Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

Pudsy33

Paul hit the nail on the head. Flexicon, a few totally new posters, like myself, are saying we see no clique.

DARK-KNIGHT

Simple if carrick isn't good enough for Europe then don't play him. Play
All our wingers in an attacking v formation??

s_carnage

Samich wrote: »

Anderson can do the Carrick job. He ain't a creative midfielder anyways that's for sure.

Really don't think Anderson has ever any hope of doing the Carrick job at a level anywhere near what Carrick did last season. All you need is to remember early on in the season last year he was playing there and although we created loads of chances it was the most open I've ever seen United

DARK-KNIGHT

KAGAWAAAAA

Pudsy33

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

KAGAWAAAAA

No we're talking

Copper_pipe

Id rather read endless pages if transfer rumours from the daily fail and discuss this clique, I see no clique

Al Capwned

From a Facebook fan page......

Lionel Messi - The White Bébé.....

:pac:

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

EDIT: And clearly I'm wrong on the pro f usless statement. Doesn't change my point though as in he still thinks Carrick isn't any good.

My view on Carrick is clearly more nuanced than you are trying to pretend. Stop misrepresenting my opinions please.

Blatter

So, COULD Bebe actually become decent player? Really surprised me by how well he played when he came on.

dahat

Blatter wrote: »

So, COULD Bebe actually become decent player? Really surprised me by how well he played when he came on.

If we knew nothing about him and he came from another club,the way he has played we would be raving even more about him!!
He is worth keeping at the club for League cup and such,plenty games to go round this season

DARK-KNIGHT

If Lucas mourn signs I might just cream my pants

I just don't want this to be another sneijder pile of **** that was too upsetting last summer damn you sneijder damn you to Dutch drug enduced hell

What happened to moutinho rumours? No truth in them?

Samich

Junior D wrote: »

If someone disagrees with an opinion, why wouldn't they try debate the reason instead of callin BS?
This is a discussion board after all

And then when you ask why you get such a grilling some other poster will come in

"Because it's BS"

sReq | uTeK

Samich wrote: »

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

Sometimes I think you're on crack, it's not far greater, clev and even ando showed in spurts last season that they MAY have the capability to be scholes esque add to that powell coming through there is ample time to wait and see if one of these can progress into that role without spending £35 million.

Carrick has NO replacement that can do his role, bar maybe Phil Jones who hasn't done it all that well in the few games it's been asked of him, Carrick is fine at what he does but hes approaching 32, there is no backup for him, his distribution of the ball in Europe is not what it is in the premiership, while I don't agree with all who say he's terrible under pressure he's just a tad limited and can't create the space he needs via quick turn/touch here or there.

So to answer your question, replacing someone who has NO backup in the team or replacing someone who can still cut it for half a season here or there with 3 possible stand in's...I know what I'd be choosing.

Also Carrick would still get game time, but in those big big European games where we need someone to come looking for the ball off the defence get a quick turn in and distribute it to kags / schooles, martinez is our man not modric.,

Cleverley, haven't seen any special passes from him yet. He plays lots of 10 yard passes.

Scholes is one of the best passers in the league, yet he's easier to replace than a defensive midfielder?

I'll stop now, no point in flogging a dead horse. Honestly think you must watch games with painted on eyeballs

DM_7

I like Powell

"It was great to get my first start and I want a bit more time to show people what I can do. It's a lot different to Crewe - they're in Swindon at an army camp and I'm coming here to China so it's ridiculous. I get on with most of them [team-mates] as they're a great bunch of lads and happy to be with them."

Schism

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

What happened to moutinho rumours? No truth in them?

Apparently Spurs are favourites to sign him, when Modric leaves.

Samich

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

If Lucas mourn signs I might just cream my pants

I just don't want this to be another sneijder pile of **** that was too upsetting last summer damn you sneijder damn you to Dutch drug enduced hell

What happened to moutinho rumours? No truth in them?

I don't think Sneijder was anywhere close to signing.

It's funny how last year Sneijder was gonna be the cure to our CM problems yet we've signed Kagawa and still people are complaining of the CM.

G.K.

Kagawa isn't a CM, for a start. He's an all out attacker.

Samich

G.K. wrote: »

Anderson is not a DM whatsoever.

Hmmmmmm.

Last season at the beginning of the season we played with no protection in front of the back 4 then? And people were saying we were playing great as if that was the way to go.

_blank_

G.K. wrote: »

Kagawa isn't a CM, for a start. He's an all out attacker.

neither is sneijder.

Kagawa is sneijder-esque in his positioning, although sneijder can play further back if needed, but usually doesn't.

