Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

I don't think Busquets is amazing in possession, gives the ball to Xavi. Maybe you should concentrate more on Andersons lack of ability in possession, or Cleverley?

Busquets is great in possession. He did start off his career a little weak in that area imo, but he is now great with the ball at his feet. The fact that you doubt that is hardly surprising though.

Cleverley is fantastic in possession. To say that his ability in possession should be questioned over Carrick's is ridiculous.

I'm not too impressed by Anderson because I think he is lazy, inconsistent and a neither-nor type of CM who doesn't defend well enough and can't shoot, so I am not going to defend him too much. But when he is on his game he is very good in possession. Carrick's first touch and close control is never up to the standard I think should be demanded.

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

He gives the ball to Xavi, just like Carrick gives the ball to Scholes.

He does not play just like Carrick. Buesquets can play himself out of trouble no even when the opposition are right on top of him, his first touch and close control are exceptional. Carrick is the exact opposite of that.

Mitch Connor

what is odd about the CM issues - is that Fergie has acknowledged there is an issue in midfield. The problem seems to be that he thinks we need an absolutely world class player to solve it, or there is no point in buying anyone.

kryogen

Samich wrote: »

He gives the ball to Xavi, just like Carrick gives the ball to Scholes.

You don't watch him

To add to that, Xavi (I believe) has said that Sergio is the best one touch footballer he has ever seen

Samich

Pro. F wrote: »

Busquets is great in possession. He did start off his career a little weak in that area imo, but he is now great with the ball at his feet. The fact that you doubt that is hardly surprising though.

Cleverley is fantastic in possession. To say that his ability in possession should be questioned over Carrick's is ridiculous.

I'm not too impressed by Anderson because I think he is lazy, inconsistent and a neither-nor type of CM who doesn't defend well enough and can't shoot, so I am not going to defend him too much. But when he is on his game he is very good in possession. Carrick's first touch and close control is never up to the standard I think should be demanded.

Well considering he is the more defence minded of the 2 the close control and first touch shouldn't be the things he's judged on. He often intercepts passes, and does a good job defensively.

Not saying Carrick is the best midfielder ever, he's a good player.

I'm saying that if there was the choice of signing Fellaini, or Lucas & RvP I'd sign the latter.

Pro. F

DM-ICE wrote: »

I'm not debating Carricks ability with you, Firstly there is no point, secondly it wasn't the point I was making.

I was commenting on this:


You are really harsh on Carrick so I totally get how Samich would make the above comment when it comes to your comments about others being harsh on Rooney.

Pots and Kettles.

EDIT: I think you are incredibly Harsh on Carrick, I actually agree that others are harsh on Rooney.

But why should I care? I mean that honestly. Not trying to be a dick.

I think the people I am disagreeing with about Carrick and Rooney are wrong.

What Samich said is totally meaningless. Because I say people are wrong in their criticisms of Rooney I should think that I am wrong in my criticisms of Carrick?

kryogen

Mitch Connor wrote: »

what is odd about the CM issues - is that Fergie has acknowledged there is an issue in midfield. The problem seems to be that he thinks we need an absolutely world class player to solve it, or there is no point in buying anyone.

I think it is a little bit of GSPfan said, I think he has and has had targets, but for whatever reason he has not managed to get them in, the sad fact is that Manchester United does not have the pulling power of Madrid or Barca for non English players and cannot compete financially at the moment with the likes of City etc either.

Kagawa expressed a desire to play for United, we managed to get him. The best prospects from South America and Spain, Portugal etc tend to idolise Madrid and Barca and try to get to play for them, the Germans go to Munich and so on, if there were better English central midfielders there we would see one of them at the club imo.

As you say though, the player does not need to be world class to help improve the team. Surely there are some available that are a level below world class

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

Well considering he is the more defence minded of the 2 the close control and first touch shouldn't be the things he's judged on. He often intercepts passes, and does a good job defensively.

Not saying Carrick is the best midfielder ever, he's a good player.

I'm saying that if there was the choice of signing Fellaini, or Lucas & RvP I'd sign the latter.

Carrick is not more defence minded than Busquets.

Even if Carrick was more defensively minded, that still wouldn't excuse his problems on the ball (as I see them). There is a minimum standard of skill on the ball required for defensive central midfielders. Imo Carrick doesn't meat that standard. No amount of defensive ability can make up for that shortfall in ability on the ball.

