Man Utd vs. Chelsea(scores)

bucks73

KdjaCL wrote:

Ronaldo was excellent today, constantly a threat and even crossed a few times.

Good game overall but have to wonder how the best 2 teams in PLmanage to carry Ballack Shev and Carrick for nearly 90 minutes.

Ronaldos determination to get back and help out defending in the second half was outstanding. :rolleyes:
When you compare the amount of work that Giggs does hes a bloody disgrace.

IMO Carrick played well and certainly a lot better than Ballack and Shev.

Quite happy with the draw myself considering the subs Chelsea could bring on. Either team could have snatched it but a draw was the fair result.

One very good thing is that all the talk wont be about a controversial incident or the referee. Just the football.

Chucky the tree

PHB wrote:

, Rossi returning at Christmas and another midfielder bought would be nice

I am sure Jose is bricking it at the thought of rossie returning after his spell at Newcastle...

Aquos76

super_furry wrote:

Of course Sky Sports are still hyping up 'The Best League in the World' (TM). "Now that was a proper football match," claimed Richard Keyes - my arse it was.

Not only Sky, Jose also referred to it in his post mach interview.

Attractive Nun

bucks73 wrote:

Ronaldos determination to get back and help out defending in the second half was outstanding. :rolleyes:
When you compare the amount of work that Giggs does hes a bloody disgrace.

Bull****. Time and again, after periods of intense Chelsea pressure, it was Ronaldo who took the ball down the wing, completely isolated, and held onto possession. Not only can this result in attacking opportunities, but - more importantly, in this game - it relieves his defence. Work like that is worth infinitely more than thoughtlessly tracking back, winning the ball (which he can't do anyway really, since he's a poor defender) and then finding that there's nobody upfield and being forced to hoof the ball back to Chelsea. And, in any case, he's obviously being told by Ferguson to remain upfield so I can't understand how you can call him a disgrace. Blatant anti-Ronaldo bias.

wheres me jumpa

I thought it was a poor game. It was exciting in the sense, I didnt know which way it would go but neither team played great football. Chelsea played the kind of football Big Jack would be proud of in the first half. United lost their shape completely in the second half.

The big things I have taken from this game:

- Chelseas set up of Ballack, Essien, Mak and Lampard is hindering them.
- Sheva will never come good, when the team has no service from the wings, when their midfield is stifled out like today and when Drogba cant direct a knockdown.
- United have nothing on the bench.

Also I think Howard Webb handled the game very well. There were a few tackles worthy or a yellow that didnt get it, but I think his decisions were consistent on both sides.

kaimera

United lost their shape when Chelsea played with some damn wingers.

fs. Jose should have remembered the fa cup last year playing no wingers.

Poor enough game imo.

PHB

I am sure Jose is bricking it at the thought of rossie returning after his spell at Newcastle...

And I'm sure Fergie is bricking it at the thought of Ballack and Sheva playing the rest of the season.

MisterAnarchy

Attractive Nun wrote:

Bull****. Time and again, after periods of intense Chelsea pressure, it was Ronaldo who took the ball down the wing, completely isolated, and held onto possession. Not only can this result in attacking opportunities, but - more importantly, in this game - it relieves his defence. Work like that is worth infinitely more than thoughtlessly tracking back, winning the ball (which he can't do anyway really, since he's a poor defender) and then finding that there's nobody upfield and being forced to hoof the ball back to Chelsea. And, in any case, he's obviously being told by Ferguson to remain upfield so I can't understand how you can call him a disgrace. Blatant anti-Ronaldo bias.

I thought Ronaldo played very well today too.
Giggs if anything slacked off in the second half as nearly all of Chelseas attacks came down the right side .
Essien seemed to have acres of space time and time again as nobody was closing him down.

Chucky the tree

PHB wrote:

And I'm sure Fergie is bricking it at the thought of Ballack and Sheva playing the rest of the season.

Havent they both scored more then rossi?