Samich

G.K. wrote: »

Kagawa isn't a CM, for a start. He's an all out attacker.

Neither is Sneijder

G.K.

Samich wrote: »

Hmmmmmm.

Last season at the beginning of the season we played with no protection in front of the back 4 then? And people were saying we were playing great as if that was the way to go.

Does that make Anderson a DM? No.

Vertigo100

Felexicon wrote: »

The idea that a clique exists in this thread has been raised many times before.
It's always the same posters coming out and saying there is no clique. Infact you could argue that the issue they are most cliquey about is the fact that there is no clique

1st rule of clique club: don't talk about clique club

Blatter

Samich wrote: »

I don't think Sneijder was anywhere close to signing.

It's funny how last year Sneijder was gonna be the cure to our CM problems yet we've signed Kagawa and still people are complaining of the CM.

Sneijder is quite a different player to Kagawa tbf. He's far more proven in CM that Kagawa is.

G.K.

Des wrote: »

neither is sneijder.

Kagawa is sneijder-esque in his positioning, although sneijder can play further back if needed, but usually doesn't.

Samich wrote: »

Neither is Sneijder

I wasn't claiming that Sneijder is either, I know full well he plays further forward too.

I was merely addressing the Kagawa point Samich made - "we've signed Kagawa and still people are complaining of the CM."

Samich

G.K. wrote: »

Does that make Anderson a DM? No.

Seems people aren't as "knowledgable" as they thought they were then?

No protection for the back 4 and happy for it to be that way so?

Samich

Blatter wrote: »

Sneijder is quite a different player to Kagawa tbf. He's far more proven in CM that Kagawa is.

He's never played in CM and he wouldn't have been played in CM for us anyways.

G.K. wrote: »

I wasn't claiming that Sneijder is either, I know full well he plays further forward too.

I was merely addressing the Kagawa point Samich made - "we've signed Kagawa and still people are complaining of the CM."

You should quote the full post.

Pro. F

DM-ICE wrote: »

Pro F did say Carrick was a very poor midfield player at top european level. He didn't use the term useless footballer specifically.

I can see why Samich would take that as saying Carrick is useless within the confines of talking about United.

Its a minor misunderstanding imo.

Saying he is very poor for the top European level is very different to just saying he is a useless footballer. What is also important is that I have pretty much always given detailed explanation of my opinion and been prepared to discuss it. Samich claiming that I call Carrick a useless footballer and nobody says anything about it is a complete misrepresentation of what actually goes on in the thread. It's not a misunderstanding, it is a misrepresentation to try and back up his whining.

DARK-KNIGHT

I think kagawa is gonna be a beast for us!! Very creative would be very exciting to see moura there too what an attacking force we would be!!!

Anyone think we need to sell players? Wingers especially?? Could fund a world class CM??

Also still think if RVP wants united Rooney would or could become a fantastic cm player!! Guy has it all when it comes to football he really does

G.K.

Samich wrote: »

Seems people aren't as "knowledgable" as they thought they were then?

No protection for the back 4 and happy for it to be that way so?

You're oversimplifying things. People weren't happy at how open United were, which explains them looking for a more defensively solid player than the likes of Ando/Clev who is as capable as them in passing matters. Carrick isn't up to that because he doesn't pass well enough under pressure.

Hence people looking for players along the lines of Martinez, M'Vila, Busquets, Song, Lucas, Banega etc...

Blatter

Samich wrote: »

He's never played in CM and he wouldn't have been played in CM for us anyways.

I remember having this debate last Summer, and it turns out that Sneijder actually had plenty of experience playing in CM for Ajax, Real Madrid and Holland iirc.

DM_7

Pro. F wrote: »

Saying he is very poor for the top European level is very different to just saying he is a useless footballer. What is also important is that I have pretty much always given detailed explanation of my opinion and been prepared to discuss it. Samich claiming that I call Carrick a useless footballer and nobody says anything about it is a complete misrepresentation of what actually goes on in the thread. It's not a misunderstanding, it is a misrepresentation to try and back up his whining.

Its a misrepresentation based on a misunderstanding.

EDIT: I originally commented as I assumed Samich was taking the informal term of useless, as in not strong or weak. Saying Carrick is very poor is the same as saying he is weak. Informally used to call a guy very poor is very much like calling him useless.

You are right about the challenged bit, you are often challenged about your Carrick opinion and others also back you up.

