Sturridge leaves, no-one's really bothered...

The tale of young Daniel Sturridge is a curious one. He's a player of undoubted talent, yet one that in our current situation we're maybe not as sorry to see go as we may've been in previous times. Firstly, we have to bear in mind that we in essence tapped up the player ourselves, so it would probably be hypocritical of us to accuse Chelsea of using underhand tactics despite the fact we've knew he was heading there for months. There's no doubt, though, that losing an Academy prospect is initially disappointing, although admittedly small news at the moment.

Whether or not Sturridge's chances over the past season have been limited in part due to the fact the club knew he was off is a moot point. Since coming unto the full squad three years ago he's not demonstrated enough to suggest he's worthy of a new big-money deal. I personally rate the lad, he's got all the attributes a young striker might need, but i question the sense in his move to Chelsea reserves.

He would, in all likelihood, have had more of a chance of a run in our first eleven had we not signed Robinho. I'm not sure they're too dissimilar. Both neither out-and-out forwards nor wingers, but somewhere inbetween the two, both having pace and skill in abundance but perhaps lacking work ethic, heart and physicality. At City he simply wasn't going to get games. If Robinho does get injured, Martin Petrov will come in, and Danny's not really the kind of player who can lead an attacking line should Santa Cruz suffer a knock, so in that sense, i can see exactly why he chose to leave us, with that i have no problem, the stats don't lie, he's made twelve starts here in three seasons.

My problem with Danny's move is that i don't think he's gone for anything but the money. It might be a bit hypocritical of us to throw accusations around like that, indeed lots of clubs have been saying the same about players that've moved here in the recent past, but how is he going to get more time on the field at Chelsea when he's achieved so little of it here? They have Drogba and Anelka, both proven forwards both domestically and in Europe. Then they have Solomon Kalou, and young Di Santo, plus they're said to be looking to spend big on a new forward. Where does Sturridge fit into that, i'm not sure?

Anyhow, what's done is done, i just hope the tribunal compensate us accordingly. I guess it's a tricky business to put a realistic valuation on such a player. Our arguments that he could potentially be top-drawer really carry no weight. Likewise Chelsea could quite easily use his lack of chances here to drive the fee down. It's really difficult to say what he's worth. He could potentially be a £20m player, yet again he could end up being released by Chelsea in a couple of years and carving out a career in League One. The £10m we're allegedly asking for is probably a little optimistic on our part, as is the £3m offer of Chelsea's. I expect the ruling to come in closer to their valuation than ours, but we shouldn't be too disappointed with that. The Academy costs around £2m a year to run, or so i've read. Since its beginnings we're well in profit, in part thanks to the SWP transfer to Chelsea. I guess we just have to accept that some make it, some don't, some flee the nest and some in turn find their way here. In any fashion, with the strikers on their way here at the moment, life's too short to get annoyed at some big-headed prospect or another moving on.