carling cup final(man utd v wigan)contains scores

astrofool

When there were two teams chasing the trophies, the league cup became less important (i.e. manu/blackburn, manu/arsenal)

But since there's now really 4 teams chasing, the value of the lesser trophies has gone up, as at least its a trophy. It's good for the game, as it means real competition in 4 competitions, and results every week really mattering alot.

It's bad in the sense that some fans live in a few years ago, when teams always fielded weak teams, until the final, and see it as a nothing cup, and the FA cup only being slightly more thought of.

Necronomicon

smemon wrote:

fair play to sir alex for having the balls to drop van the man. ive said he should be dropped before as he's lazy outside the box. then he'd usually score 1 or 2 and leave me eating my words.

More like score 19 or 20 and leave you eating your words? Seriously, who the **** cares if he isn't as box-to-box as, say, Rooney when he scores 20 a season? And he does contribute quite well outside the box, his hold-up play is second to none.
Seriously, is it just because he's a United player that people carry a chip? I was reading a rag yesterday on lunch (I know, my own fault for picking it up, News of the World by the way) which said that him being dropped to the bench would be 'the beginning of the end' and that he's looked 'listliss' recently. Pathetic, any team in the Premiership including Chelsea would love to have a striker like him.

wheres me jumpa

United
Were always in the right frame of mind. Never really played great football but always looked dangerous. Ronaldo showed what he is capable of and I really hope he can keep that form up for an extended period of time.

Wes Brown was my man of the match, he showed once again that he is the best defender at Old Trafford at the moment.

Ruud
I can understand Fergie giving Saha a game but I just thought Ruud would get an appearance at least. I really hope this has no lasting effect.

Wigan
These guys were the real story of the day. Its no consolation for them but what an achievement to get to the final and have the season they have had. De Zeuww summed them up after the game, he wasnt happy to have played in a final, he wanted to win. Great Attitude all round, even at 4-0 never stopped trying.

Conclusion
Its certainly no harm winning the cup. However it in no way puts a shine on this season. As soon as the ball kicked off I wanted to win this game just like any other but if I am being really honest, come the end of the game, I felt a wee bit embarrassed that this is what United are left to resort to.

Hopefully somebody has explained to the Glazers that this competition is the equivalent of the Super Bowl. I do genuinely hope that this win has pleased them at least. It may help the bankroll in the summer. So from that point of view some good may come from it.

Gileadi

saha deserved his place in the lineup solely on the contribution he made to the carling cup effort from united this season

im not sure how many goals he scored in the earlier rounds but i know he was fairly consistent,it was decent of fergie to stick by him for the big day

smemon

Necromomicon wrote:

More like score 19 or 20 and leave you eating your words? Seriously, who the **** cares if he isn't as box-to-box as, say, Rooney when he scores 20 a season?

he doesnt tackle, just makes token gestures by jogging over to the man on the ball. often he'll chase down the keeper and stroll back to get onside. it's one less option utd have when their on the ball in that situation.

he'll score goals, hell look at his record. but if he was at chelsea he'd be dropped if he didnt up his workrate. that sort of relaxed attitude can filter through a side and imo it's been in utd's play for a long time now.

BolBill

Nice of Wigan to turn up !

PHB

he'll score goals, hell look at his record. but if he was at chelsea he'd be dropped if he didnt up his workrate. that sort of relaxed attitude can filter through a side and imo it's been in utd's play for a long time now.

That is just absolute utter uninformed nonsense.

He is not relaxed, he is not lazy, he has the one of the highest workrates at United.
Rooney tracks back to his own corner and wins back the ball, thats great, but if there is nobody up there to pass it to, it doesnt bloody matter.
If Ruud gets the ball, and there is nobody in front of him, he will keep the ball and pass it, and then always[\b] get into the box to get on the end of the cross.
Tell me the last time you saw Ruud lose the ball when it was passed to him and nobody was in front of him. I don't remember it.

If he was at Chelsea, he'd have scored 30 goals this season already, so stop stupid. He wouldn't have been dropped, he would have made Crespo and Drogba the most expensive bench warmers in existance.
He can hold up the play and help out his team better than Drogba.
He can score goals better than Crespo.

He doesn't score goals outside the box? Who the hell cares?
He has more goals than anyone on the United team. He has 5 assists, but that would be more if Rooney and the rest of the team worked on their finishing.


Sorry to get frustrated at this, but this sort of attitude towards Ruud annoys the hell out of me.
Ruud is the only player in United who would be even considered for the world 11(anyone who says Rooney is as blinkered as a horse)
Ruud is the second best player to play for United that I've ever seen, second only to Roy Keane.
So let's stop this stupidly about him not scoring outside the box, Henry can't head the ball, doesn't change the fact that he is an amazing player. As for him being lazy, if you think that I'm not even going to try and engage with you, because you've already bought the tabloid ****e.

Ruud should have been captain, want to know why?
Go back last year, and watch the highlights of the Lyon game in the CL. Tell me who on the pitch wants it most.
Infact watch every single game this year when we go behind a goal, and tell me who wants it most.
It is always Ruud

dirkey_wynne

smemon wrote:

he doesnt tackle, just makes token gestures by jogging over to the man on the ball. often he'll chase down the keeper and stroll back to get onside. it's one less option utd have when their on the ball in that situation.

he'll score goals, hell look at his record. but if he was at chelsea he'd be dropped if he didnt up his workrate. that sort of relaxed attitude can filter through a side and imo it's been in utd's play for a long time now.