Samich

Pro. F wrote: »

But why should I care? I mean that honestly. Not trying to be a dick.

I think the people I am disagreeing with about Carrick and Rooney are wrong.

What Samich said is totally meaningless. Because I say people are wrong in their criticisms of Rooney I should think that I am wrong in my criticisms of Carrick?

Calling a player who has played 180 times for Utd a useless footballer, and then people giving out about Rooney after some poor performances and calling it harsh is hypocritical.

Pro. F

Mitch Connor wrote: »

what is odd about the CM issues - is that Fergie has acknowledged there is an issue in midfield. The problem seems to be that he thinks we need an absolutely world class player to solve it, or there is no point in buying anyone.

This is true.

Do we have an idea now how much was bid for Lucas and RVP. If that total is over £25m it really is strange that Fergie hasn't put in the €32m bid required for Martinez. Because he is a world class CM who seems to be available and those two forwards aren't really needed.

Al Capwned

Liam O wrote: »

Tbh, I'd rather have an 18 year old Rooney and a 19 year old Ronaldo again than have 26 year old Rooney and 28 year old RVP if it was my team. I think a lot of fans (especially United ones) sometimes fail to look to the future and think any season without silverware is a complete disaster.

I'd gladly take 3 years with no silverware if it meant coming out of the other end with a world class team. Not many would agree with me but as a United fan there have been a lot of times that we really shouldn't have had silverware in seasons and it's been pulled out of the bag and I feel satisfied by that while obviously craving immediate success the future years in the fast approaching post Fergie era is more of a concern imo.

Yeah, but are you not saying you'd take Rooney and Ronaldo at 18 or 19 based on fulfilled potential. There are plenty of other examples of players that had massive potential and huge hype around them that failed to deliver at the top level. Freddy Adu, David Bentley just two off top of my head.

I think the reason Rooney and Ronaldo could have been incorporated into the team at such a young age was that there was established quality and stacks of experience already in the side - van Nistelrooy, Scholes, Keane et at.

I've no problem with playing youth, actually love to see it, but bring them in alongside the more experienced players, not instead of them.

And as for having three trophyless years, to develop a world class team - Why can we not build a world class team, and win trophies at the same time - they should not be mutually exclusive.

Jimmy Iovine

Samich wrote: »

The team who wins is the team who scores more goals than the other team. Our defence is good, so that leaves our attackers.

Midfield doesn't win the game, it's what you do with the ball. Also counter attack is where the most danger is so midfield is bypassed generally here anyways.

Post of the year so far for me.

A stunningly inept analysis of the game of football.

kryogen

Pro. F wrote: »

This is true.

Do we have an idea now how much was bid for Lucas and RVP. If that total is over £25m it really is strange that Fergie hasn't put in the €32m bid required for Martinez. Because he is a world class CM who seems to be available and those two forwards aren't really needed.

I think we need to be open to the possibility that feelers were put out for him, or others like him, and were rebuffed by the player himself. He has rejected a move to Munich also this summer, he released a statement saying he would be staying at Bilbao instead

Giggsy11

This is what SAF said about CM issues:

Scholes and Giggs will obviously play their part and Tom Cleverley hopefully, as well as Anderson if he keeps fit. They will all play a part but for me Carrick is the key player. But we do have an issue in central midfield, there is no doubt about that because getting a Scholes or a Carrick is very difficult these days. Carrick has always had slow starts (to a season). He denies this, he doesn’t think that’s true, but I do. By the time he gets to December he starts playing consistently well, but he had a really good end to last season, so he’s the key to us

Getting Scholes maybe near impossible but we can get players who will improve us.

Also Carrick is better player than ProF gives credit for, he is no way poor player but at the same time we can always improve on what we have, especially in the CM dept.

I always feel issue is not with Carrick, it is more to do with his partner and also our tactics. 4-4-2 is outdated and against majority of big teams it will be 2 vs 3 and it's not surprising we lose midfield battle when our CMs are outnumbered. Not saying playing 3 will make Carrick a better player or something near to that, but at least we can have 2 better players who are good on the ball which defines Carrick role clearly.

Al Capwned

Samich wrote: »

It doesn't matter if he wasn't the worst, he's supposedly one of the best players in the world on 200k a week.

You'd surely expect better performances from him than someone on less than half his wages.

This post reminds me of my father at the only time I want to do physical harm to him. ie when he comes out with pearlers like "How can that fella miss a penalty when he's on that much money?" or "100 grand a week and he cant pass the ball to a team-mate!"

