Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread - 2013/14 Mod warning post #718

Your Airbag

Mars Bar wrote: »

I don't think too much of Cleverley but this is bang on, Pro. F. He's in a perfect position The only problem there was our two lines of four were sitting really deep.

He's not. He can't even get a tackle off from where he was, not even a standing foot tackle in, he has to sprint in for a reason. He gets turned twice, almost ends up on his arse and the player gets his shot off and it results in a goal. Sandro was afforded time and space to do all of this and breezed past him with ease. Thats not even close to being in the perfect position.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

disagree.

We do need to sort out the midfield, but I think Cleverley will remain as a good squad player.

New Signing, New Signing, Fellaini, Carrick, Cleverley.

That would be my 5 CM options, with Jones being a defender, Giggs surely having to retire at some point, and Anderson sold.

Spot on, Clev is a "play him only you must" player ie everyone else is injured, suspended or its the Carling Cup. We haven't the right amount of players in MF and due to injuries and not bringing in players for 3 seasons Clev is getting game time.

kryogen wrote: »

Think about it for a while, who do you think could be the 4th or 5th choice central midfielder in a team? that would be significantly better then Cleverley, and who would also be happy to be the 4th or 5th choice central midfielder.

Players like Cleverley are useful to have around, I have no idea how people don't see that kind of stuff. The O Sheas, the Fletchers, the Cleverleys and the P Nevilles of this world are vital to title winning squads

Come in, do a job, don't rock the boat when they are benched.

Agreed that he is squad material and has a good attitude. The problem is we are short in MF so Clev is starting important games like Sundays so we naturally discuss him on what we see and compare him to the players who should be ahead of him.

I don't think anyone wants him gone but not many would be sad to see him go. Its having him around the first team that is the issue but injuries and other factors mean he is which is not ideal because he's not good enough.

Mars Bar

Your Airbag wrote: »

He's not. He can't even get a tackle off from where he was,

It's not the GAA! We're not man marking.

It's as simple as pressure, cover and balance. The player on the ball is being pressed and Clev is providing the cover by being between the ball and the goal. Sandro received the ball and Clev correctly became the pressure but got turned inside out by Sandro's movement and pretty decent ball manipulation. Then he unluckily lost his footing.

He was in the correct position.

Your Airbag

Mars Bar wrote: »

It's not the GAA! We're not man marking.

It's as simple as pressure, cover and balance. The player on the ball is being pressed and Clev is providing the cover by being between the ball and the goal. Sandro received the ball and Clev correctly became the pressure but got turned inside out by Sandro's movement and pretty decent ball manipulation. Then he unluckily lost his footing.

He was in the correct position.

I realise its not the GAA thanks. I never said he needed to man mark either.

He should have been much closer and would have not had to rush as hard and be as easily turned. He doesn't need to in top of him but close enough so Sandor cant get up the speed to make the run and movement he did, twice.

Ball manipulation? Sandro shifted direction, nothing special. Clev lost his footing because he was playing catch up from the start after affording Sandro too much room to do as he pleased.

If Clev is giving him half that space in the pic it would have been a start.

Agueroooo

Mars Bar wrote: »

It's not the GAA! We're not man marking.

It's as simple as pressure, cover and balance. The player on the ball is being pressed and Clev is providing the cover by being between the ball and the goal. Sandro received the ball and Clev correctly became the pressure but got turned inside out by Sandro's movement and pretty decent ball manipulation. Then he unluckily lost his footing.

He was in the correct position.

Yes and no.

I wouldn't put any blame on Cleverly for the second tackle as Sandros strike top drawer, but the problem was Cleverly showed him on the inside on the first tackle ( just inside the halfway)and if he had kept Sandro on the outside then he probably would have turned out, or passed sidwards.

By showing Sandro on the inside he got turned easily and it was playing catchup there after.
But its hard to put too much blame when a player strikes an unsavable shot like that.

lordgoat

Agueroooo wrote: »

Yes and no.