And you probably think Cantona was a legend, who if you look back tackled less than Ruud. Ruud is well out at the top of the goal scoring charts because he is a great player. He should be first choice on the team sheet every week, and will be again soon. Saha played due to playing in the earlier rounds, not because he is a better player.

Nunu

PHB wrote:

That is just absolute utter uninformed nonsense.

He is not relaxed, he is not lazy, he has the one of the highest workrates at United.
Rooney tracks back to his own corner and wins back the ball, thats great, but if there is nobody up there to pass it to, it doesnt bloody matter.
If Ruud gets the ball, and there is nobody in front of him, he will keep the ball and pass it, and then always[\b] get into the box to get on the end of the cross.
Tell me the last time you saw Ruud lose the ball when it was passed to him and nobody was in front of him. I don't remember it.

If he was at Chelsea, he'd have scored 30 goals this season already, so stop stupid. He wouldn't have been dropped, he would have made Crespo and Drogba the most expensive bench warmers in existance.
He can hold up the play and help out his team better than Drogba.
He can score goals better than Crespo.

He doesn't score goals outside the box? Who the hell cares?
He has more goals than anyone on the United team. He has 5 assists, but that would be more if Rooney and the rest of the team worked on their finishing.


Sorry to get frustrated at this, but this sort of attitude towards Ruud annoys the hell out of me.
Ruud is the only player in United who would be even considered for the world 11(anyone who says Rooney is as blinkered as a horse)
Ruud is the second best player to play for United that I've ever seen, second only to Roy Keane.
So let's stop this stupidly about him not scoring outside the box, Henry can't head the ball, doesn't change the fact that he is an amazing player. As for him being lazy, if you think that I'm not even going to try and engage with you, because you've already bought the tabloid ****e.

Ruud should have been captain, want to know why?
Go back last year, and watch the highlights of the Lyon game in the CL. Tell me who on the pitch wants it most.
Infact watch every single game this year when we go behind a goal, and tell me who wants it most.
It is always Ruud

Agree 100%. You saved me a lot of typing. I couldn't have put it any better myself.

RE*AC*TOR

Congrats to ManU. Champions of the LeagueCup. No trophy drought this year.

smemon

i cannot deny ruud's a great player, as ive said, you just have to look at the stats.

about the point on ruud wanting it more than anyone at 1-0 down; you shouldnt come alive just because you go 1-0 down, had he been alive and hungry in the first place the chances are utd wouldnt be behind.

work rate should be 100% for the full 90mins, unless your 3-0 up or something. i dont believe ruud gives that. saha imo is much more livelier- like a puppy jumping about the place, he gets about the pitch more. i accept everyone cant be tracking back all the time but defending from the front wouldn't kill him.

imo it's too easy for defenders to get past ruud when playing out of defence and thats what annoys me. ronaldo's guilty of it too at times. if utd are to compete with chelsea, these are the 'stupid' things that have to be instilled into every utd player.

laziness, slopyness, lack of numbers getting back and slow closing down have cost utd over the past few years. fair enough ruud's job is to score goals but look to over at stamford bridge and their strikers are doing much more off the ball work, plus their reaping the benefits as a team.

Fighting Irish

smemon wrote:

i cannot deny ruud's a great player, as ive said, you just have to look at the stats.

about the point on ruud wanting it more than anyone at 1-0 down; you shouldnt come alive just because you go 1-0 down, had he been alive and hungry in the first place the chances are utd wouldnt be behind.

work rate should be 100% for the full 90mins, unless your 3-0 up or something. i dont believe ruud gives that. saha imo is much more livelier- like a puppy jumping about the place, he gets about the pitch more. i accept everyone cant be tracking back all the time but defending from the front wouldn't kill him.

imo it's too easy for defenders to get past ruud when playing out of defence and thats what annoys me. ronaldo's guilty of it too at times. if utd are to compete with chelsea, these are the 'stupid' things that have to be instilled into every utd player.

laziness, slopyness, lack of numbers getting back and slow closing down have cost utd over the past few years. fair enough ruud's job is to score goals but look to over at stamford bridge and their strikers are doing much more off the ball work, plus their reaping the benefits as a team.

If you united are to compete with Chelsea, i can't see a spot in the team for Saha

PHB

about the point on ruud wanting it more than anyone at 1-0 down; you shouldnt come alive just because you go 1-0 down, had he been alive and hungry in the first place the chances are utd wouldnt be behind.


work rate should be 100% for the full 90mins, unless your 3-0 up or something. i dont believe ruud gives that. saha imo is much more livelier- like a puppy jumping about the place, he gets about the pitch more. i accept everyone cant be tracking back all the time but defending from the front wouldn't kill him.
[\quote]

Passion only tends to come out when its needed, like in the last 20 minutes and when you are behind. The thing you seem to see in Saha, which I don't see at all, is that somehow running about makes you have passion.
Saha and Ruud are different types of players. Saha is a forward, Ruud is a striker.
If you think Ruud's workrate is not 100%, I suggest you either watch him on player cam, or watch him in a real life match, and then come back and tell me he doesn't have 110% work rate.

imo it's too easy for defenders to get past ruud when playing out of defence and thats what annoys me. [\quote]

Let me explain something very very simply. When Ruud is up front alone against two defenders, there is pretty much no chance he can get the ball, and he does what he is meant to do, and gets in the way of the ball down the middle, and pushes them down the flank and sideways. That is what he is meant to do and does it perfectly.