It has to be the most annoying thing he says, and by god he says it regularly. Gotten to the stage that I just ignore him and say nothing when he comes out with it....

And no matter how many times I argue that the amount of money in a lad's bank account has nothing to do with how he performs on the field, he just wont accept it.....


Edit - Actually, Dad is that you????

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

Calling a player who has played 180 times for Utd a useless footballer, and then people giving out about Rooney after some poor performances and calling it harsh is hypocritical.

I clarified to you the other day what my stance is on Carrick. As I said, I have always maintained that he is a limited player who is good at defending, but poor in possession. As I said the other day, if I have exaggerated and called him useless sometimes it is clearly not my view on him, because I have expressed my true, more balanced view countless times. Stop pretending that I am saying he is a useless footballer. Stop misrepresenting what I say about Carrick.

Lordgoat tried to portray that Rooney had had a poor season and that it wouldn't be a big loss if he was sold. That is not the same as "people giving out about Rooney after some poor performances".

_blank_

Macca07 wrote: »

and bidding for RvP to p*ss off City.

Do people think this is the kind of behaviour Ferguson and the Glazers would engage in, or is it bitter fantasy?

Do people actually think United plc go to the bother of faxing a bid to Arsenal, only to then turn around if the bid is accepted and say "lol jk, we only sent that fax to annoy city, omglawlz ur so dumb init".

a. how would it annoy city

b. it would actually piss off Arsenal, for no reason, and if United wanted to do actual business with them in the future Arsenal would tell United to **** the fck off.

killwill

Samich wrote: »

Calling a player who has played 180 times for Utd a useless footballer, and then people giving out about Rooney after some poor performances and calling it harsh is hypocritical.

Whilst I totally disagree with Prof about Carrick, the above is definitely not hypocritical.

DM_7

Pro. F wrote: »

But why should I care? I mean that honestly. Not trying to be a dick.

I think the people I am disagreeing with about Carrick and Rooney are wrong.

What Samich said is totally meaningless. Because I say people are wrong in their criticisms of Rooney I should think that I am wrong in my criticisms of Carrick?

Nope,

If you can't see the inconsistency between you saying posters with high expectations of Rooney are harsh while repeatedly posting about your own high expectations of Carrick then fair enough.

I really wasn't trying to make a big issue of it since I actually agree with you on Rooney. Only saying Samich actually had a point when he linked your posts on the two issues.

Pro. F

kryogen wrote: »

I think we need to be open to the possibility that feelers were put out for him, or others like him, and were rebuffed by the player himself. He has rejected a move to Munich also this summer, he released a statement saying he would be staying at Bilbao instead

I thought Bayern failed to match the €32m required and Bilbao said they wouldn't accept any less. Then Martinez's statement came after that.

I find it hard to believe that feelers, which is actually illegal tapping up (or is that allowed when it is a team in another country?), were put out for Martinez. There have been good central midfielders who would improve our team available over the last few years and we've never heard any inkling of any bid. I think it is more likely that we just aren't interested rather than that they are turning us down before we bid.

Jax Teller

Bayern won't pay over €25 million for him .

Pro. F

DM-ICE wrote: »

Nope,

If you can't see the inconsistency between you saying posters with high expectations of Rooney are harsh while repeatedly posting about your own high expectations of Carrick then fair enough.


For hat its worth I 100% agree with the below as it is considered, balanced and sensible.



I really wasn't trying to make a big issue of it since I actually agree with you on Rooney. Only saying Samich actually had a point when he linked your posts on the two issues.

I think you are getting too hung up on the word "harsh". I think some posters are wrong about Rooney and rate his performances too lowly. And I think some posters are wrong about Carrick and rate his performances too highly. It's not inconsistent in the slightest to have different disagreements about different players.

Giggsy11

Giggsy11 wrote: »

This is what SAF said about CM issues:



Getting Scholes maybe near impossible but we can get players who will improve us.

Also Carrick is better player than ProF gives credit for, he is no way poor player but at the same time we can always improve on what we have, especially in the CM dept.

I always feel issue is not with Carrick, it is more to do with his partner and also our tactics. 4-4-2 is outdated and against majority of big teams it will be 2 vs 3 and it's not surprising we lose midfield battle when our CMs are outnumbered. Not saying playing 3 will make Carrick a better player or something near to that, but at least we can have 2 better players who are good on the ball which defines Carrick role clearly.

