My mate (clang) Tiago is set to join Reading, which might indicate that Joe is close to a return with Liverpool rather than The Terriers?
A fair shout. Hasn't really worked out for your mate at Liverpool. He was a highly rated young player when he signed from Sporting, and there was talk of getting him to switch his allegiance to England. Never got a look in despite Liverpool having trouble at the back seemingly every season.
I read recently in the Daily Mirror (also the Liverpool Echo) that Klopp doesn't want to risk Gomez out on loan.
Asked if Gomez would compete for a first-team spot in the new year or head out on loan, Klopp said: “No to the second question about a loan.
“For us, I don’t think so. We had a very good talk. What I think about Joe Gomez is he is an unbelievable talent, which everybody knew before. It’s a long injury and if we send him on loan, with his quality, a team will play him every game. That is not what he needs in the moment. Because he was a long time injured he needs us to judge: ‘now play, now stop, rest, work on this, do this, do a little bit on this’.”
Klopp is a huge admirer of Gomez and wanted to take him to Borussia Dortmund before his Liverpool job, seems like he wants to take great care of him. I suppose this is how the professionals manage players injuries?
Klopp is a very intelligent manager, no offence to the recent incumbents (well, offence intended to Karel) but when you read even a short comment like that you start to understand why guys like him are at the top of their game.
Liverpools defencd is very vulnerable this year, if Joe can get him back to something approaching match fitness over the festive period he could have a big second half of the season.
Yet another side effect of the ban on emergency loans, is that he can't go out on loan in, say, January or February for a month to get match fitness when their medical team feel it's useful, it's either half a season or nothing,
Yes but Klopp has very sagely turned that idea down. He wants for himself and his team to manage Gomez's comeback, which I think is very smart.
Contrast that to Kashi or Diarra coming back into the side last year. Admittedly, I don't think Diarra was doing any further damage to himself given it was a fracture, but we see where Kashi is. A team like Liverpool can be more patient as they have a far larger squad and group of academy players to soften the blow, but still, they seem concerned in the player's long term health.
I have vaguely heard that, down the years, there has been talk in American sports, particularly American Football, about who club physios and doctors should work for. I don't follow it closely enough to have a firm understanding, but I believe a tendency toward shortsightedness to injuries was due in part to the team pressuring doctors to get players back on the field as quickly as possible.
I'll dig around and see if I can find any articles on this, as I suspect this goes on in all sport.
Interesting point. Could having doctors employed by the governing body (FA, ECB, NFL, etc.) work? Regardless of who the club appoints to do the treatment, the overseeing doctor decides if the player is fit to return. I can see all sorts of court cases coming out of that.
I seem to recall that being one idea, and another them being employed by players' unions. But yeah, it's easy to see how the team employing the doctor could create a conflict of interest between what's best for the team versus what's best, long term, for the player.
I know I read something on this a while back that cited some potential instances.
Here is a WashPo article on a Harvard Study recommending doctors not report to teams, but it doesn't cite any actual conflicts of interest:
I will make an effort to watch the Liverpool match tomorrow if Gomez will be playing, really hope he can overcome his injury problems and go on to be the success all us Addicks know he can.
I read recently in the Daily Mirror (also the Liverpool Echo) that Klopp doesn't want to risk Gomez out on loan.
Asked if Gomez would compete for a first-team spot in the new year or head out on loan, Klopp said: “No to the second question about a loan.
“For us, I don’t think so. We had a very good talk. What I think about Joe Gomez is he is an unbelievable talent, which everybody knew before. It’s a long injury and if we send him on loan, with his quality, a team will play him every game. That is not what he needs in the moment. Because he was a long time injured he needs us to judge: ‘now play, now stop, rest, work on this, do this, do a little bit on this’.”
Klopp is a huge admirer of Gomez and wanted to take him to Borussia Dortmund before his Liverpool job, seems like he wants to take great care of him. I suppose this is how the professionals manage players injuries?
Klopp is a very intelligent manager, no offence to the recent incumbents (well, offence intended to Karel) but when you read even a short comment like that you start to understand why guys like him are at the top of their game.
Liverpools defencd is very vulnerable this year, if Joe can get him back to something approaching match fitness over the festive period he could have a big second half of the season.