if utd are to compete with chelsea, these are the 'stupid' things that have to be instilled into every utd player.
[\quote]

No they shouldn't. They should be done by every player bar Ruud. If you have 9 men defending, what happens if you get the ball back. You can't pass it around the back cause its too risky, you have to clear it up the pitch. On TV you won't see it, because they only show where the b all is, but RUud is moving constantly to try and provide an outlet so they can get the ball out of their half, hold up the play, and start the attack.

laziness, slopyness, lack of numbers getting back and slow closing down have cost utd over the past few years. fair enough ruud's job is to score goals but look to over at stamford bridge and their strikers are doing much more off the ball work, plus their reaping the benefits as a team[\quote]

See thats where you draw the false link between Ruud's play and Uniteds form.
Lack of numbers getting back have been Fletcher and Smith and Ronaldo's mistakes, not Ruuds. He isn't meant to, and anybody with any football sense knows this. Infact if you see Ruud back defending in the corner or chasing back, which happens sometimes, you will always hear commentators and people in general say how bad it is that he should be doing it.

As for the strikers at Chelsea doing more off the ball work, it seems to me you are buying what you hear on Sky that Crespo's movement is second to none, which it really is.
But as for contribution as a whole to the team.

Drogba - Can't buy a goal. But holds up play, has a physical presence, and creates a mess. Which is exactly what Ruud does, it's jsut we don't have Lampard knocking in that many goals. Go back two years and Ruud does the exact same thing, and Scholes gets lots of goals.

Crespo - Moves around, scores a bit. Nowhere near as much as Ruud.

Ruud is the combination of Crespo and Drobga, and Chelsea would give anything to have him in his team.

Where I Think you're problem lies is that you are upset United are losing, and are picky an easy, while somewhat silly target of Ruud not doing enough defending, and in turn not working hard enough.

I suggest the next time he plays, you watch him on player cam, or you watch him in real life.
Ruud isn't the reason we aren't up with Chelsea, infact he is one of the reasons we aren't down there with Spurs

Necronomicon

PHB wrote:

Ruud is the combination of Crespo and Drobga, and Chelsea would give anything to have him in his team.




Ruud isn't the reason we aren't up with Chelsea, infact he is one of the reasons we aren't down there with Spurs

Two nails-on-heads there.

smemon

PHB wrote:

Where I Think you're problem lies is that you are upset United are losing, and are picky an easy, while somewhat silly target of Ruud not doing enough defending, and in turn not working hard enough.

Ruud isn't the reason we aren't up with Chelsea, infact he is one of the reasons we aren't down there with Spurs

once again i cannot argue the fact that van nistelrooy wins us matches, im not trying to argue that point.

im saying his attitude typifies some utd players and if he does it, it'll spread especially to the youngsters.

i have seen utd in person plenty of times and get very frustrated at the sheer laziness in trying to win the ball back from the forward players. hands on hips, hands up in the air when they should be closing down a keeper or applying pressure and narrowing options for the opposition. surely you know what im talking about if you watch the same team as me?!

now sunday was an exception, in fairness the side was superb as a unit. but it shouldnt take a cup final to motivate utd players. every utd player was focused and there was a no nonsense approach from everyone, they meant business. now why can't that be done every week?

when your 1-0, its small things like closing down players quickly and defending from the front that let the opposition know they'll have a fight to get back into the match.

by strolling around and giving people time and space on the ball, you give them confidence which more often than not results in a goal. i believe chelsea don't do that and make people work whereas utd are open to attacks due to this relaxed attitude.

attack as a unit, defend as a unit.

PHB

That's where you've got it wrong, totally wrong.
If Ruud closes down players non stop for no reason but to let him pass by him to the player beside them, then he leaves a gap to pass through the middle which will open up united. By staying back and not closing them down, he hurts their attack.
In that situation he does exactly what he is meant to do, which is stop the play generally through the middle.
He does defend, as part of a unit, and thats the goal.

Obviously hands on the hips is a problem, and I think the player you really have a problem with, and have somehow transferred it to Ruud, is Ronaldo.

But tbh, I'm ok with Ruud, Ronaldo, and Rooney never ever making a tackle.
Because I don't believe in defending as a unit, or attacking as a united, and neither do you.
Cause you don't believe in CB's making huge runs up the pitch, being totally out of position, and have a detrimental effect on the game. Thats the same thing.
Furthermore, even if it was defending from the front, which i've already shown as silly in your sense, I still don't believe in it.

Ronaldo, if he only conserves his energy so that he can attack with full effacy, I'd rather that, cause ultimately we'll score more goals that way, than we'll concede. Thats what united is all about.

smemon

PHB wrote:

Obviously hands on the hips is a problem, and I think the player you really have a problem with, and have somehow transferred it to Ruud, is Ronaldo.

Furthermore, even if it was defending from the front, which i've already shown as silly in your sense, I still don't believe in it.

Ronaldo, if he only conserves his energy so that he can attack with full effacy, I'd rather that, cause ultimately we'll score more goals that way, than we'll concede. Thats what united is all about.

i accept and totally support utd's attacking style, i'd hate to see it go the way of houllier's liverpool for example. but at the same time i hate to see us 2nd best when i know we're capable of matching chelsea.

i believe the only difference is attitude and am picking on ruud as an example. i was actually referring to giggs with the hands on hips thing although ronaldo does it too. on their day, weve seen just yesterday, what they can do even without key players like scholes, smith, heinze and indeed ruud himself.

but it's not acceptable to put in that sort of performance one week and get hammered by the likes of boro the next. looking at the table, utd havn't actually done too bad but chelsea are still miles ahead. the gap must be cut while we still have the team to match chelsea. all we need is the commitment from every player for every match.

