comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
"Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash."
Funniest backtrack ever.
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 1 hour ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
"He was bought to be a regular starter"
But fully fit, would he be now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Without doubt, for me, if he plays to the level he has been when fit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting.
Don't agree with that at all myself and think his lack of re-introduction into the team when he's fit speaks volumes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What lack of reintroduction when fit? There hasn't been a lack of reintroduction when fit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the numbers linked to earlier are correct, I would say that 44 out of 101 games is more than just ‘returning from injury’ difficulties. Maybe he wasn’t doing enough in training or something but there is something else going on there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you'd be wrong. It's as Liverpool fans are telling you. He is eased back, he plays well, he gets injured. How would you deal with the player in this situation? Keep throwing him in, hoping he doesn't get injured, or ease him in?
I don't even understand your logic here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s as I’ve already explained, I acknowledge that it will take away game time getting these repeat injuries. But, in my opinion, 44 out of 101 is a lot higher than I would expect. That’s 44 games when he is available for selection but not selected.
I’m not a doctor and presumably neither are you plus neither of us have access to his medical records but ultimately 44/101 is a lot of games to be available but not selected.
If sold now he would be considered a flop, therefore he is (present tense) a flop. A solid season next year and that all changes.
There’s the logic mate
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured. I still believe he has performed very well when he has actually played, however as I said on another thread, I'd rather have Fred, if Keita continues to keep getting injured, even if Fred isn't great.
What is this 44/101 anyhow? Are you saying he's played 44 games but been available for 101? If that's the case then that is absolute nonsense, I'm afraid.
SatNav
According to transfermarkt, he's played 51 times and brought on 18 times and subbed off 22 times.
That makes a huge difference IMO.
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured
-----
I have to agree that technically he is a flop as we signed him for big money and we are getting very little back. But it's for different reasons as compared to a typical flop who is available and plays many games but is just crap.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
In that case both Pogba & Keita are flops.
Next season might completely change that but we don’t know what the future holds.
What we can all agree on is that Sanchez is the biggest flop ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ðŸ˜
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i don't really agree with most people's idea of a flop on here but i had forgotten about sanchez.
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured. I still believe he has performed very well when he has actually played, however as I said on another thread, I'd rather have Fred, if Keita continues to keep getting injured, even if Fred isn't great.
What is this 44/101 anyhow? Are you saying he's played 44 games but been available for 101? If that's the case then that is absolute nonsense, I'm afraid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s from some stats that someone else posted with a link. No it’s not that. It’s that Liverpool in his time have played 101 games and Keita was available for selection in 44 of those but not picked. Which as I say, if they’re accurate, then that’s incredibly high.
Anyway, a flop he would be if he left now. Granted, injury (which is clearly a big factor in his performance as a Liverpool player) is not anywhere near as bad as say Sanchez where it’s purely been that’s he’s just not good anymore; Torres MkII
comment by montleeds (U18330)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
In that case both Pogba & Keita are flops.
Next season might completely change that but we don’t know what the future holds.
What we can all agree on is that Sanchez is the biggest flop ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ðŸ˜
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i don't really agree with most people's idea of a flop on here but i had forgotten about sanchez.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I know what you mean, the word has harsh implications and truly the only person that this 100% applies to is our man Sanchez
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured. I still believe he has performed very well when he has actually played, however as I said on another thread, I'd rather have Fred, if Keita continues to keep getting injured, even if Fred isn't great.
What is this 44/101 anyhow? Are you saying he's played 44 games but been available for 101? If that's the case then that is absolute nonsense, I'm afraid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s from some stats that someone else posted with a link. No it’s not that. It’s that Liverpool in his time have played 101 games and Keita was available for selection in 44 of those but not picked. Which as I say, if they’re accurate, then that’s incredibly high.
Anyway, a flop he would be if he left now. Granted, injury (which is clearly a big factor in his performance as a Liverpool player) is not anywhere near as bad as say Sanchez where it’s purely been that’s he’s just not good anymore; Torres MkII
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that's also incorrect. Can you post a link to those stats?
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 1 minute ago
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured
-----
I have to agree that technically he is a flop as we signed him for big money and we are getting very little back. But it's for different reasons as compared to a typical flop who is available and plays many games but is just crap.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This I agree with. Injuries are not entirely the players’ fault so it is a little harsh but still a ‘flop’
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured. I still believe he has performed very well when he has actually played, however as I said on another thread, I'd rather have Fred, if Keita continues to keep getting injured, even if Fred isn't great.