I think there is an issue with Carrick in that he is limited in specific ways, ways in which a CM like him can be rendered ineffective for an entire match. I think we can all agree he isn't world class, he can certainly do a job against certain opposition. However he just is not quick enough to turn on the ball to create space for himself to make that killer ball when he's under pressure.

Some of the bigger teams that have the resources in their team to at least keep an eye on our danger men also know exactly how to deal with Carrick most of the time. Given space he can hurt any team, once closed down he really does go missing completely. I really feel that if he was not so limited in these ways we would have fared a lot better in a good few games last season. Scholes is a good one to compare him to as he can create space for himself, it's how he runs on to the ball combined with his quick thinking and movement that set him apart from what Carrick can't do. Scholes just can't do it for more than 60 minutes anymore.

Ferguson knows we need to replace Scholes, sure he said it himself! But I do struggle to think who we should replace him with that we could realistically have a chance of getting.

Mitch Connor

alproctor wrote: »

This post reminds me of my father at the only time I want to do physical harm to him. ie when he comes out with pearlers like "How can that fella miss a penalty when he's on that much money?" or "100 grand a week and he cant pass the ball to a team-mate!"

It has to be the most annoying thing he says, and by god he says it regularly. Gotten to the stage that I just ignore him and say nothing when he comes out with it....

And no matter how many times I argue that the amount of money in a lad's bank account has nothing to do with how he performs on the field, he just wont accept it.....


Edit - Actually, Dad is that you????

Kinda disagree with you on this.

There are basic/standard skills in football, and the higher up the ladder you go the more proficient players should be in utilizing those skills. At the top end of the game, and the top end players specifically, there should be far less screw ups in basic football skills.

It isn't that the 180k a week should make him a better footballer - being 'worth' that 180k a week should mean, for example, hitting the top corner from 12 yards or beating the first man on a corner is a fairly easy thing for you to do. The better you are the less acceptable it is to be failing at the fundamentals of the game, imo.

DM_7

Giggsy11 wrote: »

This is what SAF said about CM issues:

Getting Scholes maybe near impossible but we can get players who will improve us.

Also Carrick is better player than ProF gives credit for, he is no way poor player but at the same time we can always improve on what we have, especially in the CM dept.

I always feel issue is not with Carrick, it is more to do with his partner and also our tactics. 4-4-2 is outdated and against majority of big teams it will be 2 vs 3 and it's not surprising we lose midfield battle when our CMs are outnumbered. Not saying playing 3 will make Carrick a better player or something near to that, but at least we can have 2 better players who are good on the ball which defines Carrick role clearly.

100% agree with the above.

A good summary of real problems and solutions that United could undertake to use what we have rather than buy x or y.

kryogen

Pro. F wrote: »

I thought Bayern failed to match the €32m required and Bilbao said they wouldn't except any less. Then Martinez's statement came after that.

I find it hard to believe that feelers, which is actually illegal tapping up (or is that allowed when it is a team in another country?), were put out for Martinez. There have been good central midfielders who would improve our team available over the last few years and we've never heard any inkling of any bid. I think it is more likely that we just aren't interested rather than that they are turning us down before we bid.

I don't want to believe that though

I don't think we had a shot at Sahin once Madrid announced interest, Vidal who knows? Martinez, I thought Munich had agreed a fee with the club, could be wrong of course.

Afaik its only tapping up in England yeah, open to correction on that of course. We are meeting we Lucas reps though without having agreed a transfer with the club yet, could have done the same with Martinez is all I was saying.

There have been so many decent players move over the last few years that it is of course silly of me to think that none of them wanted to come to United, but the alternative to it being a possibility is that Fergie and the scouts at United (who have a great record overall) are completely unaware of so many players that are widely discussed on fan boards!

Also the club has a history of keeping bids under wraps until the deal is done anyway, so us not hearing about bids doesnt mean there have been none either

Pro. F

Des wrote: »

Do people think this is the kind of behaviour Ferguson and the Glazers would engage in, or is it bitter fantasy?

Do people actually think United plc go to the bother of faxing a bid to Arsenal, only to then turn around if the bid is accepted and say "lol jk, we only sent that fax to annoy city, omglawlz ur so dumb init".

a. how would it annoy city

b. it would actually piss off Arsenal, for no reason, and if United wanted to do actual business with them in the future Arsenal would tell United to **** the fck off.