Necronomicon

bucks73 wrote:

Ronaldos determination to get back and help out defending in the second half was outstanding. :rolleyes:
When you compare the amount of work that Giggs does hes a bloody disgrace.

I thought Ronaldo played better than Giggs today. It was Giggs' lapse of concentration that lead to the Chelsea corner and subsequent equaliser. He played a cross-field ball from a free kick in his own half right to a Chelsea player, handed them the counter attack.
Not trying to pin blame on Giggs, but I think you're being harsh on Ronaldo.

smemon

that match proves that this IS the best league in the world.

for those of you saying it was a poor game wtf.

the game was played at a blistering pace from start to finish. It was end to end stuff. Plenty of tackles flying in (most of them fair), a few bust ups which is nice to see....

along with goals - one a lightening quick counter attack team move and the other pure determination to win the ball.

that was the best match i've seen all season. Superb football on a big stage. It shows how even these two sides are. Because we didn't have 5 goals, doesnt mean it was a brutal match :rolleyes:

MrJoeSoap

smemon wrote:

that match proves that this IS the best league in the world.

for those of you saying it was a poor game wtf.

the game was played at a blistering pace from start to finish. It was end to end stuff. Plenty of tackles flying in (most of them fair), a few bust ups which is nice to see....

along with goals - one a lightening quick counter attack team move and the other pure determination to win the ball.

that was the best match i've seen all season. Superb football on a big stage. It shows how even these two sides are. Because we didn't have 5 goals, doesnt mean it was a brutal match :rolleyes:

Amazing to see how some people get caught up in the hype. This game was poor at best, the football was dreadful at times and other than the goals there were few clear cut chances. Best league in the world my arse, a good league has more than two teams in contention every season.

kinaldo

smemon wrote:

that match proves that this IS the best league in the world.

I have to strongly disagree. Did you watch the RealMadrid Barca game a few weeks ago?

Xavi6

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Amazing to see how some people get caught up in the hype. This game was poor at best, the football was dreadful at times and other than the goals there were few clear cut chances. Best league in the world my arse, a good league has more than two teams in contention every season.

Agree 100%. So many of the supposed 'stars' completely underperformed - Ronaldo, Shevchenko, Ballack to name three. As a neutral I don't feel it was a game from 'The Greatest League in the World'. The Premiership is still behind La Liga at least.

fade2black

There's a bit of a difference between the service at Chelsea and the service at Newcastle.

Guy:Incognito

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Best league in the world my arse, a good league has more than two teams in contention every season.

In the last 15 years, bar 2 years, Serie A has been won by either Milan or Juve. (I know about last season but that doesnt count cos inter won by default). Since 1985 la liga has been one by either Real or Barce in all but 4 seasons. Its much of a muchness between the 3 top leagues. Over 20 years in England theres been Liverpool, Arsenal, Blackburn, Utd ,Chelsea, Everton and Leeds. Thats a decent spread. Most leagues ahve a clear pack of 2 or 3 that are only ever in contention, someone might hang onto the tails points wise but are never realisticly going to win it.

MrJoeSoap

Stekelly wrote:

In the last 15 years, bar 2 years, Serie A has been won by either Milan or Juve. (I know about last season but that doesnt count cos inter won by default). Since 1985 la liga has been one by either Real or Barce in all but 4 seasons. Its much of a muchness between the 3 top leagues. Over 20 years in England theres been Liverpool, Arsenal, Blackburn, Utd ,Chelsea, Everton and Leeds.

I never said anything about Spain, Italy etc...

Best standard of football without a doubt, but certainly not the best leagues in terms of competitiveness. Seeing Man Utd win 8 Premierships has me turned sour, regardless of the odd Arsenal or Blackburn win. Chelsea will soon do the same.

Boring.

Guy:Incognito

MrJoeSoap wrote:

I never said anything about Spain, Italy etc...

Best standard of football without a doubt, but certainly not the best leagues in terms of competitiveness. Seeing Man Utd win 8 Premierships has me turned sour, regardless of the odd Arsenal or Blackburn win. Chelsea will soon do the same.

