Just saw a stat about combined premier league games missed through injury (per team) and we are by far the leaders in that dept beating the closest team to us (Chelsea) by 38 missed games. It is worth noting that Chelsea, while being the second highest in that table, is part of a pack of teams where that stat ranges between 103 to 124 missed games. So, technically, we are truly in a league of our own when it comes to injuries.
I am not a physio or a doctor and I have 0 medical knowledge, but I wonder: is it reasonable/legitimate if I ask ''do we have a problem with our medical dept or maybe the way we train?
I know that we signed a player that sort of inflated that stat even more for us (Arthur), but I am pretty sure that we are top of the injury table (or at least top 3) year after year. When you add to this the fact that some players, like Keita, are not known for being injury prone before joining its hard not to ask yourself questions.
I personally think our problem is a combination of some of the players we target and identify as being the ones we need being injury prone before joining combined to something with the way we train (or something else I don't know) that just worsen the injury rate in the squad. The first point I can understand considering our approach to transfers as a club (which I like), but I also think that sometimes concessions have to be made in that dept. Maybe go for that 2nd, less ideal but also less injury prone choice on 2 of those 4 transfers just to insure that the squad is not constantly depleted to a point where some seasons are ruined. I feel like there's no use to getting 4 players you really like if 3 of them are almost never available.