What is this 44/101 anyhow? Are you saying he's played 44 games but been available for 101? If that's the case then that is absolute nonsense, I'm afraid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s from some stats that someone else posted with a link. No it’s not that. It’s that Liverpool in his time have played 101 games and Keita was available for selection in 44 of those but not picked. Which as I say, if they’re accurate, then that’s incredibly high.
Anyway, a flop he would be if he left now. Granted, injury (which is clearly a big factor in his performance as a Liverpool player) is not anywhere near as bad as say Sanchez where it’s purely been that’s he’s just not good anymore; Torres MkII
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that's also incorrect. Can you post a link to those stats?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somewhere in this thread. Feel free to look for it yourself.
I didn’t post them, someone else did
Sign in if you want to comment
Biggest big money flop currently in the PL?
Page 12 of 12
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
posted on 18/5/20
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
posted on 18/5/20
"Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash."
Funniest backtrack ever.
posted on 18/5/20
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 1 hour ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
"He was bought to be a regular starter"
But fully fit, would he be now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Without doubt, for me, if he plays to the level he has been when fit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting.
Don't agree with that at all myself and think his lack of re-introduction into the team when he's fit speaks volumes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What lack of reintroduction when fit? There hasn't been a lack of reintroduction when fit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the numbers linked to earlier are correct, I would say that 44 out of 101 games is more than just ‘returning from injury’ difficulties. Maybe he wasn’t doing enough in training or something but there is something else going on there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you'd be wrong. It's as Liverpool fans are telling you. He is eased back, he plays well, he gets injured. How would you deal with the player in this situation? Keep throwing him in, hoping he doesn't get injured, or ease him in?
I don't even understand your logic here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s as I’ve already explained, I acknowledge that it will take away game time getting these repeat injuries. But, in my opinion, 44 out of 101 is a lot higher than I would expect. That’s 44 games when he is available for selection but not selected.
I’m not a doctor and presumably neither are you plus neither of us have access to his medical records but ultimately 44/101 is a lot of games to be available but not selected.
If sold now he would be considered a flop, therefore he is (present tense) a flop. A solid season next year and that all changes.
There’s the logic mate
posted on 18/5/20
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
posted on 18/5/20
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
posted on 18/5/20
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
posted on 18/5/20
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured. I still believe he has performed very well when he has actually played, however as I said on another thread, I'd rather have Fred, if Keita continues to keep getting injured, even if Fred isn't great.
What is this 44/101 anyhow? Are you saying he's played 44 games but been available for 101? If that's the case then that is absolute nonsense, I'm afraid.
posted on 18/5/20
SatNav
According to transfermarkt, he's played 51 times and brought on 18 times and subbed off 22 times.
That makes a huge difference IMO.
posted on 18/5/20
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured
-----
I have to agree that technically he is a flop as we signed him for big money and we are getting very little back. But it's for different reasons as compared to a typical flop who is available and plays many games but is just crap.
posted on 18/5/20
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
In that case both Pogba & Keita are flops.
Next season might completely change that but we don’t know what the future holds.
What we can all agree on is that Sanchez is the biggest flop ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ðŸ˜
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i don't really agree with most people's idea of a flop on here but i had forgotten about sanchez.
posted on 18/5/20
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured. I still believe he has performed very well when he has actually played, however as I said on another thread, I'd rather have Fred, if Keita continues to keep getting injured, even if Fred isn't great.
What is this 44/101 anyhow? Are you saying he's played 44 games but been available for 101? If that's the case then that is absolute nonsense, I'm afraid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s from some stats that someone else posted with a link. No it’s not that. It’s that Liverpool in his time have played 101 games and Keita was available for selection in 44 of those but not picked. Which as I say, if they’re accurate, then that’s incredibly high.
Anyway, a flop he would be if he left now. Granted, injury (which is clearly a big factor in his performance as a Liverpool player) is not anywhere near as bad as say Sanchez where it’s purely been that’s he’s just not good anymore; Torres MkII
posted on 18/5/20
comment by montleeds (U18330)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
In that case both Pogba & Keita are flops.
Next season might completely change that but we don’t know what the future holds.
