Agger

[King Binny]

[article=http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11669/8997354/premier-league-liverpools-daniel-agger-says-he-is-not-going-anywhere]Daniel Agger has insisted he has no plans to leave Liverpool and is fighting to get back in the team as quickly as possible.

Agger has been left out of Liverpool's last four Premier League games as Brendan Rodgers has kept faith in the three-man central defence of Kolo Toure, Martin Skrtel and Mamadou Sakho.

The 28-year-old remains under contract at Anfield until 2016 and has previously insisted that he will honour his deal despite reported interest from Barcelona in the summer.

And Agger has again moved quickly to reassure fans that he is happy at Anfield and does not want to leave, after fresh speculation surfaced about his future.

He tweeted: "Please stop all the tweets about me leaving! I'm not going anywhere! Will be back in the team soon."

The latest reports emerged after Agger was quoted as telling television station TV3 Sport in his native Denmark that he was frustrated at not playing and may have to consider moving on.

Asked what could make him leave Liverpool, the 28-year-old said: "First of all, if I don't play. If the manager doesn't think I'm good enough, that could make me leave Liverpool.

"I'm here to play football, nothing else. So if I don't play football, then I don't want to be here anymore."

Agger lost his place in the side due to injury and manager Brendan Rodgers has insisted he will continue to pick the team on merit, saying Skrtel is well suited to the current formation.

"The three at the back plays to his strengths," said the Northern Irishman.

"It allows him to defend and it allows him to simplify things when he has the ball.

"I think in the run of games he's had he's gained confidence and that's meant I've acknowledged and recognised that he's playing at a really good level.

"I've always tried to show my fairness with players. People say 'you don't like this player' or 'you don't like that player' but it's about performance level.

"If you are playing well, you'll play. If you're not, you'll be in and out of the team.

"I've got an international captain sitting on the bench but that's because I like to think I'm fair and if people are playing well they play. Martin has been outstanding."[/article]

 

[mark1975]

Gets injured, doesn't walk straight back into the team and after a couple of games benched, decides to pull out the same old, "I'll go if I don't play".

Haven't we been here a few times before? I'm sure it was all hypothetical, but these players know the score. They know if they're not in the team, then questions will be posed. And to avoid speculation, they know what they should say. Instead we know what usually happens, they leave things open to interpretation and the hint of unhappiness puts pressure on the club/manager to respond one way or the other.

I'm sure alot of people will say he was asked the question so forced to state the obvious. The easy answer would have been, something along the lines of having the belief in his own ability to get back in the side and the knowledge that it's a long season and things change very quickly. Look at what happened to Skrtel, he didn't say a word, even though it was clear he was on the fringe of things and the window was about to shut. Opportunity came and he took it, without a comment either way. Just head down and gets on with it.

I wouldn't be so cynical if we hadn't heard something along these lines the last couple of times Agger's not been in the team after coming back from injury.

 

[Red Bird]

Mark, they all talk. Skrtel gave an interview where he contradicted Rodgers's reason for dropping him (for Carragher) last season.

 

[mark1975]

Course they do, they know the game. But come on, after a couple of games when it's fairly obvious he's only a ban/drop in form/injury away from walking back into the side? He's done this a few times now. Besides, there's a difference between saying you're unhappy you've been made a scapegoat of, and saying you'll go if you don't get back in the side.

 

[Red Bird]

One of the things that has held us back, significantly more than anything, has been complacency. Both Agger and Skrtel were massively guilty of this. Now all of them know that if you get your chance, grab it because if you get dropped it's a hell of a long way back. That can only be for the good.

 

[Modo]

What the article doesnt mention is what did the interviewer ask?

 

[Ryan]

What's your reason Mr. O?

Well, I think Rodgers rates Agger pretty highly, and the only reason he's not in the team right now is that he got injured at an inopportune time. For him anyway. He's not going to take out one of Toure, Skrtel, Sakho when we're winning, and especially when they're all playing pretty well. That's fair too, you've got to reward good performances. This works well for BR too, cos he knows when Agger does come back in that he'll be less likely to be complacent.

We'll lose a game sometime in the next 3-4 weeks I'd imagine, and that'll give BR the chance to stick Agger back in.

I don't think Agger is any better or any worse than the 3 that are playing. They're all much of a muchness; good, but not altogethor great really.

 

[Ryan]

One of the things that has held us back, significantly more than anything, has been complacency. Both Agger and Skrtel were massively guilty of this. Now all of them know that if you get your chance, grab it because if you get dropped it's a hell of a long way back. That can only be for the good.

Yup.

