Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

DM_7

United do personalise the training regime of players. Maybe not well enough but they do attempt it.

a torn cruciate is not something that can be avoided, look at how many players get this type of injury in american football for example.

torn muscles are a bigger concern. I know someone posted in detail about preperation, stretching etc and how that helps prevent muscle injuries on the united thread before.

killwill

DM-ICE wrote: »

United do personalise the training regime of players. Maybe not well enough but they do attempt it.

a torn cruciate is not something that can be avoided, look at how many players get this type of injury in american football for example.

torn muscles are a bigger concern. I know someone posted in detail about preperation, stretching etc and how that helps prevent muscle injuries on the united thread before.

United have a very good medical staff.
Back when Eddie O'Sullivan was Ireland coach he invited SAF over to Dublin for a motivational speech to the Irish team.
One of the things he told O'Sullivan wasthat before you spend a penny on players, you need to invest heavily on the best medical staff.

Orando Broom

Grass based athletes (soccer, Rugby, GAA American football) have gotten stronger and faster, the cruciate ligament is now the weak link. It is an injury that is happenign wholesale across all codes.

More is expected from athletes ligaments becuase of the forces at work in terms of explosive running and direction changing.

homerjay2005

killwill wrote: »

A torn ACL is not neccessarily down to a weak cruciate you know.

yes thats a valid point, but there are ways to prevent it and certain people for example are more prone to it than others.

for example, i bet you didnt know that if you are a female athlete, the chances of doing your cruciate is much much higher than if you are a male.

helimachoptor

homerjay2005 wrote: »

for example, i bet you didnt know that if you are a female athlete, the chances of doing your cruciate is much much higher than if you are a male.

How come?

killwill

homerjay2005 wrote: »

yes thats a valid point, but there are ways to prevent it and certain people for example are more prone to it than others.

for example, i bet you didnt know that if you are a female athlete, the chances of doing your cruciate is much much higher than if you are a male.

You bet correct, I would have said male cruciates would be more likely to go because, and this might sound a little controversial, men are more aggressive and put their bodies through more in sports.

helimachoptor

killwill wrote: »

You bet correct, I would have said male cruciates would be more likely to go because, and this might sound a little controversial, men are more aggressive and put their bodies through more in sports.

He said females are more likely to do the cruciate than males

killwill

helimachoptor wrote: »

He said females are more likely to do the cruciate than males

I know, read my post again.

I said I would have thought mens were more likely to go.

helimachoptor

killwill wrote: »

I know

Sorry I read both homers and your posts wrong, i am an idiot

killwill

helimachoptor wrote: »

Sorry I read both homers and your posts wrong, i am an idiot

Agreed, ha only joking.

Samich

Questions don't need to be asked of the medical team. The best known soccer club in the world don't hire cowboys in all fairness.

Jimmy Iovine

Cruciate injuries were always there. My dad did his over 30 years ago. They were never properly diagnosed though. They may have been passed off as inflammation or something else. As a result there seems to have been a huge increase in the reported cases in the last few years.

I know it has become one of the most common injuries in hurling. Some people put the blame on the types of boots being worn. Boots with blades offer more grip, but have little give if your leg is twisted.

I don't know if they are easily preventable. You just have to take care and have a large slice of luck on the pitch. Very, very few players come back better after a cruciate injury.
The likes of Henry Shefflin (two injuries to both knees) and Ronaldo (two to the same knee) are exceptional.

Hopefully Will Keane has the mental strength to get through the whole process and come out the other side. From the few times I've seen him play I can't remember him having too much pace about him. He should be lucky in that sense. I doubt he'd have to restructure his game too much.

_blank_

Fat Ronaldo?

He was never the same.

Samich

So with Chelsea taking the cheque book out they seem to be building a potent team. Could be the hardest PL to win yet for Utd.

MagicMarker

helimachoptor wrote: »

How come?

Because of the extra weight from all the sandwiches they do be carrying... :pac:

Jimmy Iovine

Des wrote: »

Fat Ronaldo?

He was never the same.

Hate when people refer to him as that.

Anyway, he was hardly ever going to be the same player after the two injuries. The lost years robbed him of his incredible pace. He re-developed his game to become an even more clinical finisher. He could no longer get the ball on the halfway line and be confident that he could run through tackles and score. His performance against United in 2003 was incredible.