I wouldn't put any blame on Cleverly for the second tackle as Sandros strike top drawer, but the problem was Cleverly showed him on the inside on the first tackle ( just inside the halfway)and if he had kept Sandro on the outside then he probably would have turned out, or passed sidwards.

By showing Sandro on the inside he got turned easily and it was playing catchup there after.
But its hard to put too much blame when a player strikes an unsavable shot like that.

His mistake was not pushing him onto his left. Or keeping him on his left. He would only hot that from there on his right foot. He should have known this.

His starting position is fine IMO. If he pushes on he leaves a huge gap and a one-two pass takes him and jones out of the game.

Also whatever else Carrick > Clevs. It's not even open for debate.

Oranage2

Looking at the midfield all in a straight enough line most likely set up there to help the centre back from a through ball or to pick up the ball from a headed clearance.

Can't fault his position really. He should have just ran out and held his position, a lot of united players back, committing himself was silly, still young so he should sort that side of his game out.

Your Airbag

Ogden's First January Piece: Regarding Targets and Contracts

Reckons we could go in for Baines, Herrera and Gundoganin.

We will offer Vidic, Evra, Jones and DDG new deals. Rio and Giggs will wait until the end of the season before talks begin.

Most interestingly we will wait until the windows closes before opening contract talks with Rooney. Maybe Moyes wants to see will he push for a move. It will be interesting to see if another team comes in for Rooney and any movements he will make in January if any.

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

1. I agree that he has been on par with our other midfielders this season in terms of passing stats but that is not the only criteria they need to be judged on, also Carrick & Fellaini are not in great form. Cleverly always has a high % of completed passes per match. On Avg after 10 matches this season his pass completion rate is 88% compared to Carricks 86% and Fellaini's 87% (after 7 matches) so he is on par for one stat.

But a pass completion stat does not tell the whole story for a MF player. He had the most forward passes in the final third you say. With the ball in the final third he created zero chances for the team. This is the problem with Clev, he works hard and grafts and is careful with his passes but is a player who gets the ball to someone who can create rather than do it himself. Carrick would cause more damage with his 86%.

2. I don't know where you are getting this stat from, he made two tackles, two interceptions, one clearance and he took on players twice and was successful once.

If you view Cleverly as a player to simply give the ball to someone who can create for us then I guess he is fine but I would also say its a low expectation to have of our midfield. We used to have Scholes, Keane and Veron in there. Carrick and Hargreaves have a good creative side also and could mix it with that company, Clev not so much.

I'm not just focusing on yesterdays match, its important to have a bigger sample size. If we compare him to Carrick this season, because they have both played 10 matches for us thus far, over the 10 game period Carrick on avg has created 12 chances compared to Clev's 6, Carrick avg's 7 defensive actions to Clev's 2.

Judging a CM on chances created (which is assists plus key passes, so assists plus assists that weren't converted) is extremely flawed. There are always good CMs who have surprisingly low numbers of assists and key passes while other CMs who play differently rack up those numbers. Paul Scholes is the classic example of the type of CM who was excellent but always had low assist numbers. Modric was another.

And you can't ignore the fact that Moyes' style just isn't working at the moment and that the team hasn't gelled at all. The midfield doesn't interlink properly with the forwards because they are too rigid and everything is aimed at getting our wide players in behind the opposition fullbacks. Both Cleverley and Fellaini, the two CMs who get forward more, have low creative stats (Clev 0 assists, 0.6 key passes avg per game, Fell 0 and 0.4). While Carrick who has been the one to sit a little deeper and who has always specialised in long passing has been able to get 1.2 key passes per game.