Samich

Pro. F wrote: »

Saying he is very poor for the top European level is very different to just saying he is a useless footballer. What is also important is that I have pretty much always given detailed explanation of my opinion and been prepared to discuss it. Samich claiming that I call Carrick a useless footballer and nobody says anything about it is a complete misrepresentation of what actually goes on in the thread. It's not a misunderstanding, it is a misrepresentation to try and back up his whining.

It's funny how when someone challenges you on say, Carrick, you just keep going round saying the same thing. Oh but what happens when bateman gives his opinion that no one likes, ye challenge him, he goes round in circles.

Blatter

Also Samich, I find it funny that you can infer that you don't like to see posters representing their opinion as fact:

Samich wrote: »

Mitch is the one I enjoy reading posts of. He doesn't try to make other posters look stupid when disagreeing with them, he also doesn't make his posts sound like fact.

Yet you go ahead and do it yourself:

Samich wrote: »

He's never played in CM and he wouldn't have been played in CM for us anyways.

Pro. F

Junior D wrote: »

Around half way through the Euro's I made the suggestion that United should be looking at someone like Moutinho/Veloso as a step-up from Carrick, my opinion on that was attacked. I was told that I didn't know anything or obviously didn't watch enough football if that was my opinion.

Then for a while when Moutinho was linked with United, there was loads of people on here saying he was exactly the type of player they needed.

I just think that most of the people here that are quick to throw most others opinions that quick out the window are actually just sheep who follow others and probably know very little themselves

I remember that discussion you were having about Moutinho/Veloso. I think it was only Keane2047 that rubbished your opinion. All the others that were discussing it with you were just disagreeing with you iirc. The fact that when he was linked with United later and other posters were interested in him doesn't mean there are a bunch of sheep who are just following others. There are a lot of posters on this thread. You would need to show that specific people attacked your opinion on Moutinho and then changed there stance on him when United were linked. I very much doubt there were more than one or two who did that, if any. I think you might just be being a little over sensitive tbh. Everybody faces strong opposition to their views from time to time. It doesn't mean that the people opposing your views are all doing it out of herd mentality.

Samich

G.K. wrote: »

You're oversimplifying things. People weren't happy at how open United were, which explains them looking for a more defensively solid player than the likes of Ando/Clev who is as capable as them in passing matters. Carrick isn't up to that because he doesn't pass well enough under pressure.

Hence people looking for players along the lines of Martinez, M'Vila, Busquets, Song, Lucas, Banega etc...

Maybe, but they were creaming themselves over the football we played.

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

It's funny how when someone challenges you on say, Carrick, you just keep going round saying the same thing. Oh but what happens when bateman gives his opinion that no one likes, ye challenge him, he goes round in circles. TROLL

Bateman repeated what his own posts verbatim, ignored counter arguments and said things that were absolute nonsense. I don't do any of that.

DM_7

Samich wrote: »

It's funny how when someone challenges you on say, Carrick, you just keep going round saying the same thing. Oh but what happens when bateman gives his opinion that no one likes, ye challenge him, he goes round in circles. TROLL

No need for that now.

When Pro F is asked about his Carrick opinion at this stage its normally from a poster not already aware of his reasoning. Pro F tries to have a reasoned discussion about the topic and will actually answer any questions asked.

The De Gea stuff you talk about was laughable as it wasn't based on any of his attributes and the poster in question never, never answered any posts that didn't suit his argument, ignored counter arguments. He was regurgitating the same few lines over and over.

Completely different.

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

Maybe, but they were creaming themselves over the football we played.

You are still oversimplifying things.

Samich

G.K. wrote: »

You're oversimplifying things.

Pro. F wrote: »

You are still oversimplifying things.

Uncanny

G.K.

Samich wrote: »

Uncanny

Explain?

Samich

DM-ICE wrote: »

No need for that now.

When Pro F is asked about his Carrick opinion at this stage its normally from a poster not already aware of his reasoning. Pro F tries to have a reasoned discussion about the topic and will actually answer any questions asked.

The De Gea stuff you talk about was laughable as it wasn't based on any of his attributes and the poster in question never, never answered any posts that didn't suit his argument, ignored counter arguments. He was regurgitating the same few lines over and over.

Completely different.

Oh rly?

All I see from him is his "can't pass under pressure", "better alternatives to carrick" thing.

Magicmarker said to him that Fergie sees him day in, day out so knows more than him. Pro F says that can be said about anything. Basically rubbishing MM's post.

Also Bateman was shown the save v chelsea and said he gained a point v chelsea but doesn't make up against Blackburn etc. Which was true.

Samich

Samich wrote: »

G.K. wrote: »

You're oversimplifying things.

Pro. F wrote: »

You are still oversimplifying things.