Boring.

In fairness, mo league really has a constant rotation of winners. I dont follow the american league but they may be more even as they run a draft system to stop this sort of thing do they not?

kinaldo

Stekelly wrote:

In the last 15 years, bar 2 years, Serie A has been won by either Milan or Juve. (I know about last season but that doesnt count cos inter won by default). Since 1985 la liga has been one by either Real or Barce in all but 4 seasons. Its much of a muchness between the 3 top leagues. Over 20 years in England theres been Liverpool, Arsenal, Blackburn, Utd ,Chelsea, Everton and Leeds. Thats a decent spread. Most leagues ahve a clear pack of 2 or 3 that are only ever in contention, someone might hang onto the tails points wise but are never realisticly going to win it.

We can play around with statistics all day, but La Liga in particular has been consistently competitive:

98/99: Barcelona Milan
99/00: Deportivo Lazio
00/01: R.Madrid Roma
01/02: Valencia Juventus

4 consecutive seasons, 8 different champions.

If we extend out from 96 to present we can add Atl. Madrid and Inter to make 10 different champions.

In Spain, titles this decade have been divided up as

Real Madrid 2
Barcelona 2
Valencia 2
Deportivo 1

Smaller clubs also frequently challenge all the way.

Real Socieded narrowly lost the title on the final day of the season as recently as 2003.

Deportivo took it to the final day in 1994 and Sevilla could win it this year.

super_furry

If that was the 'best match you've seen all season', it doesn't say much for the way the Premiership is going. I honestly believe that as a spectacle the Premiership is in as bad a way as it's ever been, but that's an argument for another thread. I think people are getting sidetracked by the whole 'best league' idea. English teams may be doing well in Europe, but the Premiership has become increasingly dull over the last few years, with the likes of Bolton being the norm and Arsenal the exception.

The game today may have been a tense one for those with a vested interest, but for the neutrals, it was a poor match with little to offer outside of Rooney's fleeting moments of skill.

MrJoeSoap

Stekelly wrote:

I dont follow the american league but they may be more even as they run a draft system to stop this sort of thing do they not?

Yeah, same as all the major sports in the US. It's not really the draft that stops monotony, more the fact that the league system breaks into a "post-season" and all the top teams still have a chance. There has been a good rotation of winners there, as there normally is in the other US sports.

Ensures there is a decent chance for every team (except the Chicago Cubs), and the interest remains strong and attendances high.

The franchising on the other hand...

smemon

well, if skill is what you're after, go to La Liga or Brazil... The premiership isn't the most skillful league in the world. But for the overall package it comes out on top.

The pace was incredible today, possibly the fastest pace i've ever seen 2 teams play the full 90 mins at. You's are missing the point here - the reason you's THINK it was boring is because two great sides cancelled each other out. Utd all guns blazing first half, Chelsea dominating the 2nd.

a 'great' player can only be 'great' if the opposition make mistakes. (formation, tactics, to misplaced passes). The reason neither side won today was because the greatness cancelled each other out.

No one side deserved to win. Both are challengers for the title, and both have won it in recent years... The fact the game was played at the fastest possible pace imo shows that when both sides are at their peak, they cancel each other out.

el rabitos

smemon wrote:

a 'great' player can only be 'great' if the opposition make mistakes. (formation, tactics, to misplaced passes). The reason neither side won today was because the greatness cancelled each other out.

well reading that was a good chuckle

if 1 player wins a 50/50 tackle with another player and goes on to score a great goal, does losing a 50/50 tackle constitute a "mistake"? course not. goals dont just happen because of a "mistake". YOU'S crazy YOU'S all are

MisterAnarchy

In general the matches between the top few teams in the Premiership over the last few years have been pretty poor affairs.
High tempo,cagey,defensive minded ,kick and rush stuff played at 100 miles an hour.
If you are emotionally involved as a fan sure it is exciting stuff but for the neutral its brutal stuff.
There hasnt been a decent match between Man Utd and Liverpool in over 5 years.
I'd gladly watch a La Liga match than a Premiership match.

