team in the cup convinced them that their youngsters were on a par with Fergie’s Fledglings.

 

[number4.]

It seems that their woes are our fault. Maybe losing to their weakened team in the cup convinced them that their youngsters were on a par with Fergie’s Fledglings.

better long game than Megan that

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

 

[davek]

It seems that their woes are our fault. Maybe losing to their weakened team in the cup convinced them that their youngsters were on a par with Fergie’s Fledglings.

Many a true word spoken in jest.

...and I bet FSG were only too glad to go along with it.

 

[Jebus_lives]

perhaps - and apologies for replying ;-)

My gut is its not a new phenomena, possibly more topical as it is the league winners collapsing & there are more injuries due to nature of the season, but from memory Spurs got similar coverage last year when they had no players pre lockdown

I cannot remember anyone having any sort of comparable prolonged coverage of an 'injury crisis'. Other teams have had it mentioned as part of game coverage, but it's not been repeated ad nauseum at every opportunity.

 

[wandyr79]

You get injuries, you deal with it.

I would argue that if Ancelotti was Liverpool manager with the same injury list they would be 3rd at worst. It is not the number of injuries you have it is the ability to get on with it and stop crying about them. Work the system to lessen the impact, change training slightly and/or get a few players in.

Every one of the 92 league clubs and below can point to games where they have missed important players and these are generally discussed more in the media at the higher level but this is the first time I have ever seen so many graphs and tables pointing out the data (without considering all non statistical factors) to try and prove one club has been the unluckiest, the worst hit, the most hard done by, [insert over the top cryarse comment here], etc.

 

[catcherintherye]

I really wanted to add ‘I await to be corrected by Number4’ at the end of my post but CBA.
I didn’t say that the data isn’t collected but I can’t remember it ever being discussed in such minutiae in previous seasons. The plight of Soton and Leicester has been brought up but we know who made the issue trendy.

We have had seasons with terrible injuries and nobody says a word. It's also worth pointing out, especially in modern football, once players start getting injured they rarely recover fully. Younger players with knocks fine, but older players do become injurt prone quite quickly. The level footballers now have to operate at physically is so high, I'm not sure it's easy to just recover to that level.

 

[Kurt.]

 

[catcherintherye]

Well I have no reason to doubt it. I would imagine one might include total numbers (Inc CL) the other just PL, but if you look at them compared to the mean average in either, it is very similar. As I said in the other post, Im not getting sucked into this point, you asked for a source, I shared.

(and then nearly signed this off as a work email )

I don't think I asked for a source mate, but appreciate you sharing one!

With the nicest will in the world though, I have just pointed out in 2 miutes, off the top of my heasd why it is wrong for us. If I had more time I could probably do so in more detail, but I'm realy not sure I need to waste the time, you can just seethe numbers are way out. I mean the Athletic, ran a very pro Liverpool story, from their Liverpool writer, which showed on the very issue Everton were nearly 100% higher on injury days (and this is beforee the latest speight of injuries) and Liverpool were around 20% lower. To me that is a far more workable number. They have around 200 games missed and we are at 150. I believe Palace are higher than both, and we are higher on players missed.

 

[catcherintherye]

Sp

Spot on regarding the money and the revenue streams. The Europa League generates millions in turnover and losing the money the 'famous European nights under lights' at Anfield generates would be a serious loss of revenue. It would also improve their chances of signing decent players. No European football whatsoever in the forseeable and they are between a rock and a hard place when it comes to recruitment. Cash is king these days and it is for FSG so depriving them of that is what we need.

Contract will have certain mobilisation points both ways. The 1st will be European football, the 2nd CL football as milestones.

Playing EL is essentially "sweating the asset". From a sponsors viewspoint, it's free exposure, another free 10+ games you are getting with your product seen, in lots of different countries. The ground is also full for 5/6/7 more games. It's not CL money but it's a pretty handy pot. I'd imagine where Liverpool are, with the financial pressures every penny would count.

The competition is a pain in the backside, but for someone like Liverpool, they could stick out your Shaqiri's and Origi's etc and probably get close to getting out of the group. I'm not sure it's as big a problem asit might be for someone like Everton. We probably have to be careful viewing it through blue tinted glasses.

 

[JLW]

Dum dum dum Another one bites dust!! And another ones gone and a others ones gone........

 

[Yarrgh]

I'll be honest mate, but those numbers look way off, or they are certainly way off what was reported in the Athletic. I don't remember the exact numbers, but we were much closer, and Palace seems very low as well.

We just seem far too low there. Gbamin has missed 27, Delph has missed 20+, James 15+, Coleman 15+, just on those lads alone we are well above the number they've given to us. Thats before you even get to Allan, Richarlison, DCL, Kenny, Olsen, Pickford, Doucoure, Gomes, Digne, Holgate, Mina etc who've all missed 5-10+ games. Before you're even trying youre at 150 games there. It just feels massively too low.

Yes but their injuries mean more.