Uncanny

Is it? Or are you consistently oversimplifying things?

Mitch Connor

Damn, we need more football games!

So, who has impressed over the 3 games?

For me, Wooton, Lingard and Kagawa have impressed me the most. Wooton looks like a solid defender - don't think he will make it for us, but solid enough and loves to tackle. Lingard has simply impressed me with his positioning, movement and intelligence - always looking to find a space to receive the ball in rather than remaining static, always look for players to to do that. Kagawa has similarly impressed me in terms of how he plays. I look forward to seeing him in a proper United team, with Rooney, Nani, Welbeck and others - those that will link with him the best imo.

Tunnicliffe is another I have enjoyed seeing on this trip - bags of energy and looks like he absolutely loves his time on the pitch for United. If United do not make a CM signing this summer, I do think he has a chance of making a role for himself. Combative, energetic and not half bad on the ball at all - he has a chance at United imo.

Would liked to have seen more of Petrucci - a silky smooth user of the ball, was a shame to see him played left today as it doesn't suit him at all.

Brady I am not sure about. He has looked good coming forward but then I would expect that from him, he is a left winger by trade. The level of opposition against him hasn't been great and he has still be caught out positionally quite a bit. I would also expect that of him, as it is not his natural position, so if there is a future for him there it will take time - but I would be weary of getting ahead of ourselves with him based on his offensive performances from LB against opposition a good deal below what we'd be facing regularly.

Pro. F

DM-ICE wrote: »

Its a misrepresentation based on a misunderstanding.

EDIT: I originally commented as I assumed Samich was taking the informal term of useless, as in not strong or weak. Saying Carrick is very poor is the same as saying he is weak. Informally used to call a guy very poor is very much like calling him useless.

You are right about the challenged bit, you are often challenged about your Carrick opinion and others also back you up.

I understand that it could be looked at as ''useless.'' But I responded to Samich directly two or three times in recent days to explain what I think about Carrick is not as simple as him being ''useless''. Samich ignored those explanations and persisted with claiming that I called Carrick useless. This is even more perverse when you consider how much text I have written about my opinion on Carrick on here. I think it is a deliberate misunderstanding from Samich to help support his argument that some posters can get away with saying anything. And if you read his posts he has these convenient for his argument misunderstandings very regularly.

Samich

Sacramento wrote: »

Is it? Or are you consistently oversimplifying things?

Quote me please.

Samich

@Pro F, how about I recommence by debate on Valencia? Can't be seen as trolling then as you've been on about Carrick for how many days now?

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

Oh rly?

All I see from him is his "can't pass under pressure", "better alternatives to carrick" thing.

That's all you see because that is all you want to see.

Samich wrote: »

Magicmarker said to him that Fergie sees him day in, day out so knows more than him. Pro F says that can be said about anything. Basically rubbishing MM's post.

It is true that that can be said about any player and if followed to it's logical conclusion would make any discussion of Fergie's decisions pointless.

Samich wrote: »

Also Bateman was shown the save v chelsea and said he gained a point v chelsea but doesn't make up against Blackburn etc. Which was true.

The fact that Bateman acknowledged one counter argument one time, does not change the fact that he ignored most of them most of the time.

It was also pointed out to Bateman that DDG earned more points than he cost us last year, so no that is not true.

G.K.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Tunnicliffe is another I have enjoyed seeing on this trip - bags of energy and looks like he absolutely loves his time on the pitch for United. If United do not make a CM signing this summer, I do think he has a chance of making a role for himself. Combative, energetic and not half bad on the ball at all - he has a chance at United imo.

Agreed, with no Fletcher (It seems) or Park there's more of a gap in the squad for someone in the energetic mould.

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

@Pro F, how about I recommence by debate on Valencia? Can't be seen as trolling then as you've been on about Carrick for how many days now?

Easily 1200+ days I would say.

It is the manner in which you conduct your debate which is the biggest factor in whether something is trolling or not, rather than the frequency.

DM_7

Pro. F wrote: »

I understand that it could be looked at as ''useless.'' But I responded to Samich directly two or three times in recent days to explain what I think about Carrick is not as simple as him being ''useless''. Samich ignored those explanations and persisted with claiming that I called Carrick useless. This is even more perverse when you consider how much text I have written about my opinion on Carrick on here. I think it is a deliberate misunderstanding from Samich to help support his argument that some posters can get away with saying anything. And if you read his posts he has these convenient for his argument misunderstandings very regularly.

I was trying to give him the benefit of the doubt (well my doubt) regarding the term useless being not good enough.

Wish I didn't now..........