Jivin Turkey

smemon wrote:

i believe the only difference is attitude

Well let me tell you, there is a hell of a difference in quality. In the first XI, not to mention on the bench.

Then of course as you say, the hunger of some of the Chelsea players is much bigger.

smemon

Jivin Turkey wrote:

Then of course as you say, the hunger of some of the Chelsea players is much bigger.

yeah thats my whole point. i dont think utd are any less talented than chelsea, i just think they don't give it 'john terry commitment' week in week out.

people don't fear utd like they do chelsea. chelsea have this shadow of invincibility around them, not just football wise but human wise. i think opposition think they are invincible mentally aswell. this all adds to their reputation and the fear factor they have gained imo.

utd don't fear anyone and can topple anyone including chelsea as we've seen but they can't demolish mid to lower league sides like chelsea can.

it's not down to ability 'cause as we know utd can beat the best when they want and continue to prove that. so it has to be mindgames/attitude when it comes to sides of a lesser quality.

Jivin Turkey

smemon wrote:

yeah thats my whole point. i dont think utd are any less talented than chelsea, i just think they don't give it 'john terry commitment' week in week out.

Eh no sorry.

Look at the midfielders Chelsea have at their disposal. Now look across the dross United have. Then tell me that their isn't a gulf in class. Chelsea's 9th and 10th choice midfielders (Geremi and Gudjohnsen) would get into the United team, definitely at the moment and arguably even if everyone was fully fit.

smemon wrote:

utd don't fear anyone and can topple anyone including chelsea as we've seen but they can't demolish mid to lower league sides like chelsea can.

it's not down to ability 'cause as we know utd can beat the best when they want and continue to prove that. so it has to be mindgames/attitude when it comes to sides of a lesser quality.

So to use your logic, the only difference between United and Middlesboro or Blackburn is one of attitude as we have seen that they can "beat the best when they want".

Do you agree with that? Or does your logic somehow not hold weight now?

Green_Martian

Well just got back from Cardiff this evening..............:D

I thought the atmosphere was excellent yesterday, thought UTD started very slow in the first half, but in the second half they seemed to up the pace.

Was delighted for Saha as he practically got UTD there with his goals, great to see him start and score (even if it was a tad lucky). Thought Rooney and Ronaldo also played well.

Well at least we will have won a trophy this season, not like last season:D

smemon

Jivin Turkey wrote:

So to use your logic, the only difference between United and Middlesboro or Blackburn is one of attitude as we have seen that they can "beat the best when they want".

Do you agree with that? Or does your logic somehow not hold weight now?

i do agree with that. utd have the class 1st of all, they have the players to compete for trophies. 'boro or blackburn don't.

when it comes to the top 3 or 4 chelsea aren't whipping everyone as the league table would suggest (maybe tight 1-0's), their simply winning all the games in between while the rest slip up.

the reason utd can be beaten easier than chelsea is
1. utd approach the game too relaxed and complacent
2. the opposition once they see the attitude begin to gain confidence and over power a utd side that wouldnt be over powered if they were mentally prepared.

when the pressures on, utd usually deliver. it's when the presures off that they let their foot of the gas. imo.

Jivin Turkey

smemon wrote:

i do agree with that. utd have the class 1st of all, they have the players to compete for trophies. 'boro or blackburn don't.

You do agree? Your last sentence would indicate to me that you don't. And if you don't you are completely contradicting yourself.

smemon wrote:

when it comes to the top 3 or 4 chelsea aren't whipping everyone as the league table would suggest (maybe tight 1-0's), their simply winning all the games in between while the rest slip up.

You should put that into your sig.

Chelsea have scored more and conceeded less than everyone. So if they are just winning tight 1-0s what is everybody else doing? Winning 3/4 - 1/2?

smemon wrote:

the reason utd can be beaten easier than chelsea is
1. utd approach the game too relaxed and complacent
2. the opposition once they see the attitude begin to gain confidence and over power a utd side that wouldnt be over powered if they were mentally prepared.

3. Their squad pales in comparison to Chelsea's in every area of the pitch bar upfront. It is arguable that no United player (front men excluded) would make it into the Chelsea team. And at most you would have two on the bench.

You can't apply the logic that United are as good as Chelsea because they can beat them on their day, without accepting that the likes of Boro and Blackburn are obviously as good as United for the exact same reason, the only difference being attitude.

smemon

Jivin Turkey wrote:

You can't apply the logic that United are as good as Chelsea because they can beat them on their day, without accepting that the likes of Boro and Blackburn are obviously as good as United for the exact same reason, the only difference being attitude.

well the league table doesnt lie as we're always told and i see utd lying 2nd in it ahead of boro and blackburn. how you can suggest utd are of a similar ability of them is beyond me.

utd have matched chelsea constantly in head to heads, whilst always finishing in the top 3. they obviously have the players to play at the top level.

im conceding chelsea are a better team (this is my whole argument!) and believe utd need to work to get up to their level. best 11 -v- 11, i dont believe chelsea are superior to utd. if they are, it is very tight.