What we can all agree on is that Sanchez is the biggest flop ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ðŸ˜
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i don't really agree with most people's idea of a flop on here but i had forgotten about sanchez.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I know what you mean, the word has harsh implications and truly the only person that this 100% applies to is our man Sanchez
posted on 18/5/20
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured. I still believe he has performed very well when he has actually played, however as I said on another thread, I'd rather have Fred, if Keita continues to keep getting injured, even if Fred isn't great.
What is this 44/101 anyhow? Are you saying he's played 44 games but been available for 101? If that's the case then that is absolute nonsense, I'm afraid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s from some stats that someone else posted with a link. No it’s not that. It’s that Liverpool in his time have played 101 games and Keita was available for selection in 44 of those but not picked. Which as I say, if they’re accurate, then that’s incredibly high.
Anyway, a flop he would be if he left now. Granted, injury (which is clearly a big factor in his performance as a Liverpool player) is not anywhere near as bad as say Sanchez where it’s purely been that’s he’s just not good anymore; Torres MkII
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that's also incorrect. Can you post a link to those stats?
posted on 18/5/20
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 1 minute ago
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured
-----
I have to agree that technically he is a flop as we signed him for big money and we are getting very little back. But it's for different reasons as compared to a typical flop who is available and plays many games but is just crap.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This I agree with. Injuries are not entirely the players’ fault so it is a little harsh but still a ‘flop’
posted on 18/5/20
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 35 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by Thor (U22388)
posted 4 hours, 13 minutes ago
Sat Nav
"but what about the 40 odd times he wasn't injured and didn't play?"
"40% of the games that have been played since he joined, he hasn't been injured and hasn't been involved"
---------
The way I see it, both of these cannot be true. None of these are true statements IMO, but even on a purely logical basis, both cannot be true surely.
And I've posted stats a few pages back and provided sources which show that Keita has been injured often and regularly, coming on or being subbed off nearly 90% of the time he is available, because he is always transitioning from one injury or another.
He's played 90 minutes 6 times in two seasons and all his full games have come in periods where he has stayed fit for a few weeks and he has produced for Liverpool to expected standards for a player in his circumstances.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he has missed 23 games
Liverpool played 53 games last season and 48 this season
101 games...he has appeared 34 times, often off the bench
--------
After joining Liverpool for the 18/19 season, Keita has made a total of 51 apps in all competitions. That blows everything else away. Basically all this info is erroneous, even the number of games used.
101- 34- 23 = 44 games he didn't appear in, not because he was injured just because herr Klopp didn't fancy him
thats a flop, no arguments
-----
Yeah, if you use these imaginary stats.
The transfermarkt link is good. A link to all his injuries. I suggest you click on the stats tab and go from there.
It’s pretty simple to understand mate. The numbers used above are 101 games since he joined Liverpool so 40 games and 40% are roughly the same (the poster wasn’t needing to be 100% accurate).
-------
Yeah, it's accurate if you don't use real stats. Anything can be accurate if you're plucking the numbers from thin air.
Therefore both statements can be true as they are both saying the same thing??????
------------------------------------------
Again, yes, if you use made up stats. Admittedly there is an element of the post that I missed but overall its still virtually all hogwash.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the stats quoted previously are completely wrong, then my opinion changes greatly. It is what I am basing a lot of my opinion on as 44/101 is a lot of missed games whilst available for selection.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just it. He wasn't available for selection as they didn't want to risk him as he kept getting injured. They didn't need to either as we kept winning.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I get that.
I still think that 44/101 even when taking that all into account, is an awful lot.
That plus that if he were sold now, I think it was you but could have been another Liverpool fan, then he would be deemed a flop (for whatever reason).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I would deem him a flop as he kept getting injured. I still believe he has performed very well when he has actually played, however as I said on another thread, I'd rather have Fred, if Keita continues to keep getting injured, even if Fred isn't great.
What is this 44/101 anyhow? Are you saying he's played 44 games but been available for 101? If that's the case then that is absolute nonsense, I'm afraid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s from some stats that someone else posted with a link. No it’s not that. It’s that Liverpool in his time have played 101 games and Keita was available for selection in 44 of those but not picked. Which as I say, if they’re accurate, then that’s incredibly high.
Anyway, a flop he would be if he left now. Granted, injury (which is clearly a big factor in his performance as a Liverpool player) is not anywhere near as bad as say Sanchez where it’s purely been that’s he’s just not good anymore; Torres MkII
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, that's also incorrect. Can you post a link to those stats?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Somewhere in this thread. Feel free to look for it yourself.
I didn’t post them, someone else did
Page 12 of 12
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12