Comments on: Chelsea v Arsenal v Liverpool v Manchester United – Who Can Handle Injuries Better?

By: destan--gunner

destan--gunner — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:20:47 +0000

Arsenal : fabregas,hleb,toure
Liverpool : Gerrard,torres,reina
MAN.UTD : rooney,Ronaldo,Scholes
Chelsea : Drogba,Essien,Terry

If they lose these Players they all will fall…but all top4,can`t lose them at the same time…one team is going to have luck…guess who ? i thikn Arsenal !

GO GUNNERS GO

By: Shohan Khan

Shohan Khan — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:31:16 +0000

I agree with Liverpool_fan on this one. “I though this was going to be an actual article comparing their teams but you should have named it Chelseas sqaud depth” Man United have excellent squad depth and last season there was a time when Man United had only 11 fit players (including the sub keeper). This was when they went away to Milan and lost 3-0 in the 2nd leg. Many players played out of positon and Vidic even played with an injury. And yeah how come noone talks about that? Only Chelsea get injuries yeah?

By: Conor

Conor — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:15:15 +0000

And by the way, correct me if I’m wrong but did United not just send out their 2nd team last night(bar 1 player;the captain) and get a draw at the Stadio Olimpico? Fair enough you can talk about Chelsea’s squad being the best in the world, but at least acknowledge the fact that other teams have great squads too.

By: Conor

Conor — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:23:38 +0000

Too biased towards Chelsea imo. You write 4 paragrahs on Chelsea’s great squad yet you mention nothing good about Manchester United’s or Liverpools squad, which both are very good, Arsenal for now still rely on youngsters too much, but who cares when they pay the football they do so regularly.
Liverpool have just as good back-up strikers as Chelsea: Voronin-Shevchenko, Kalou-Crouch. In midfield they’re fairly close too: Makelele-Mascherano/Alonso Mikel-Lucas,Sissoko-Sidwell. Chelsea have the better back-up wingers as Malouda is much better than Babel or Pennant. and in defence Chelsea are only slightly superior, both have 2 good left backs, Liverpool have better right backs, but Chelsea have Alex, and even Ben Haim(panic buy) who are better than Hyypia.
Without Scholes we are second in the league and may be first by Monday but you say we are a different team without him, yet without Lampard chelsea struggled much more.
“Chelsea do have enlarged their squad somewhat this season ” Firstly chelsea always had the best squad in the league, yet injuries still stopped them from winning the league(apparently), and compared to their squad last year the only differnce has been that you have more numbers than before, making players unhappy, such as Malouda, and none of the summer signings have been that impressive, although Belleti has helped solve the problem at right back, 2 years later.

By: Liverpool_Fan

Liverpool_Fan — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:17:17 +0000

I though this was going to be an actual article comparing their teams but you should have named it Chelseas sqaud depth

By: Louis

Louis — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 14:22:18 +0000

Well said Karl.

By: Karl

Karl — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:09:25 +0000

“Manchester United haven’t been the same team in style and vigor without midfielder Paul Scholes”

I think the above quote is a very silly one from the author.
It does not even seem as if Paul Schole’s absence bothers the team much. We do play fine without him.
It’s Ronaldo/Rooney that is a bit of a concern. At least in Tevez, we have some form of substite for Rooney, but nothing yet for Ronaldo. Perhaps in a season or 2 Nani will be ready.

The point that I’m trying to make is, SAF identified the crucial areas and are working on it.

By: Frankie

Frankie — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:11:51 +0000

Well, since my earlier post, Gerrard and Torres have put on superb performances in Liverpool’s 0-4 hammering of Marseille, as if to underline the point about their critical importance to Liverpool.

By: Frankie

Frankie — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:56:13 +0000

The truth is that all the Big Four suffer and will suffer when their special players are missing. There is a case for saying that each of the Big Four have two special players the loss of which for any significant period would not only dent, but would probably de-rail title ambitions. Consider the loss of the following pairs from the Big Four:

Torres and Gerrard (Liverpool)
Rooney and Ronaldo (Man Utd)
Terry/Essien and Drogba (Chelsea)
Fabregas and Hleb (Arsenal)

By way of example, United have lost two games this season. Guess who weren’t playing. Yep, Rooney and Ronaldo. Arsenal lose in Seville, struggle to draw with Newcastle and lose to Middlesboro. Guess who weren’t playing. Yep, Fabregas and Hleb. Chelsea lost to United when they were without Drogba. And can you imagine Liverpool without both Torres and Gerrard? Doesn’t bear thinking about.

So, its really about each team getting on the prayer mat and asking the Gods to keep their special players out of harm’s way. Special players apart, United and Chelsea are clearly the sides best able to cope with a raft of injuries as they have both shown over the past year.

By: Taehr

Taehr — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:04:41 +0000

Uniteda cope with injuries the best.they proved that last season and are proving it again this time around with injuries to rooney,saha,hargreaves,scholes,neville etc.united also have the largest squad of players(quality players),except upfront.arsenals squad is thin and is looking increasingly vulnerable.i give them 2 more weeks at the top if not till sunday.subhankar mate keep up the good work with these ” big team” articles.there was really none for some time.