If he had never gotten injured and had settled at a club then I think he'd have gone on to become the greatest. He had everything that a footballer needed. Even after his injury he was still world class. 83 goals in 127 games for Madrid after having recovered from two career-ending injuries is no mean feat.

His mental strength was his greatest asset. 99% of other players would have caved under the pressure but he went on to win a World Cup and 2 La Ligas and played an integral part in them all (bar the second La Liga).

ceegee

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Cruciate injuries were always there. My dad did his over 30 years ago. They were never properly diagnosed though. They may have been passed off as inflammation or something else. As a result there seems to have been a huge increase in the reported cases in the last few years.

I know it has become one of the most common injuries in hurling. Some people put the blame on the types of boots being worn. Boots with blades offer more grip, but have little give if your leg is twisted.

I don't know if they are easily preventable. You just have to take care and have a large slice of luck on the pitch. Very, very few players come back better after a cruciate injury.
The likes of Henry Shefflin (two injuries to both knees) and Ronaldo (two to the same knee) are exceptional.

Hopefully Will Keane has the mental strength to get through the whole process and come out the other side. From the few times I've seen him play I can't remember him having too much pace about him. He should be lucky in that sense. I doubt he'd have to restructure his game too much.

Didnt SAF ban blades from the club a few years back? Not sure if thats still the case


edit - f**k me, that was 7 years ago it happened, if you dont mind I'll be over in the corner feeling old.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/m/man_utd/4277722.stm

Nuri Sahin

PHB wrote: »

I haven't seen Kagawa ever, but I think Welbeck is a cracking prospect, better than Chicho, and should definately be first choice with Rooney. Kagawa, as I understand it, is a creative midfielder, who plays on the wings or through the center. The center thing wont work until he can play as part of a 2, because Rooney effectively plays at the top of a three. In which case, he'll be on the wings.

I agree with that. Again, it's why I've always wondered why the urgent need for a number 10, be it Hazard or Kagawa. To me anyway, looked like Welbeck and Rooney had an excellent understanding when I did see them play. Maybe I was wrong

Kharrell wrote: »

You're carrying the team so im fine

I was just lighting up the runway really.

IvySlayer wrote: »

Me too!

Off course I just shot everyone in sight...bad guys..police...innocents :pac:

And cans! And shooting roof tiles..

I had that game too. Don't care what anyone says, it was fun :P

homerjay2005 wrote: »

give our history of ineptness with transfers, nothing is sure with united. until the lad is holding up the jersey, its not guaranteed.

weve been let down too many times at this stage to ever take a transfer for granted.

The only way I don't see him signing is if he gets injured over the next 7 days or so. That reason aside, if he doesn't sign, I'll buy a United top and take a pic of me wearing it okay (Kharrell stop smiling) That's how confident I'am :-/ I'll be feckin ecstatic if he stayed with Dortmund / didn't sign for you guys as I've said before.

Lukekul

Here's a page on female acl injurys.

Basically the main thing is the different shapes of the knees.

_blank_

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Hate when people refer to him as that.

Boohoohoo

Mitch Connor

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Hate when people refer to him as that.

Jimmy Iovine

Des wrote: »

Boohoohoo

Nice of you to ignore the rest of my post.

Giggsy11

-Ade- wrote: »

I agree with that. Again, it's why I've always wondered why the urgent need for a number 10, be it Hazard or Kagawa. To me anyway, looked like Welbeck and Rooney had an excellent understanding when I did see them play. Maybe I was wrong

Yeah Rooney is superb #10, but most of our attacks came from wings and threat from middle was non existent. Rooney and Welbeck combined superbly in the last few games but still our main threat was from wings.

And you dont pass up chances to sign a player like Kagawa for cut price Isn't it

The only way I don't see him signing is if he gets injured over the next 7 days or so. That reason aside, if he doesn't sign, I'll buy a United top and take a pic of me wearing it okay (Kharrell stop smiling) That's how confident I'am :-/ I'll be feckin ecstatic if he stayed with Dortmund / didn't sign for you guys as I've said before.

I dont think you will see many United fans relaxed about the deal or think it is as good as done after what happened with Ramsey and other previous deals. I'm very much sure we will sign him but still somewhere in my mind I have a fear that we may lose him.