Chucky the tree

You have been smoking the whackey again havent you smemon?

Nalz

It was an okay game. Good TV because of the hype and the game that was in it but it was no more than okay. I thought the Charlton v Everton game was the best game of the weekend!

The draw was a fair result. United were by far the better team in the first half and had the better chances, with Ronaldo and Saha should have got another at least. Carrick played well, tbh I cant fault anyone's display on the United team...maybe Saha, though he did score a good goal.

For 20 minutes solid, Chelsea dominated midfield in the second half. Maybe not to the extent that Arsenal did at OT, but they really pushed up a gear. They may have been limited to long shots and long field crosses/passes, but United just couldnt get the ball off them. Shevshenko was disappointing. Even though Robben coming on changed Chelseas system for the better - I thought he was poor and he looks like an unhappy camper to me. They deserved their goal and anyone that saw just the second half would say Chelsea were robbed, despite Uniteds counter attacks and fúckups in the Chelsea box.

Rio Ferdinand, Ashley Cole and Carrick played well for me...which will please McClaren.Just to add to all that, the highlights on MOTD2 made it look like United were all over Chelsea for the 90mins, which wasnt the case at all.

fair result, now bring on Everton!

yop

Fair result, we decided to stay in the dressing room for the 2nd half which was frustrating, should have gone at them. Carrick had a good game as did Rio and Vidic.
Ref was weak, Ballack clocked up at least 6 fouls at least one of them should have been a yellow.

iregk

smemon wrote:

well, if skill is what you're after, go to La Liga or Brazil... The premiership isn't the most skillful league in the world. But for the overall package it comes out on top.

I'm going to assume that your about 13 and have never watched football in any other country bar England. the match yesterday was a show case for everything that is the premiership. Poor football, lack of ideas and creativity. Both teams ran from end to end constantly and the EPL crowd think that this makes for dynamite football. The prem is kamakasi football, no emphasis on holding onto the ball and keeping posession. Even the Milan Messina game that I watched saturday night in a pub wsa a lot better than the game yesterday.

The one thing I noticed yesterday was United's lack of a plan b. Half time they had dominated the first half. Mourinho who I'd rate as the best half time manager in the league changes a right full for a left winger and completely dominated the 2nd half. Could United have done that? No. We know Chelsea's squad depth but what was worrying for United fans was the fact that when Ronnie and Saha came off who had you got to replace them? The sheer power of Fletcher and O'Shea!!! Later on in the season that lack of depth will hit United hard. As for Carrick as man of the match, I'm still laughing. 3 players from Chelsea, Ashley Cole, Essien or Carvalho should have gotten it. The fact that MacLarens justification was that he is English speaks volumes for the mentality in the country.

Jivin Turkey

iregk wrote:

I'm going to assume that your about 13 and have never watched football in any other country bar England. the match yesterday was a show case for everything that is the premiership. Poor football, lack of ideas and creativity. Both teams ran from end to end constantly and the EPL crowd think that this makes for dynamite football. The prem is kamakasi football, no emphasis on holding onto the ball and keeping posession. Even the Milan Messina game that I watched saturday night in a pub wsa a lot better than the game yesterday.

Didn't Chelsea have 70% possession at one stage yesterday? Does that not constitute a team with an "emphasis on holding onto the ball"?

The game was end to end because in the second half United sat back and tried to soak up the pressure, and hit with pace on the break, while Chelsea patiently probed.

iregk wrote:

As for Carrick as man of the match, I'm still laughing. 3 players from Chelsea, Ashley Cole, Essien or Carvalho should have gotten it. The fact that MacLarens justification was that he is English speaks volumes for the mentality in the country.

While I don't think Carrick was particularly impressivve, Essien was absolutely anonymous in the first half. There were periods that I genuinely wondered if he was on the field. I was very disappointed in his performance because he is a player that I rate highly, and who has been doing brilliantly this year. I thought he would be the difference between the sides, but he was no where to be seen.

