While I think there's hyperbole in the that, with the criticism toned down, I can see valid points about his performance. I would agree that Mitrovic is more important to Fulham than Sturridge would be; Mitrovic played 82 league games with 40 goals for Fulham, Sturridge has played 17 league games, scoring 4 goals in Turkey within the same 3 year time frame. He's also without a club due to a 4 month worldwide football ban.   Micah Richard's article reads like a friends justification, but it's neither insightful or enlightening. It opens with "Daniel Sturridge is far too good a player to be out of the Premier League after only just turning 31 but, let's face it, the reason he is currently without a club has got nothing to do with his age, or his ability. It's not because of his injury history or wage demands, either - it's down to the label he's been given as being difficult, or a problem player. I have no idea where that perception has come from, but it is a reputation that is completely undeserved." If I was calling it for reasons he's without a club, I'd say wage>injury history>age>attitude>ability - ultimately he chooses to sign or refuse what he's offered, given that it's October it's fairly natural to assume his desire to play will be questioned. Talent is the last of my worries, I hope he doesn't let it go to further waste while weighing up his options.

Surprising that none of their legions of devoted fans in Colombia have replied.

Saw Lovren gave away a pen tonight....the guy never learns.

Who controls the Var for European football is it still Stockley park ?