PHB

I disagree about Uniteds defense not being able to match Chelseas, its obvious to the entire world that Uniteds midfield is nowhere near the level of a middle table team, let alone a challenging team, let alone a title winning team. And that'll be fixed, with that the defense will look better. Terry wouldn't be as rated if he was playing in front of the protection of Fletcher and O'Shea, compared to Makelele, just like Makelele made Real Madrid defenders look amazing.

best 11 -v- 11, i dont believe chelsea are superior to utd

Em.
Goalies: Cech is better, VDS is good.

Defenders:

Neville vs. Ferreira - Ferreria is the best RB in the premiership if not the world, but Neville comes very close.
Ferdinand vs. Carvalho/Gallas - Equal
Terry vs. Brown/Vidic - Terry
Heinze/Evra/O'Shea - Gallas/Del Horno - without Heinze and Evra settling in, it has to be Chelsea

Midfield:

Wingers : Ronaldo, Giggs, Park vs. Cole, Robben, Duff, SWP - Chelsea are ahead
Central : Fletcher, Scholes vs. Lampard, Makelele, Essien, Maniche, Gudjohnson, Geremi - Chelsea

Strikers:

Crespo, Drogba, Cole vs. Ruud, Rooney, Saha, Rossi, Ole - United.

Chelsea are better because in midfield they dominate United. Defensivly they are the same, and up front United have the edge, but it isn't a huge edge, the midfield edge is.

---

I realise that some in the United squad lack a certain type of committment, like the John Terry throw yourself at it, but thats not all that matters.
Rio doesn't have that style of play, but he is no less committed and determined than Terry is.

Ronaldo and Giggs are like that, but to be honest, they are wingers, and I don't expect them to be the last ditch tacklers.

Ruud, is the one player on the united pitch in every game who gives it all both in the Terry form you like so much, pretty much elbowing anyone who tries to get the ball of him when he is holding it up, and in the skill form, and in results, top scorer yet again.
I just can't see how you can pick him out and identify him as the problem, when he is the example of what you want.

samb

Very good analysis PHB. only disagrement is that Carvalho is far better than Ferdinand.

Nunu

I wouldn't say far better. He gets away with so many pointless shirt tuggings and the like in the box. One of these days he'll be pulled up on it and it will cost his team. Overall though he does slightly edge Rio.

smemon

im not saying van nistelrooy is the problem, or he should be starting every match on the bench. it's not him in particular ive a problem with, it's the combined attitude of some of the squad which tbh has to come from the manager ultimately.

at full strength i believe utd are equal to chelsea, obviously not when youve got fletcher/o shea etc playing. (although ironically fergie insists on starting 1 if not 2 of them every match.)

giggs, ronaldo, smith, scholes. 2 of utd's most successful players of all time, a young talented/exciting winger and a traditional british 'up and at them' smith.

all of these players when in the mood are arguably the finest in the world. ronaldo on form is breathtaking, we all know what giggs & scholes can do and we've seen smith is well capable of holding things together in midifeld (chelsea game).

my question is why can't the side be motivated for every match and not just high pressured ones such as cup finals or derbys. im not expecting every player to out do themselves every match, i just don't like it when utd go down without a fight. if the attitude and commitment was right, i would not and could complain.

Jivin Turkey

smemon wrote:

well the league table doesnt lie as we're always told and i see utd lying 2nd in it ahead of boro and blackburn. how you can suggest utd are of a similar ability of them is beyond me.

utd have matched chelsea constantly in head to heads, whilst always finishing in the top 3. they obviously have the players to play at the top level.

im conceding chelsea are a better team (this is my whole argument!) and believe utd need to work to get up to their level. best 11 -v- 11, i dont believe chelsea are superior to utd. if they are, it is very tight.

Back to your hypocritical best Smemon. As you said the league table doesn't lie and Chelsea are pretty much at a level above the likes of Liverpool and United as they are above the likes of Blackburn and Bolton.

smemon wrote:

at full strength i believe utd are equal to chelsea, obviously not when youve got fletcher/o shea etc playing. (although ironically fergie insists on starting 1 if not 2 of them every match.)

giggs, ronaldo, smith, scholes. 2 of utd's most successful players of all time, a young talented/exciting winger and a traditional british 'up and at them' smith.

I'm not even going to discuss it further with you if you are going to come out with this sort of garbage.

As I said already, Chelsea's 9th and 10th choice midfielders would push for a place in United's midfield. And their 6th and 7th whoever they may be would walk in. Giggs and Scholes may have been two of the most successful players of all time but thats the thing, they are both too old now to be producing that form week in week out.

Attitude is not the problem, although it probably is a contributing factor. When it comes down to is, the gulf in ability is apparent for anyone to see.

Jivin Turkey

First you say this

PHB wrote:

I disagree about Uniteds defense not being able to match Chelseas

then go on to say this

PHB wrote:

Goalies: Cech is better, VDS is good.

Defenders:

Neville vs. Ferreira - Ferreria is the best RB in the premiership if not the world, but Neville comes very close.
Ferdinand vs. Carvalho/Gallas - Equal
Terry vs. Brown/Vidic - Terry
Heinze/Evra/O'Shea - Gallas/Del Horno - without Heinze and Evra settling in, it has to be Chelsea

So going by your own synopsis, out of five defensive positions Chelsea are currently stronger in four, and one is equal, yet you disagree that United can't match Chelsea defensively?