Mr Simpson

Samich wrote: »

So with Chelsea taking the cheque book out they seem to be building a potent team. Could be the hardest PL to win yet for Utd.

We won't win it if we don't break out the chequebook very quickly.

Jimmy Iovine

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Yeah Rooney is superb #10, but most of our attacks came from wings and threat from middle was non existent. Rooney and Welbeck combined superbly in the last few games but still our main threat was from wings.

And you dont pass up chances to sign a player like Kagawa for cut price Isn't it

The reason most of our threats come from the wing is because of the exceptional play of Rooney and Welbeck up front. They get the ball to their feet, play with it a bit and then spread it out wide.

They may not have been rampaging straight through the middle but they have been absolutely vital to the threat on the wing. Without them there would be no threat. The ball would be bouncing off the forwards and it'd come straight back from where it was kicked. Take a look at any Sunday league football around Ireland and you'll see. Hopeless forwards who can't hold up the ball to give it back to the midfielders or to spread it wide. It's the most basic job that a forward has to do, yet so many are unable to do it. When it is done perfectly it's very often ignored.

If we add Kagawa then our options increase.

bucketybuck

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Yeah Rooney is superb #10

Although he is a great player, I don't think Rooney is as good a playmaker as he is a goalscorer. He does nice long range passes sure, but his percentage of incisive passes is not as good as people think.

Proof? Rooney had only 8 assists in all competitions last season. Silva had 14, Van Persie had 12, even Juan Mata had more with 15.

Rooney is a striker, playing deeper because United have nothing else there, but its not his best position. Tracking back and tackling is a bonus for a playmaker, but assists and creating chances are the bread and butter, and Rooney does not create as many as his peers.

He is a great goalscorer, and thats where United should use him.

Lord TSC

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

If we add Kagawa then our options increase.

Thats the key thing, imo.

With a mid player like Wagaka, we are not only dangerous on the wings but up the middle as well. Its all about having as many options as possible.

Pro. F

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Yeah like you said he is brave enough to put in a tackle or two. So defensive side of the game will improve with years.

And I disagree with 'not good with the ball at his feet'. He is awesome, even in tight spaces ball sticks to his feet. Till date in the most of games he played, he was very comfortable in possession even when marked by 2 players and he has good vision to pick passes that none of his teammates can see. (All this in reserves only, so I'm not sure if he can do it at highest level as league is altogether different game)

I've only seen him in two reserve/youth games. I've seen all his first team appearances I think. I wouldn't agree that the ball sticks to his feet at all. Imo his first touch is woeful and he's always trying to make up for that. I agree he has an eye for a pass though and can thump a good shot too. Typical English style cm imo.

donalg1

Whats the story with Carrick not going to the Euro's, has he retired from International football or is he just too useless for it.

v3ttel

donalg1 wrote: »

Whats the story with Carrick not going to the Euro's, has he retired from International football or is he just too useless for it.

Read back through the thread. It was discussed last night.

In summary, he didn't want to go and be a bit part player. He will happily play if he is first choice, but doesn't want to warm the bench any longer. Technically go, if he is first choice or there is an "extreme situation".

Macca07

There would be a good chance he would change his mind if Parker isn't fully fit and pulls out.

Orando Broom

Rooney10 wrote: »

Read back through the thread. It was discussed last night.

In summary, he didn't want to go and be a bit part player. He will happily play if he is first choice, but doesn't want to warm the bench any longer. Technically go, if he is first choice or there is an "extreme situation".

Wrong. He wanted to go and wasn't picked then told anyone who'd listen he never wanted to go anways. I saw a seven year old do that once. It was pathetic. Do you think he'd have turned it down had he been named,e ven as a reserve?

I think it was a poor selection by Hodgson, Henderson over Carrick, but Carrick's reaction was petulant and unfortunately all too common a reaction for the modern footballer.

Perhaps he should knuckle down and try to become a more dynamic force in the middle next season instead.

Samich

I hope we don't splash out like chelsea have. A cm like Asamoah (who is described as an Essien type) would do nicely. I wouldn't like us to to be spending bucket loads tbh.

Samich

Orando Broom wrote: »

Wrong. He wanted to go and wasn't picked then told anyone who'd listen he never wanted to go anways. I saw a seven year old do that once. It was pathetic. Do you think he'd have turned it down had he been named,e ven as a reserve?