Cole did well against Ronaldo, but to be honest no one player really stood out.

redspider

A draw was a fair result in this game, although on paper, it gives Chelsea perhaps some advantage back. I think Man Utd went about it the right way and were clearly on top for the 1st half. Saha's goal though was an atypical one for him, good that it came off but I cant see him scoring goals like that week in week out, given the amount of sitters he has missed this season. It was more a Rooney-esque goal.

Chelsea did well though to come back and turned it around tactically. Not a good day for Shevcenko again, as it was last year's 4-3-3 system which put Man Utd under the cosh rather than the new 4-4d-2 system (where d stands for diamond). With Essien at right back, Mourinho asks a lot from his players but they are delivering. Maybe Mourinho should just keep Shevcenko for the CL games.

My prediction is still the same. ie: CMAL
1. Chelsea 2. Man Utd 3. Arsenal 4. Liverpool

Note that Man Utd have to play the others from the big-4 away.

---

In terms of the discussion about other leagues, its hard to compare them. Clearly, before Abramovich funded Chelsea's success in recent years, the league in England was dominated by Man Utd and Arsenal in the previous 10 or so years. Man Utd had the money to do it, still have, and Arsenal who are not poor by any stretch of the imagination did better for their funding than Liverpool did for example. But I'm sure if you compiled a table on what teams spend each year (salaries and effective spend/depreciation on players values/purchasing), then it would more or less match the league table. There would be differences of course but not many at the top.

Looking across Europe, the same more or less applies. The clubs with the income, spend more and do better. There are exceptions of course, and new teams appear, although many have a benefactor which bring them to the top, eg: Wigan, Hearts (last season). I dont know about AZ or Schalke.

The draft system (used in the US and in AFL, thats aussie rules) is a good idea as it attempts to re-dress the natural tendency for the big to get bigger and the small to fall behind. But it requires a youth structure that is different than in soccer across the world today where 12 year olds with potential are literally 'signed'. That to me is exploitation of youth and shouldnt be allowed.

I prefer close leagues myself, where at the start of each season there is about half a dozen teams which could win it. The 2nd flight in England is close this year, just look at how many teams are within 10 pts of the top. The German league is also close this year. And the leagues in Brazil tend to be very well fought, and the football is very good as well. They dont have the money, but if the money balance was the other way around, we here in little old Ireland could be watching Brazillian football on weekends. Mind you, there are issues with time differences, etc, and the distance and cost to get to games.

In England this year its a two horse race, which for the neutral is a bit of a dissapointment as a) its the same old, same old (although Chelsea are the new money!) and b) the likes of Arsenal and Liverpool have fallen away so quickly and early.

Even though I'm a Liverpool fan, I think it would be good for the league if Liverpool could manage to win it some year soon. Of course it probably would be even better if a new team could come through. The 'big clubs' of Newcastle, Spurs, Everton, Villa are potentially sleeping giants that could break the top-4, but they have a long way to go.

Redspider

TheMonster

iregk wrote:

I'm going to assume that your about 13 and have never watched football in any other country bar England. the match yesterday was a show case for everything that is the premiership. Poor football, lack of ideas and creativity. Both teams ran from end to end constantly and the EPL crowd think that this makes for dynamite football. The prem is kamakasi football, no emphasis on holding onto the ball and keeping posession. Even the Milan Messina game that I watched saturday night in a pub wsa a lot better than the game yesterday.

The one thing I noticed yesterday was United's lack of a plan b. Half time they had dominated the first half. Mourinho who I'd rate as the best half time manager in the league changes a right full for a left winger and completely dominated the 2nd half. Could United have done that? No. We know Chelsea's squad depth but what was worrying for United fans was the fact that when Ronnie and Saha came off who had you got to replace them? The sheer power of Fletcher and O'Shea!!! Later on in the season that lack of depth will hit United hard. As for Carrick as man of the match, I'm still laughing. 3 players from Chelsea, Ashley Cole, Essien or Carvalho should have gotten it. The fact that MacLarens justification was that he is English speaks volumes for the mentality in the country.