Yet another side effect of the ban on emergency loans, is that he can't go out on loan in, say, January or February for a month to get match fitness when their medical team feel it's useful, it's either half a season or nothing,
Yes but Klopp has very sagely turned that idea down. He wants for himself and his team to manage Gomez's comeback, which I think is very smart.
Contrast that to Kashi or Diarra coming back into the side last year. Admittedly, I don't think Diarra was doing any further damage to himself given it was a fracture, but we see where Kashi is. A team like Liverpool can be more patient as they have a far larger squad and group of academy players to soften the blow, but still, they seem concerned in the player's long term health.
I have vaguely heard that, down the years, there has been talk in American sports, particularly American Football, about who club physios and doctors should work for. I don't follow it closely enough to have a firm understanding, but I believe a tendency toward shortsightedness to injuries was due in part to the team pressuring doctors to get players back on the field as quickly as possible.
I'll dig around and see if I can find any articles on this, as I suspect this goes on in all sport.
Interesting point. Could having doctors employed by the governing body (FA, ECB, NFL, etc.) work? Regardless of who the club appoints to do the treatment, the overseeing doctor decides if the player is fit to return. I can see all sorts of court cases coming out of that.
I seem to recall that being one idea, and another them being employed by players' unions. But yeah, it's easy to see how the team employing the doctor could create a conflict of interest between what's best for the team versus what's best, long term, for the player.
I know I read something on this a while back that cited some potential instances.
Here is a WashPo article on a Harvard Study recommending doctors not report to teams, but it doesn't cite any actual conflicts of interest:
There's never been an ex Charlton player I've wanted to see succeed as much as Joe Gomez. Really think he can go all the way to the very top.
Agree.
Not so sue about John Stones but Gomez is the real deal
I think once John Stones starts to think as a defender instead of being a ball playing "footballer" he will be immense. The comparison would be Luiz at Chelsea who, in his first spell, made similar mistakes through overplaying in dangerous areas. He doesn't do that so much now and is one of the reasons Chelsea in their last 14 games (in which he has played every minute) have only conceded 4 goals.
It is certainly very easy to fawn over the youth academy products that the team you support produce. You hear time and time again from fans of various teams how good their latest youth player to come through the ranks and play for the first team is, and how they will end up playing playing for top club or for their national team, but in so many cases this never materialises.
However I feel like I can safely say that Joe Gomez, is one of the best, if not best, player to come from our academy and will be a star in the future. I will be tuning in later to watch him play as I am genuinely excited to see him play again, and that's a rare thing to say about a defender!
Radio 5 live commentator said he got exposed for pace by the Plymouth substitute a couple of times and also mentioned he'd been out of first team action for 465 days (I think) but had played 6 under 23 games in his comeback
I thought Gomez was pretty good. When you get a pass from him, it is direct and comfortable, and the precision of his passing makes it easier for the recipient to control. Mind you as the game went on I wanted Plymouth to win because the commentators took patronising, dismissive, and disdainful to a higher than usual level today.
He'll get there eventually (playing for clubs the size of Real Madrid)I genuinely think that, but Liverpool is probably his best place (if he gets first team football) atm
I don't know what his injury/fitness status is, but it mus the disheartening to watch Can and Lucas play at CB ahead of you.
Regarding him not going out on loan, I think it was probably due, at least in part, to the fact that Liverpool had 150 games in January and early February. He would really benefit from the old "emergency loan" rule. Think he'd fit in well at Hudds actually...
Comments
http://livesonline.rcseng.ac.uk/biogs/E000376b.htm
he operated on Paul Went's knee
Not so sue about John Stones but Gomez is the real deal
However I feel like I can safely say that Joe Gomez, is one of the best, if not best, player to come from our academy and will be a star in the future. I will be tuning in later to watch him play as I am genuinely excited to see him play again, and that's a rare thing to say about a defender!
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jan/06/joe-gomez-liverpool-playmouth-fa-cup-jurgen-klopp
Mind you as the game went on I wanted Plymouth to win because the commentators took patronising, dismissive, and disdainful to a higher than usual level today.
http://talksport.com/football/liverpool-fc-transfer-report-real-madrid-plotting-shock-move-out-favour-reds-starlet-joe
Regarding him not going out on loan, I think it was probably due, at least in part, to the fact that Liverpool had 150 games in January and early February. He would really benefit from the old "emergency loan" rule. Think he'd fit in well at Hudds actually...