I agree.

I had been thinking that maybe United would low-ball Arsenal to make sure that City don't get him for a ridiculous price. But now you say it, there's probably too much of a risk there that Arsenal might accept and then United would have to withdraw and end up looking like unprofessional idiots.

lordgoat

Samich wrote: »

I don't think Busquets is amazing in possession, gives the ball to Xavi. Maybe you should concentrate more on Andersons lack of ability in possession, or Cleverley?

Wow. The only thing I think you know about Busquets is his name.

What a truly ignorant post.


Busquets is the player I'd love us to sign most.

kryogen

Well to go full on nuts about that, the club wouldnt have to pull out per se, just refuse to meet Van Persies demands That way it would have been a problem with the player and not Arsenal

I don't think that is happening of course.

Mitch Connor

DM-ICE wrote: »

100% agree with the above.

A good summary of real problems and solutions that United could undertake to use what we have rather than buy x or y.

when we had Ronaldo in our team, we were scary good at times but our midfield was simply a younger version of what we have now. For me the issue is that Ronaldo did so much of the attacking work himself, the midfield was able to sit deeper and maintain a solid base for Ronaldo (and Rooney/Tevez) to work from. When we lost Ronaldo, we lost that offensive out ball and the midfield has had to step up and contribute to the attack more. Valencia has been superb for us, but he doesn't do it on his own like Ronaldo used to. This has opened up the midfield pairing more, which provides space in behind and makes us less solid.

If we were to sign Lucas, for example, I think we could be seeing Fergie going back to the Ronaldo/solid midfield tactics.

I reckon he will look to Carrick and one other (anderson, scholes, cleverley, jones) to sit and protect the centre of the pitch while 3 from Valencia, Kagawa, Nani, Young and Lucas set about the opposition, supporting Rooney.

If we were to sign RVP as well.... then I have no idea what the plan is as the squad balance would be way off imo!

Will I Amnt

Can anyone be so kind as to fill me in on the pre-season game on Saturday please??
Who were we playing?what score?any standout performances?

Away on holiday at the moment and the villa is in the middle of nowhere,only got hooked up with a working sim card today and internet coverage is piss poor

Giggsy11

Sacramento wrote: »

I think there is an issue with Carrick in that he is limited in specific ways, ways in which a CM like him can be rendered ineffective for an entire match. I think we can all agree he isn't world class, he can certainly do a job against certain opposition. However he just is not quick enough to turn on the ball to create space for himself to make that killer ball when he's under pressure.

Some of the bigger teams that have the resources in their team to at least keep an eye on our danger men also know exactly how to deal with Carrick most of the time. Given space he can hurt any team, once closed down he really does go missing completely. I really feel that if he was not so limited in these ways we would have fared a lot better in a good few games last season. Scholes is a good one to compare him to as he can create space for himself, it's how he runs on to the ball combined with his quick thinking and movement that set him apart from what Carrick can't do. Scholes just can't do it for more than 60 minutes anymore.

Ferguson knows we need to replace Scholes, sure he said it himself! But I do struggle to think who we should replace him with that we could realistically have a chance of getting.

I agree with what you are saying, Carrick is bit limited, he is ineffective when not given space and he doesn't have Scholes like brain to make space for himself or even close control like Scholes.

But he is very good reader of the game, defensively good. That's why I said he should be played with other 2 midfielders who are good on the ball so that his weakness will be covered by other 2 players and the defensive liability of those players will be covered by Carrick (Working as a team).

Our problem is not even Carrick IMO. It is the one to partner him. If we can get better than Carrick (which can be done) then fine, or first priority should be sign good CM to play alongside Carrick.

Al Capwned

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Kinda disagree with you on this.

There are basic/standard skills in football, and the higher up the ladder you go the more proficient players should be in utilizing those skills. At the top end of the game, and the top end players specifically, there should be far less screw ups in basic football skills.

It isn't that the 180k a week should make him a better footballer - being 'worth' that 180k a week should mean, for example, hitting the top corner from 12 yards or beating the first man on a corner is a fairly easy thing for you to do. The better you are the less acceptable it is to be failing at the fundamentals of the game, imo.

Yeah, I get what you're saying - That the fact that he's getting 180k a week makes him a good footballer, and that a good footballer should be able to score a pen. And I agree with you there.

