9 injuries?
I recall Liverpool only using 14 players during the whole season during one of their title winning escapades, and this in the day when foul play was tolerated, more league games were played and the pitches were in worse condition than they are now.
It appears that medical teams carry far more influence these days as to whether players can be selected.
Roy sometimes gives the impression that he finds this influence wearisome.
You obviously don’t want players aggravating issues or damaging themselves, but in the past players would play when e.g ‘95% fit.’
Part of the reason for this chopping and changing these days in my view is the bloated squads.
Don’t tell me that those 14 Liverpool players in the title winning season weren’t injured at times.
However, in the absence of a 24 man squad they played.
No doubt some will find this a dinosaur view and talk in terms of medical advancement contrasting this with when trainers would treat injured players with the old bucket and sponge .
Perhaps, but the fact remains that players are far more prone to missing games through injuries these days.

I'm not sure I agree.
Guys like Dalglish, Souness and Rush would have succeeded in any era.
McDermott was one of the fittest players I ever saw, the prototype for the modern day box to box midfielder.
Rush could give Edouard (and for that matter many other strikers) a lesson on how to close down defenders and defend from the front.
Notwithstanding his intense work rate Rush was still an incredible finisher.
The conditioning and training approach is different these days, but I'm not convinced the players are fitter.
Overlapping full backs emerged back then and had to be up and down the field all day both attacking and defending without the luxury of a third centre back to cover them as there is these days.
Extra time was used in the event of a draw after 90 mins and cup ties were replayed if drawn, not decided by penalties.

I think its a bit of an assumtion that any of the greats of the past would succeed in todays game . Would they be able to attain the fitness levels required would be the first hurdle .
The players you quote were of their era for sure but remember Rush was closing down Centre halfs like Linnegan and Ruddock who were trying to hoof it forward , the way football is played today he would have been knackered after 5 minuites as the lads at the back passed the ball about between themselves .But thats about opinion .

Where we are going to dissagree is fitness levels that are monitored 24/7 , conditioning and diet . Read any biography from players of 20 years ago and half of them were turning up to training half cut , Bryan Robson said that nobody at Man utd realised Magrath was an alcoholic because he wasnt even in the top 6 drinkers at the club .
The games all about being an athlete these days and good athletes at that

And we still need a striker

Perhaps I'll have to reconsider the greatest players I've seen live which include Moore, Best, Charlton, Greaves, Mackay, Giles and Cruyff as they wouldn't last the pace!
Great players are great players full stop.
I wonder if Ronaldo and Messi wil similarly be written off in 50 years time because e.g Messi was one footed or because Ronaldo couldn't defend?
Or for Palace fans do we write off Sansom or Hilaire from 40 years ago as they wouldn't be 'conditioned' properly or eat the right foods?
There's no reason to believe that any of the aforementioned wouldn't adapt to the modern game and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't continually be declared unfit for matches.