 

[the_khl]

Not sure about the general opinion on Phil Thompson and Alan Kennedy as pundits in here but both reckons Agger should be starting.

Controversial!!!!

*high fives Thompson and Kennedy*

 

[mark1975]

Why's it controversial? There's only you making it a big issue, we're all either haters or we're saying Skrtel is amazing, or both. Read what people say Kris, any one of the four could be starting because they're all about the same level. Skrtel isn't brilliant, neither is Agger or they'd have cemented their places in the side a long time ago.

You moan about the backlash and then repost or bump threads to re-raise the topic. What's the point? So great, Kennedy and Thompson agree with you and Modo, ergo everyone else is wrong. Put up a flag.

 

[the_khl]

No no others are not necessarily wrong, I am just glad it is not only me and that crazy, loveable Swede that thinks Agger should be in the team regardless. I was starting to question my sanity over this issue.

Now we are AT LEAST five. I count Molby too as he is as much Scouse as he is Danish ergo valid to include.

I am trying to give this thread a more friendly face Mark, no more fighting over opinions. Yours is a good as mine and vice versa.

Bearhug? BEARHUG!!

 

[mark1975]

I'm not fighting Kris, it's just irritating. He should be in the team regardless? Of what?

 

[Farkmaster]

I was surprised that Agger was given the vice-captaincy given our defensive woes last year, and I'm pleased to see he isn't guaranteed anything.

Our "best" defender has changed from month to month for a little while now depending on which way the wind blows (i.e. who fucked up most recently). No one was a stand out last season. I'm hoping someone raises their level to prove that point, and everyone should be in the mix. Agger doesn't deserve any special treatment based on his average at best performances.

If he's so undeniably superior, he shouldn't have a problem showing it when he inevitably gets his chance.

 

[Ryan]

I was surprised that Agger was given the vice-captaincy given our defensive woes last year, and I'm pleased to see he isn't guaranteed anything.

Our "best" defender has changed from month to month for a little while now depending on which way the wind blows (i.e. who fucked up most recently). No one was a stand out last season. I'm hoping someone raises their level to prove that point, and everyone should be in the mix. Agger doesn't deserve any special treatment based on his average at best performances.

If he's so undeniably superior, he shouldn't have a problem showing it when he inevitably gets his chance.

Innit.

 

[mark1975]

Quite. Which is pretty much what many people say time and time again, but it gets exaggerated into hate and retaliated with criticism of whoever takes his place (usually Skrtel). I'd be surprised if anyone realistically thought either of them were even close to brilliant. They're all good steady defenders, much of a muchness. There's no real stand out reason why any of them should be deserving of a guaranteed place, unless being Danish counts as a reason.

 

[the_khl]

You really think ol Phil and Alan cares about him being Danish?

Well odd.

 

[i_rushie]

Nobody reckons you're crazy for wanting Agger in the team. Most in this forum recognizes that any of the four CBs could start, and if Agger were to start, no one would overly complain. But that only goes to show how little separates each of them.

And that's why we disagree that Agger ought to be guaranteed a place.

 

[mark1975]

You really think ol Phil and Alan cares about him being Danish?

Well odd.

Kris, do you deliberately miss the point or are you that blinded by your own patriotism?

So did Phil and Alan say he's irrefutably the best defender we have and he should "walk into the team regardless" and always be "guaranteed a place"?

Or is that your version of events?

 

[the_khl]

I am not deliberately trying to miss the point mate, and maybe I am not quite sure what we are now discussing but here's what Phil Thompson was quoted saying yesterday in Daily Mail

"We need to make space for Daniel Agger".

"When you've got a player of that ability, you have to find places to play these lads." Quite strong statement imo that doesn't leave much room for interpretation other than that he believes he should play regardless.

*He then goes on and suggest wing back if nothing else is available which I don't agree is a valid solution.

This is not me trying to convince anyone on here that "I am right" I am merely putting forward examples of great pundits - such as ourselves here on 6CM *points around room whilst avoiding Glock* - that are of the same opinion that me, that Agger shouldn't be on the bench.

 

[Judge Jules]

Kris old pal, Thommo and Alan Kennedy are great old pros to whom the club owes a lot, but the painful truth is they'd probably have a job mustering half a dozen brain cells between the pair of them. This doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong about Dan Agger, but it kinda overshadows their value as witnesses for the defence. IMHO of course.

 

[the_khl]

Kris old pal, Thommo and Alan Kennedy are great old pros to whom the club owes a lot, but the painful truth is they'd probably have a job mustering half a dozen brain cells between the pair of them. This doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong about Dan Agger, but it kinda overshadows their value as witnesses for the defence. IMHO of course.

Ah well, fair enough.