I think what some posters, and my father , are saying is that Rooney (for example) shouldn't be missing penalties, or should be able to find a teammate with a 10 yard pass, because of the money they receive, and not because of how good a footballer they are.

Using that argument means that Paul Green is a better footballer than Paul McGrath was, because he earns/earned more money.

Dunno if i've explained myself very clearly there, but you get what I mean.

Hopefully.

Samich

Ha, any fool can see we struggle when Scholes doesn't play. We don't struggle because Carrick plays.

The problem is replacing Scholes, not Carrick.

Mars Bar

cambo2008 wrote: »

Away on holiday at the moment and the villa is in the middle of nowhere,only got hooked up with a working sim card today and internet coverage is piss poor

You're on holiday! Why would you want to be on the soccer forum of boards on holiday?!

Enjoy it!

Mitch Connor

It would make no sense for United to bid for RVP if they didn't actually want him.

Who cares if City pay a few million more as a result; anyone think that would affect City's plans, at all?

If he ends up at City, it will be another player United wanted, that City will have beaten them to. Why would United want to create such a scenario? How is helping City display there financial might good for United?

As for United placing a bid that was rejected, so did City and Juve, apparently. Who seriously thinks United would immediately go to there top price for RVP, or immediately go with the figure they reckon Arsenal will accept? Seriously? Our first bid was always going to be low and always going to be rejected; likely there will be more bids, from all interested parties.

This isn't to say we are certainly going to get him - he could well end up at City and we end up with egg on our faces from a failed transfer persuit, again, but that isn't the intention of United/Fergie imo. It would be astonishingly crazy if it was.

Samich

alproctor wrote: »

Yeah, I get what you're saying - That the fact that he's getting 180k a week makes him a good footballer, and that a good footballer should be able to score a pen. And I agree with you there.

I think what some posters, and my father , are saying is that Rooney (for example) shouldn't be missing penalties, or should be able to find a teammate with a 10 yard pass, because of the money they receive, and not because of how good a footballer they are.

Using that argument means that Paul Green is a better footballer than Paul McGrath was, because he earns/earned more money.

Dunno if i've explained myself very clearly there, but you get what I mean.

Hopefully.

So you're saying Rooney shouldn't be able to find a team mate with a pass 10 yards away?

kryogen

Samich wrote: »

Ha, any fool can see we struggle when Scholes doesn't play. We don't struggle because Carrick plays.

The problem is replacing Scholes, not Carrick.

We did not struggle without Scholes offensively until the injuries came about, and we struggled defensively without Carrick at the start of the season. So open it was not funny, but so good going forward were able to beat teams 8-2

Samich

kryogen wrote: »

We did not struggle without Scholes offensively until the injuries came about, and we struggled defensively without Carrick at the start of the season. So open it was not funny, but so good going forward were able to beat teams 8-2

The games Scholes didn't play after his return were the games we played bad.

i.e Wigan

Carrick is not the problem, replacing Scholes is.

Pro. F

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Also Carrick is better player than ProF gives credit for, he is no way poor player but at the same time we can always improve on what we have, especially in the CM dept.

I always feel issue is not with Carrick, it is more to do with his partner and also our tactics. 4-4-2 is outdated and against majority of big teams it will be 2 vs 3 and it's not surprising we lose midfield battle when our CMs are outnumbered. Not saying playing 3 will make Carrick a better player or something near to that, but at least we can have 2 better players who are good on the ball which defines Carrick role clearly.

Three things count against that theory imo.

Firstly, we have palyed 451 in big games plenty of times and still been poor at keeping and using possession.

Secondly, Rooney playing the withdrawn role in a 4411 is only very marginally different from most 451s and most ACMs. I know Rooney is not great at beating defenders around the edge of the box and often can't come up with a killer through ball, but he still shows excellently for the midfield and helps a lot in the general keep ball passing and moving type of play and his defensive work is very good. I really don't think United are as disadvantaged by the 4411 match-up to 451 as might be first thought.

Finally, when Anderson and Cleverley played in together in the 4411 the team were transformed into a slick passing and quick moving joy to watch. I know it was only a few games, but one of those games was against City. And more importantly it was a complete transformation in the ability of the team to keep and use the ball, not just a slight improvement.

kryogen

Samich wrote: »

So you're saying Rooney shouldn't be able to find a team mate with a pass 10 yards away?