I think it was a poor selection by Hodgson, Henderson over Carrick, but Carrick's reaction was petulant and unfortunately all too common a reaction for the modern footballer.

Perhaps he should knuckle down and try to become a more dynamic force in the middle next season instead.

You should have quoted yer mans full sentence, he was right in what he said "He didn't want to go and be a bit part player". You just highlighted the "He didn't want to go" bit.

Orando Broom

Samich wrote: »

You should have quoted yer mans full sentence, he was right in what he said "He didn't want to go and be a bit part player". You just highlighted the "He didn't want to go" bit.

Sorry, I'll rephrase 'Carrick wanted to go but only on his terms'. Yep a team player. Whatever I quote or didn't quote the result is the same.

Carrick wasn't picked and then said he didn't want to go. How could he know he was going to be a bit part player? The only logical conclusion is that Carrick himself believed he wasn't as good as Barry, Parker and Henderson because as it turns out he'd, as of now, be quite an important player.

Professional Griefer

Samich wrote: »

I hope we don't splash out like chelsea have. A cm like Asamoah (who is described as an Essien type) would do nicely. I wouldn't like us to to be spending bucket loads tbh.

I don't care if we do or not. Just as long as suitable players in the correct positions come in.

bucketybuck

Orando Broom wrote: »

Carrick wasn't picked and then said he didn't want to go. How could he know he was going to be a bit part player?

Is it not common knowledge now that Carrick effectively retired months ago, long before any squad was picked? Making your accusation totally without basis. (I know, I know, some people struggle with common knowledge)

Kerrydude1981

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Dg3Kdh_rtI

onemorechance

Swansea's assertion that Iceland midfielder Gylfi Sigurdsson has signed for the club wrong says Hoffenheim

By Graham Clutton 12:10PM BST 31 May 2012


Stumbling block: Gylfi Sigurdsson's permanent move to Swansea has hit the skids now that manager Brendan Rodgers has decided to join Liverpool Photo: GETTY IMAGES

A Swansea City statement earlier this week said the club was delighted to have agreed terms with the player and club following Sigurdsson's hugely successful loan spell last season.

It was believed the 22-year-old would be joining the Swans’ for a fee of £6.8million subject to a medical.

However, on the day that Brendan Rodgers is due to complete his move to Liverpool, the Bundesliga club has reacted angrily to the initial story coming out of south Wales, claiming that contracts have not been signed.
They told Telegraph Sport that Sigurdsson remains a Hoffenheim player and is due back in pre-season training next month.

Communications manager Holger Tromp said: “Since there has not been any contract written or even signed yet with Swansea, we need to still plan with Gylfi. He is a player with a regular contract in Hoffenheim and we expect him to be back in training on June 18th."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/swansea-city/9302658/

Liverpool appoint Rodgers
...

Swansea chairman Huw Jenkins has confirmed that the departing Rodgers will not be able to sign Swansea players for the next year, as part of an agreement.

...

Yahoo! EuroSport

If Sigurðsson is not a Swansea player then I expect that he is exempt from this agreement. Sigurðsson for < £10 million would be better than Modric @ £30 million, even Modric at < £10! :pac:

PhlegmyMoses

Orando Broom wrote: »

Sorry, I'll rephrase 'Carrick wanted to go but only on his terms'. Yep a team player. Whatever I quote or didn't quote the result is the same.

Carrick wasn't picked and then said he didn't want to go. How could he know he was going to be a bit part player? The only logical conclusion is that Carrick himself believed he wasn't as good as Barry, Parker and Henderson because as it turns out he'd, as of now, be quite an important player.

Where are you getting this from? Most sources reported that he had retired up to a year ago unless he was guaranteed game time.

Samich

Some mouth watering play in that vid :P

v3ttel

Let me explain why you are wrong.

Firstly:

Orando Broom wrote: »

I think it was a poor selection by Hodgson, Henderson over Carrick, but Carrick's reaction was petulant and unfortunately all too common a reaction for the modern footballer.

Let's ask Roy if he considered Carrick over Henderson on the stand by list.

I wouldn't dream of putting Michael Carrick on a standby list after he's made it clear in the past he doesn't want to be involved like that

I don't understand which part of that you don't get? It couldn't be clearer. He did not choose Henderson over Carrick, as Carrick told him, he didn't want to be a bit part player.