And why don't you put Ferdinand against Terry and Carvalho against Brown and make it a clean sweep of five out of five for Chelsea, while still having Wiliam Gallas on the bench.

The mind boggles sometimes PHB.

PHB wrote:

Terry wouldn't be as rated if he was playing in front of the protection of Fletcher and O'Shea, compared to Makelele, just like Makelele made Real Madrid defenders look amazing.

While I agree that Makélele would help any defence, to claim that he is one of the main reasons that Terry looks good is plain stupid. Did Ferdinand/Sylvestre/Brown not have the same comfort with Keane doing the same job last year? How come they didn't look so good?

anonymous_joe

Terry's a very very good centre-back, but, I don't think he's the best in the world, and I think he benefits from playing behind a very strong and clever midfield.

smemon

Jivin Turkey wrote:

As you said the league table doesn't lie and Chelsea are pretty much at a level above the likes of Liverpool and United as they are above the likes of Blackburn and Bolton.

correct, so utd are 2nd with boro and blackburn well below us which is why i can't understand you comparing us to them. surely theres a bigger gulf in class between utd and bolton/boro than utd and chelsea.

Jivin Turkey wrote:

I'm not even going to discuss it further with you if you are going to come out with this sort of garbage.

what garbage? we have 2 midfielders that have won everything there is to win in club football; granted are in their 30's but are still far from 'past it' as you suggest. my opinion is that they're not pulling their weight due to being complacent. (which i believe flows through the side and is a big reason for utd's poor showings in recent years)

Jivin Turkey wrote:

As I said already, Chelsea's 9th and 10th choice midfielders would push for a place in United's midfield.

so what? chelsea can only field 4 or 5 max so it doesnt matter who's on the bench. 11-v-11, utd are a match for chelsea. ok, chelsea win some one on one battles, but as a team, utd imo can match chelsea.

injuries test the squad strength of course, but they can't be controlled or predicted. im taking utd as injury free here.

PHB

So going by your own synopsis, out of five defensive positions Chelsea are currently stronger in four, and one is equal, yet you disagree that United can't match Chelsea defensively?

The discussion in relation to the squad was in my mind, talking about next year.
So when I say that,
RB - I think Ferreria is just ahead, its just ahaed, so its not a huge differences.

When I talk about CB's, there are two types.
The diving head first CB, and the reader of the game.
In the reader of the game catagory is Ferdinand vs. Carvalho/Gallas
And I think its a draw

In the diving head first catagory, its Terry vs. Brown/Vidic
And I think Terry comes out ahead

In the left back catagory, I think Heinze is top quality, as would most people, so next year when he is back, I think we are ahead in that department.

While I agree that Makélele would help any defence, to claim that he is one of the main reasons that Terry looks good is plain stupid. Did Ferdinand/Sylvestre/Brown not have the same comfort with Keane doing the same job last year? How come they didn't look so good?

Makelele was and is and always has been better at protecting defenses than anybody in the world, he is a born and breed DMC, while Keane and Vieiria used to get forward a lot more. And even if you look at the amount of goals concedded last year, United concedded 26 in the entire year, compared to 15 from Chelsea, and Arsenal 36 and Liverpool 41.
He offers a lot more protection.

Ultimately, next year, when United have a decent midfield in front of them, I think defensivly we are up there with Chelsea, and with a bit more protection in front of them, match them.

Jivin Turkey

smemon wrote:

correct, so utd are 2nd with boro and blackburn well below us which is why i can't understand you comparing us to them. surely theres a bigger gulf in class between utd and bolton/boro than utd and chelsea.

That's my point. I think it is ridiculous to claim that Blackburn or Boro are as good as United on the basis that they matched them in a one off game. Just like its equally as ridiculous to say that United can match Chelsea on the basis of one game.

Look at the league table FFS!

smemon wrote:

what garbage? we have 2 midfielders that have won everything there is to win in club football; granted are in their 30's but are still far from 'past it' as you suggest. my opinion is that they're not pulling their weight due to being complacent. (which i believe flows through the side and is a big reason for utd's poor showings in recent years)

Well be of that opinion but fact of the matter is both players have not "pulled their weight" for over a year now. The reason being is that they are not the same players that they were "back in the day". Scholes will be almost 32 by the time he kicks a ball again and Giggs will turn 33 before the end of the year. It's not them being complacent, unfortunately it's a case of years of success catching up on two legends of the English game.

smemon wrote:

so what? chelsea can only field 4 or 5 max so it doesnt matter who's on the bench. 11-v-11, utd are a match for chelsea. ok, chelsea win some one on one battles, but as a team, utd imo can match chelsea.

No 11 v 11 they are not a match. If you are trying to claim that use the same logic for Blackburn v United. You can't claim one but not the other. Can you not see your monumental contradiction here?

smemon

wrote:

Jivin Turkey
Look at the league table FFS!

No 11 v 11 they are not a match. If you are trying to claim that use the same logic for Blackburn v United. You can't claim one but not the other. Can you not see your monumental contradiction here?

no i cant. from the league table, we see utd are the closest to chelsea, one of 2 sides that have the potential to close that gap (in the future ie next year).

chelsea aren't going to lessen in quality or hunger so utd must strive to match that, treat every game as a cup final.
giggs and scholes aren't past it, they're in good nick and still produce the goods when it suits.

i refuse to accept age as an excuse, just look at adams/keown/schmeichael/keane/nedved/zidane/hierro/maldini....