You know damn well that is not what he is saying

DM_7

Mitch Connor wrote: »

when we had Ronaldo in our team, we were scary good at times but our midfield was simply a younger version of what we have now. For me the issue is that Ronaldo did so much of the attacking work himself, the midfield was able to sit deeper and maintain a solid base for Ronaldo (and Rooney/Tevez) to work from. When we lost Ronaldo, we lost that offensive out ball and the midfield has had to step up and contribute to the attack more. Valencia has been superb for us, but he doesn't do it on his own like Ronaldo used to. This has opened up the midfield pairing more, which provides space in behind and makes us less solid.

If we were to sign Lucas, for example, I think we could be seeing Fergie going back to the Ronaldo/solid midfield tactics.

I reckon he will look to Carrick and one other (anderson, scholes, cleverley, jones) to sit and protect the centre of the pitch while 3 from Valencia, Kagawa, Nani, Young and Lucas set about the opposition, supporting Rooney.

If we were to sign RVP as well.... then I have no idea what the plan is as the squad balance would be way off imo!

Well I meant I agreed with Giggsy11s approach by finding a way to use what we have rather than it being the only way. I also agreed with the idea of getting Carrick some help so he will be better.

I wouldn't say put two players with Carrick, but I would be trying to get another player in the Central area for him to move the ball towards quickly.

I would consider a player like Kagawa to be a third but advanced midfield player at times.

I would agree with the solid midfield approach, Kagawa or Valencia can help out at times leaving two players supporting Rooney, at others they will be more advanced meaning three support him.

Pj!

Mitch Connor wrote: »

It would make no sense for United to bid for RVP if they didn't actually want him.
If they're bidding they want him. Why would anyone think otherwise?

Who cares if City pay a few million more as a result; anyone think that would affect City's plans, at all?
What? Everyone bidding wants him.

If he ends up at City, it will be another player United wanted, that City will have beaten them to. Why would United want to create such a scenario? How is helping City display there financial might good for United?
United are trying to get the player. Are they supposed to avoid competing with City in the transfer market? Crazy.

As for United placing a bid that was rejected, so did City and Juve, apparently. Who seriously thinks United would immediately go to there top price for RVP, or immediately go with the figure they reckon Arsenal will accept? Seriously? Our first bid was always going to be low and always going to be rejected; likely there will be more bids, from all interested parties.
Obviously enough

This isn't to say we are certainly going to get him - he could well end up at City and we end up with egg on our faces from a failed transfer persuit, again, but that isn't the intention of United/Fergie imo. It would be astonishingly crazy if it was.
What??

.

kryogen

Samich wrote: »

The games Scholes didn't play after his return were the games we played bad.

i.e Wigan

Carrick is not the problem, replacing Scholes is.

Scholes played against Everton. In your strange way of looking at things does that not prove he is a problem too?

Scholes played against Bilbao if I am not mistaken, Scholes played against City.

Were they all great performances?

Will I Amnt

Mars Bar wrote: »

You're on holiday! Why would you want to be on the soccer forum of boards on holiday?!

Enjoy it!

I don't really,just wanted to know how the game went and thought this the easiest way to find out
I was hoping to stream it through the hotspot on the phone but network is terrible,lucky to load this page.
And cheers,I'm very much enjoying it.

Al Capwned

Samich wrote: »

So you're saying Rooney shouldn't be able to find a team mate with a pass 10 yards away?

Em.....

Not being smart, but please try to read that again.

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

Ha, any fool can see we struggle when Scholes doesn't play. We don't struggle because Carrick plays.

The problem is replacing Scholes, not Carrick.

Nobody is denying that Scholes needs replacing. I would say that Cleverley is more than good enough to step up if he stays fit. Some disagree, but we all agree that relying on Scholes is a problem.

The Carrick discussion is different. We struggle when Scholes doesn't play, we also struggle when Scholes does play and we are up against opposition that press high up the pitch. The team has been poor at keeping and using the ball for years, not just since Scholes became super old.

MagicMarker

This time in 4 weeks we'll all be discussing the line up against Everton.

Samich

kryogen wrote: »

Scholes played against Everton. In your strange way of looking at things does that not prove he is a problem too?

Scholes played against Bilbao if I am not mistaken, Scholes played against City.

Were they all great performances?

Weren't there some stats showing the amount of games we won with Scholes in the team? Think the win % was higher with Scholes in the side.

kryogen

Pj! wrote: »

.

Its possible you may have misunderstood what Mitch said?