---

Secondly:

Orando Broom wrote: »

He wanted to go and wasn't picked then told anyone who'd listen he never wanted to go anways.

Again, I call bullsh!t. Let's ask the FA's spokesperson:

We were advised a few months ago that because of where he was in his career, that he wanted to step back from being called up and sitting on the subs bench. He will help in extreme situations

Not sure what part of that could possibly leave you in any doubt whatsoever.

I just don't understand why you have to blatantly make stuff up, and then have the cheek to call Carrick "pathetic" and compare him to a 7 year old. It is borderline trolling.

Orando Broom wrote: »

He wanted to go and wasn't picked then told anyone who'd listen he never wanted to go anways. I saw a seven year old do that once. It was pathetic.

Kylo Ren

Samich wrote: »

Some mouth watering play in that vid :P

G.K.

SAF on Will Keane: "I'm very, very disappointed for the lad. He was in the first team squad for next season." #MUFC

PhlegmyMoses

Jesus, Fergie going all Geoff Shreeves on Keane there. Here's what you could have won but for your weak cruciate.

Fenix

Means we'll probably sign a striker now though, Owen and Berba leaving, Kiko out on loan and probably not good enough, Keane out, the one sold...

BEBE!

Jimmy Iovine

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

Jesus, Fergie going all Geoff Shreeves on Keane there. Here's what you could have won but for your weak cruciate.

I don't think he has a weak cruciate as such. He was probably very unlucky in the way he turned. If the pressure was applied on another side of his knee then it's likely that he'd be alright now and just have a bit of bruising.

VW 1

bucketybuck wrote: »

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Yeah Rooney is superb #10

Although he is a great player, I don't think Rooney is as good a playmaker as he is a goalscorer. He does nice long range passes sure, but his percentage of incisive passes is not as good as people think.

Proof? Rooney had only 8 assists in all competitions last season. Silva had 14, Van Persie had 12, even Juan Mata had more with 15.

Rooney is a striker, playing deeper because United have nothing else there, but its not his best position. Tracking back and tackling is a bonus for a playmaker, but assists and creating chances are the bread and butter, and Rooney does not create as many as his peers.

He is a great goalscorer, and thats where United should use him.

I don't think you can judge Rooney's effectiveness in supply on assists alone though. We are quite unique in the way we play most games with out and out wingers and nobody really making runs from midfield into the box to score on a consisten basis.

It would be a lot easier for RVP Silva and Mata to make assists to midfielders who actually run into the box, or to players playing at the top of a 4-3-3 and looking always to score.

Rooney is unlike those in that when he receives the ball deep, he looks to spread it wide to a winger and then get into the box and get on the end of what he created, as opposed to looking for a killer ball to set someone up for a goal.

I would imagine Rooney has assisted a lot more assists than the three you mentioned above.

PhlegmyMoses

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

I don't think he has a weak cruciate as such. He was probably very unlucky in the way he turned. If the pressure was applied on another side of his knee then it's likely that he'd be alright now and just have a bit of bruising.

The weak cruciate part was tongue-in-cheek. Referencing Homer's post from earlier.

Pro. F

bucketybuck wrote: »

Although he is a great player, I don't think Rooney is as good a playmaker as he is a goalscorer. He does nice long range passes sure, but his percentage of incisive passes is not as good as people think.

Proof? Rooney had only 8 assists in all competitions last season. Silva had 14, Van Persie had 12, even Juan Mata had more with 15.

Rooney is a striker, playing deeper because United have nothing else there, but its not his best position. Tracking back and tackling is a bonus for a playmaker, but assists and creating chances are the bread and butter, and Rooney does not create as many as his peers.

He is a great goalscorer, and thats where United should use him.

I do agree that Rooney is more of a goal scorer than a creator, but to be fair to him those players all had more technically skilled and mobile midfields to work with. Imo
Rooney is very creative, only just below the likes of Mata, Silva and Kagawa, but the problems in our midfield limit and shape the attack.

Kagawa probably will be an improvement on Rooney in terms of playing clever through balls and that, but improving the central midfield would more thoroughly fix the lack of creativity through the middle imo. Look at how the team played when Cleverley and Anderson were starting together, two mobile CMs both with proper technical ability. I don't think the team during that spell would have been accused of lacking creativity through the middle. (I know the Anderson Cleverley pair isn't good enough defensively.)