Chelsea had to have a plan B as their Plan A was hopeless;)

Draw was a fair result but you would wonder what would have happened if the refereee(who otherwise had a good game) had the balls to send Drogba off for the elbow, he looked first and swung blatantly at Vidic. Worst part is he was booked so punishment stops there.

Utd were in total control in the first half and should probably been further ahead and even the second half could have had a goal on the break. Hopefully Moaninho will put it down as a blip and persevere with the 4 CM experiment. How long before Shevchenko is dropped, he was awful yesterday.

sofireland

Happy with the draw, keeps the gap in tact, though 6 points would have been nice.

We arguable created better chances, but didn't put them away... truly was a game of two halves.

TheMonster

redspider wrote:

In terms of the discussion about other leagues, its hard to compare them. Clearly, before Abramovich funded Chelsea's success in recent years, the league in England was dominated by Man Utd and Arsenal in the previous 10 or so years. Man Utd had the money to do it, still have, and Arsenal who are not poor by any stretch of the imagination did better for their funding than Liverpool did for example. But I'm sure if you compiled a table on what teams spend each year (salaries and effective spend/depreciation on players values/purchasing), then it would more or less match the league table. There would be differences of course but not many at the top.

Redspider

Interesting you mentioed that - there was a major discussion on a Utd forum recently and it turns out since the start of premiership Utd and Liverpools Net spend has been fairly equal(a fact that surprised me), difference being Utd spent big on a few players, Rooney,Rio,Saha, Carrick etc while Liverpool buy a lot of mid price players(4-10M).

Nalz

redspider wrote:

Even though I'm a Liverpool fan, I think it would be good for the league if Liverpool could manage to win it some year soon. Of course it probably would be even better if a new team could come through. The 'big clubs' of Newcastle, Spurs, Everton, Villa are potentially sleeping giants that could break the top-4, but they have a long way to go.

decent enough read there. I hope you are right regarding other clubs coming through. Me being a United fan, Im very happy with our performance so far. However, with trips to Anfield, Emirates and Stamford bridge still to come...It will be Chelseas year yet again. I fear those sleeping giants will be in a coma for a few more years to come

iregk

TheMonster wrote:

Chelsea had to have a plan B as their Plan A was hopeless;)

Draw was a fair result but you would wonder what would have happened if the refereee(who otherwise had a good game) had the balls to send Drogba off for the elbow, he looked first and swung blatantly at Vidic. Worst part is he was booked so punishment stops there.

Completely agree with you. Chelsea's plan A was woeful, plan B though was brilliant. Essien was dire in the first half but showed how good a player he is consdering he was moved to right full and was still excellent in the 2nd half. Drogba maybe should have gone for the elbow but I think Vidic made a bit of a show of himself with the wriggling around as if his jaw was ripped clean off. Its amazing they players are in so much agony yet manage to spring up and argue seconds later.

Nalz

you're having a laugh if you think Carvalho or Essien deserved MoM. Ashley Cole, Rio or Carrick for me.

TheMonster

iregk wrote:

Completely agree with you. Chelsea's plan A was woeful, plan B though was brilliant.

I never said it wasn't - my point it they got it so wrong they needed a plan B.

quad_red

a plan B.

When the going got tough, Mourinho had the squad to bring on players like Cole and Robben.

Utds bench consisted of Evra (LB), Silvestre (LB/CB), Fletcher (Mid) and O'Shea (?).

THAT is why Utd won't win the league without a staggering amount of luck with injuries.

leninbenjamin

it was an alright match overall, nothing spectacular but good entertainment for most of it. i think it showed both the good aspects (the fast paced, end to end nature of play) and bad aspects (the abundance of sloppy passes, over-reliance on brute strength at times, sometimes a lack of tactical awareness from certain players and the tendecy to resort to the long ball when under pressure) of football in england.