Jivin Turkey

smemon wrote:

no i cant. from the league table, we see utd are the closest to chelsea, one of 2 sides that have the potential to close that gap (in the future ie next year).

chelsea aren't going to lessen in quality or hunger so utd must strive to match that, treat every game as a cup final.

Right so we are agreed. They are not on the same level as Chelsea.

smemon wrote:

giggs and scholes aren't past it, they're in good nick and still produce the goods when it suits.

i refuse to accept age as an excuse, just look at adams/keown/schmeichael/keane/nedved/zidane/hierro/maldini....

Giggs and Scholes could still play a vital role in any attempt United make to get back on top. But fact of the matter is they are too old to be expected to do it week in week out for 50 games a year.

Of the players you mentioned, five of the last six are probably in the top ten footballers of the last ten years, the first two are centre halves. Many of these players had to comprimise their games somewhat as they got into their 30s. None of them relied on attributes such as pace like Giggs. I'm not sure what is wrong with Scholes but he has been off the boil for two years. If it's not age it is something far more serious.

Hobart

Jivin Turkey wrote:

The mind boggles sometimes PHB.

PHB wrote:

The discussion in relation to the squad was in my mind, talking about next year.

For once Jivin, i totally agree with you.

smemon

Jivin Turkey wrote:

But fact of the matter is they are too old to be expected to do it week in week out for 50 games a year.

Many of these players had to comprimise their games somewhat as they got into their 30s. I'm not sure what is wrong with Scholes but he has been off the boil for two years. If it's not age it is something far more serious.

i accept your senior citizens in the side cant be expected to start every match, i fully support that as new players need to be given a chance. however in the big games (such as in the cl, derbys in league, away matches, fa cup's etc...) this is where they must be used. and this is where they should be performing and leading by example.

giggs can play when he wants to play and has improved from a couple of seasons ago - showing that he relys on confidence and not age. scholes, yes, isnt scoring as much and not as dangerous around the box as he used to be but he links the play superbly and plays a key role in using the midfield as a base to attack and not the backline.

without scholes, utd would have no vision or creativity in the centre of midfield. he may be old but he's got a couple of years left imo and has invaluable experience.

anyway, i seem to be going through the whole utd side 1 by 1 here, thats not my aim. it's the side as a whole and the attitude of it which i believe has to be improved or certainly consistent. imo, utd can play like champions when they want to but that 'want' isn't always there.

Jivin Turkey

smemon wrote:

anyway, i seem to be going through the whole utd side 1 by 1 here, thats not my aim. it's the side as a whole and the attitude of it which i believe has to be improved or certainly consistent. imo, utd can play like champions when they want to but that 'want' isn't always there.

Yes. That and about five of Chelsea's second string could seriously challenge for a place in the starting United XI. There's the real difference.

gracehopper

Jivin Turkey wrote:

Yes. That and about five of Chelsea's second string could seriously challenge for a place in the starting United XI. There's the real difference.

that goes without saying. A way to measure the gap between United and Chelsea and indeed liverpool and chelsea is to look at which players from liverpool & man U would get into the chelsea team

liverpool: Carragher and Gerard
United: Rooney, RVN

These four are the only players that would be definite starters for Chelsea.

besty

gracehopper wrote:

that goes without saying. A way to measure the gap between United and Chelsea and indeed liverpool and chelsea is to look at which players from liverpool & man U would get into the chelsea team

liverpool: Carragher and Gerard
United: Rooney, RVN

These four are the only players that would be definite starters for Chelsea.

Heinze and Neville would start

gracehopper

besty wrote:

Heinze and Neville would start

sorry your right, Heinze would start. Do you think Neville would though? I'd rate Ferreira(sp)a better full back than Neville. I'm a United fan but i'm not really a fan of Gary Neville. He has a good attitude but he's a very limited player and has looked very shakey since coming back from injury. With Duff and Robben i wouldnt think Cristiano Ronaldo would start and did ye see the impact SWP had last night when he came on? He's a class player aswell and is totally wasted at Chelsea.

PHB

I actually doubt Carragher would get into the Chelsea first team, ahead of Terry? Mourniho likes to play a hands on deck CB and a reader, and Carragher is a hands on deck guy and so is Terry and while Gerrard alone would get in, he couldnt play in that midfield with Lampard as I'm sure Mourinho realises, so none of them might get in. Although I'd imagine Makelele-Gerrard-Lampard would be incredible if it gelled, which I'm sure Mourinho could make happen, unlike Sven.

Ruud would definally be their striker, and I think Heinze could get the place at left back, although with Gallas preforming I couldn't be sure, but I'm not sure Rooney could force his way into the top 11. I'd imagine though he would force himself into the rotation of those wide players, but that is not his position and he isn't amazing at it. I think Ronaldo has a better chance of getting into that team, especially considering the form he is on.

Rooney - Ruud - Ronaldo is more potent than
Robben - Drogba/Crespo - Duff/SWP/Cole

However, I think the best combo there is

Robben - Ruud - Ronaldo
with second string being
Duff - Crespo - Rooney

Ferreira is a better RB than Neville, the best and second best in the premiership respectivly.

gracehopper

PHB wrote:

I actually doubt Carragher would get into the Chelsea first team, ahead of Terry? Mourniho likes to play a hands on deck CB and a reader, and Carragher is a hands on deck guy and so is Terry and while Gerrard alone would get in, he couldnt play in that midfield with Lampard as I'm sure Mourinho realises, so none of them might get in. Although I'd imagine Makelele-Gerrard-Lampard would be incredible if it gelled, which I'm sure Mourinho could make happen, unlike Sven.