Chelsea are still looking the stronger really. I think this match will act as a microcosm for the season. Man Utds current starting eleven cant last a full season. They need some element of rotation or else they will burn out sometime after Christmas. Whereas Chelsea can just bring on the other stars in thier squad.

What i found most bizarre about this match, is why Mourinho started Geremi . He is clearly the weakest player in the Chelsea squad at the moment, and was exploited non-stop by the Utd wingers til he went off.

Its also clear that Sheva can't play in a system of 4 central midfielders. He really needs wingers to give him service so he can play to his strengths. Yet we all know Mourinho doesn't trust wingers (seems to think they are flakey or something).

MrJoeSoap

iregk wrote:

The prem is kamakasi football, no emphasis on holding onto the ball and keeping posession. Even the Milan Messina game that I watched saturday night in a pub wsa a lot better than the game yesterday.

Haven't seen the Milan stats but Chelsea had 58.8% of possession and an 81.5% passing accuracy. I thought they kept the ball fairly well, though I wouldn't doubt the Milan game was better.

MisterAnarchy wrote:

In general the matches between the top few teams in the Premiership over the last few years have been pretty poor affairs.
High tempo,cagey,defensive minded ,kick and rush stuff played at 100 miles an hour.
If you are emotionally involved as a fan sure it is exciting stuff but for the neutral its brutal stuff.

Exactly.

Trilla wrote:

Good TV because of the hype and the game that was in it but it was no more than okay. I thought the Charlton v Everton game was the best game of the weekend!

Agree with the first part but not the second, Charlton and Everton was only okay at best too imo.

iregk

leninbenjamin wrote:

What i found most bizarre about this match, is why Mourinho started Geremi

Well thats the problem right back position for us. Geremi isn't that great a player but he has done ok up to now. Ferrera was vastly over rated prior to coming over and Mourinho has not lost faith in him. Boularouz is an out and out center half and look clumsy and akward at right full. So as it stands Geremi is the best of a bad bunch. Expect in Jan or summer at the latest for jose to go shopping for a Philippe Lahm or someone of that stature.

smemon

iregk wrote:

what was worrying for United fans was the fact that when Ronnie and Saha came off who had you got to replace them? The sheer power of Fletcher and O'Shea!!!

yes, very worrying :rolleyes: we've only got smith, solksjaer, rossi to come back along with park. It's rare any side loses 2 or 3 strikers in the same period. Your saying we should go out and buy another 2 or 3 :rolleyes: yeah that certainly makes for a great league - the side with the most money wins.

Utd have a long history of giving youth a chance, by your logic we should just buy more players when others get injured.

iregk wrote:

Later on in the season that lack of depth will hit United hard. As for Carrick as man of the match, I'm still laughing. 3 players from Chelsea, Ashley Cole, Essien or Carvalho should have gotten it. The fact that MacLarens justification was that he is English speaks volumes for the mentality in the country.

the home side in a draw normally gets MOTM, unless the away keeper has had a blinder.

it keeps 75,000 fans happy it's not carricks fault McClaren is english. He played well and made countless 'keane-like' interceptions which was the reason imo, utd were so dominant in the first half.

Utd were more threatening than chelsea were in the second imo, therefore one has to award motm to a utd player unless one stood out from chelsea which none did imo.

iregk

smemon wrote:

Your saying we should go out and buy another 2 or 3 :rolleyes: yeah that certainly makes for a great league - the side with the most money wins.

Utd have a long history of giving youth a chance, by your logic we should just buy more players when others get injured.

Ok I'm slightly confused as to where you extrapolated from my comments that United should not give youth a chance and go out and buy 2-3 players

smemon

iregk wrote:

Ok I'm slightly confused as to where you extrapolated from my comments that United should not give youth a chance and go out and buy 2-3 players

you've criticised our squad depth. Claiming o'shea and fletcher aren't up to scratch (don't worry, i'm not going to challenge that claim )

It's a reasonable assumption that you're saying we should go out and strengthen the squad further. However you have overlooked the fact that we already have players out and they are coming back soon.

So it wouldn't make sense to go out and buy 2 or 3 players just for the short-term whilst the injured guys are out for a few weeks.

if you were off sick for 2 weeks, would your boss hire someone on a fulltime contract to do your job?? No he wouldn't. He'd either get someone already working there to fill in or else make do with his current staff and delegate your workload.

Utd are a business, a team. More new signings, without anyone leaving, would cause conflict imo and wouldn't make financial sense.

if you're saying fletcher & o'shea should be sold, and 2 better players brought in - i can't argue with that.

LostinBlanch

iregk wrote:

Drogba maybe should have gone for the elbow.

Maybe? Maybe? He looked to see where Vidic was before he deliberately threw the elbow into his face. Definite sending off without any doubt. Out it this way if Vidic elbowed Drogba in such a fashion I think you'd be screaming blue murder if he wasn't sent off, and rightly so.

But because it's Drogba who has such a reputation for fair play [ahem] it's he "maybe should have gone for the elbow".

MrJoeSoap

LostinBlanch wrote:

Maybe? Maybe? He looked to see where Vidic was before he deliberately threw the elbow into his face. Definite sending off without any doubt. Out it this way if Vidic elbowed Drogba in such a fashion I think you'd be screaming blue murder if he wasn't sent off, and rightly so.

But because it's Drogba who has such a reputation for fair play [ahem] it's he "maybe should have gone for the elbow".

Or put it this way... if it was Vidic who had elbowed Drogba you would probably be saying "maybe he should have gone".

He's admitting Drogba was lucky and you are still criticising him. Bizarre. He's right about Vidic too.

LostinBlanch

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Or put it this way... if it was Vidic who had elbowed Drogba you would probably be saying "maybe he should have gone".

He's admitting Drogba was lucky and you are still criticising him. Bizarre. He's right about Vidic too.

No Joe I said that if Vidic had done that to Drogba then he should have been sent off automatically. Reread the bit where I said Iregk would have been screaming blue murder if Vidic elbowed Drogba in the same way. Note I said and rightly so - no maybes there. Nothing bizarre about that IMO. If I'm criticising anything it's not having the honesty to say that he should have gone. No maybes about it.

Drogba should have walked but the ref bottled it.

RE Vidic, that's your opinion, in mine he's not a player who goes down to get someone sent off. How many times did Vidic get elbowed and hit yesterday? Loads, it's almost* like Chelsea were operating on instructions to soften him up or injure him, knowing how important he is to United at the moment.

*Note I said almost

iregk

smemon wrote:

if you're saying fletcher & o'shea should be sold, and 2 better players brought in - i can't argue with that.

Ok I get where your coming from now. Its a fair assumption alright, I was just confused as to where it came from. Anyhow basically the point I was trying to get around to is that yes Fletcher adn O'shea should be gotten rid of and two better players brought in. If these players can be drafted from the youth setup then all the better, if not, the transfer window is the only option.

iregk

MrJoeSoap wrote:

He's admitting Drogba was lucky and you are still criticising him. Bizarre. He's right about Vidic too.

Thank you Joe. Jesus lads are the football forums getting that bad that when you admit your own player was lucky to stay on the pitch you get torn apart for it!!!

evad_lhorg

Just back last night from a great weekend in Manchester topped by being in amazing seats near the dugout only 3 rows from the pitch!

The atmosphere, especially in the first half, was absolutely amazing! Never felt anything quite like it when Sahas goal went in. Unbelievable.

I couldnt believe Carrick got MOTM. For me it was Ronaldo, Scholes or Essien. nobody else was worth it from what I saw.

Utd shoulld have had it wrapped up in the second half anyway. two great chances in front of goal both involving Ronaldo and Saha and both players seemed to panic in front of goal.

Great game to be at though