Ruud would definally be their striker, and I think Heinze could get the place at left back, although with Gallas preforming I couldn't be sure, but I'm not sure Rooney could force his way into the top 11. I'd imagine though he would force himself into the rotation of those wide players, but that is not his position and he isn't amazing at it. I think Ronaldo has a better chance of getting into that team, especially considering the form he is on.

Rooney - Ruud - Ronaldo is more potent than
Robben - Drogba/Crespo - Duff/SWP/Cole

However, I think the best combo there is

Robben - Ruud - Ronaldo
with second string being
Duff - Crespo - Rooney

Ferreira is a better RB than Neville, the best and second best in the premiership respectivly.

i dont think Cristiano would keep duff out of the Chelsea team. He wouldnt fit into the Mourinho machine. I think Rooney could do gudjohnsen & lampards job as well if not better than both of them. Rooney IMO Rooney would get onto any team on the planet, he does seem a little tired for United lately though.

PHB

Rooney isn't as good as people make out, I'm sure he will be, but he's not there yet.
----
In relation to Ruud btw:

He might have been dropped for the Carling Cup final, but Ruud van Nistelrooy is top of the official Barclays Premiership player ratings. The Dutchman is number one in the Actim Index, which rates players on positive actions such as passes, shots and tackles made.

Van Nistelrooy has a score of 5.73, fractionally ahead of Frank Lampard on 5.72. Liverpool dynamo Steven Gerrard is in third on 4.71. Rio Ferdinand is United's next highest player in fifth, while Wayne Rooney lies in 14th.

Jivin Turkey

Seriously PHB I didn't want to post on this thread again because we are going completely OT, but this has to be addressed.

PHB wrote:

I think Ronaldo has a better chance of getting into that team, especially considering the form he is on.

Rooney - Ruud - Ronaldo is more potent than
Robben - Drogba/Crespo - Duff/SWP/Cole

However, I think the best combo there is

Robben - Ruud - Ronaldo
with second string being
Duff - Crespo - Rooney

To say that Ronaldo would get in the Chelsea side is complete and utter horse excrement. He would be my fifth choice Chelsea winger. You would even put him there instead of Rooney??? For Gods sake man get a grip!

Seriously, are you just on a total wind up mission?

I find it hard to believe sometimes the stuff you come out with.

Hobart

Jivin Turkey wrote:

Seriously PHB I didn't want to post on this thread again because we are going completely OT, but this has to be addressed.


To say that Ronaldo would get in the Chelsea side is complete and utter horse excrement. He would be my fifth choice Chelsea winger. You would even put him there instead of Rooney??? For Gods sake man get a grip!

Seriously, are you just on a total wind up mission?

I find it hard to believe sometimes the stuff you come out with.

It's either a complete Troll or the guy knows SFA about football. Forgetting about Ronaldo's penchant for complete lack of professionalism and his hissy fits, when things do not go his way, he does not possess the skillset or approach that Cole/Duff/Robben etc... have. I wouldn't have him in the Manu team, but for lack of options.

As for him being a better choice than Rooney, actually you are trolling.

PHB

Jivin Let me explain this first,

If somebody does not agree with you it does not mean he is winding you up, no matter how much you think he is wrong. I have my opinions on football and I think i'm right most of the time.
I assume Hobart called me a troll or something, don't know have him on ignore, if you feel the same about me, I suggest you do the same.

Rooney is a great striker, and a huge potential for the future. What he isn't is a wing forward in the lines of Ronaldo or Duff or Robben. This can been seen very easily if you watch him when he has played in that position for United, and was quite ineffectual. Sure he made lots of clas runs all the way up the pitch, but he does from corners when he'd be back anyway. On the whole he is ineffectual in that position, and his position is that inside a 4-4-1-1, playing the deep striker who drops back. He would not fit into the a 4-3-3, and hasn't in the past.

Ronaldo, as you can imagine we will disagree one again and again and again
I rate him as one of the best prospects in the world and I think his recent form is once again showing his talents. He is nowhere near consistant enough yet, as all will accept, but he has more talent than any of the Chelsea wingers, perhaps bar Robben.
In a pure pick your best 11 for a match, I think the choice would be Robben and Ronaldo.

Duff on the right is not as good as Ronaldo on the right.
Duff is afterall a left winger.

Cole, while getting much better, is still not of the quality of Robben Duff or Ronaldo. There is something missing in his game, and I'm not sure what it is. I think he is being carried by Chelsea atm, and I don't know if he will be shown up. That said, he has consistantly proved me wrong again and again, so I expect him to do as again.

SWP isn't even match fit at this stage from the amount of time he has had this year.

So in the Chelsea wingers,
it would go

On the left:
Robben then Duff
On the right:
Ronaldo then Cole then SWP.

Hobart

PHB wrote:

I assume Hobart called me a troll or something, don't know have him on ignore, if you feel the same about me, I suggest you do the same.

I have you on ignore aswell PHB, but we both know how easy it is to click on the post!!. You are trolling.

Triton

Hobart wrote:

I have you on ignore aswell PHB, but we both know how easy it is to click on the post!!. You are trolling.

Pot. Kettle. Black. That's my three word contribution.