Cleverley doesn't have as many defensive actions as Carrick? No shít, Carrick's usually a league leader in that type of stat. How does Cleverley compare to some other CMs in that regard? Here's a selection of CMs that Cleverley (average 2.1 tackles and 1.2 interceptions per PL game this season) is matching in that department: Dembele (2.4 tkls, 0.9 ints); Sandro (1.3 tkls, 1.7 ints); Paulinho (2.2 tkls, 1 ints); Flamini (1.4 tkls, 1.3 ints); De Guzman (1.5 tkls, 0.9 ints); Fellaini (1.3 tkls, 1.7 ints). Cleverley is in grand company there. To try and portray his defensive numbers as somehow notably below acceptable is false.

Your Airbag wrote: »

3. He should have been closer, there is no case to make here for Clev. He rushes in because he let his man have too much space. You say Sandro turned him because Clev bought the turn, as someone who has played a decent amount of football in his youth the easiest player to turn is the one rushing at you rather then the one trying to contain you. Clev should have been closer and held a line until Sandro made his move and would not have been turned. Clev rushed in and had to halt and restart his momentum in the opposite direction giving Sandro a headstart because of this he needs to rush after Sandro a second time and when Sandro turns again Clev must halt his momentum and go in a different direction a second time, he almost slips because of it and was playing catch up in that exchange from the start because he let Sandro have too much space. Al Sandro's momentum is in the same direction, Clev has to shift and adjust his twice because of poor positioning.






Yes 99 times out of hundred it might not fly into the top corner but its not an excuse to make for a player. "Its not too bad he lets his man beat him twice and get a shot off its ok because from that range they don't generally go in." They will go close or be pushed out by the keeper and are open for rebounds. This was that one time out of 99 and a key moment.

He should not have been closer. He was covering Jones while Jones was facing the ball out on the wing. Saying that Cleverley should have been closer to Sandro when the ball was where it was is to completely ignore how modern teams hold their shape. United, like the vast majority of modern teams, don't use a man marking system so he should have been covering Jones until the ball came into his area, which is what he did.

You say that Cleverley rushed in when Sandro got the ball, but that is also not true. Your gifs don't show from the start where Cleverley initially closes Sandro, he did that bit fine. He went forward quickly and slowed as he got close, all text book. The problem came after that when Sandro turned him a little too easily with a nice quick change of direction, which you want to dismiss because Sandro is taller than Cleverley. Cleverley was always playing catch up after that and that was exacerbated by the fact that Jones hadn't covered Cleverly properly (he'd left the gap between thm too wide) and so Clev was on an island dealing with Sandro, then Sandro unleashed his bullet.



I'm not saying it's ok for Cleverley to get turned because his opposite number will rarely strike a ball so well, I'm saying that midfielders get little bits of space like that from time to time. Defending CMs have to scramble to cover from time to time, that's a big part of their job. It's impossible to defend the middle of the park flawlessly and sometimes the opposition will score a screamer before they get to the back four. To describe what happened as Cleverley having poor defensive position and technique is just wrong.

Your Airbag wrote: »

How many other times has he let players away? It was poor decision making, strenght and concentration. I see Vidic and other players rush in only to halt their run correctly the closer to the target they get and they don't buy the turn as easily.

You have asked for other examples, I don't have a list of examples or times in a match they happened but I see Clev scampering after players that have turned him quite a bit. There is a reason why I and others have said this about him, its because it happens when he is out there and all these pre match passing stats don't reflect how off the pace he can be at times.

Looking at all three of our MF's over a larger period of time its Clev who still sticks out for me. As a whole he is below Carrick who offers more defensively and creatively. Fellaini is not doing it for us right now but has done in the past. With Clev I have never seen a consistent level of quality near Carricks overall level. I was excited for him when he burst onto the scene but I haven't see enough quality in his game to want him in the squad. He keeps it basic and can be defensively slack and has had trouble seeing out 90 mins before, this imo is from him getting turned or not being close enough to where he should be during a game and having to cover more ground.

This is the impression I have of him after watching almost all of his matches, yes he works hard and can play better than yesterday but overall he doesn't cut the mustard. I don't have stats for this so you can take my word or not but a lot of fans don't rate him highly for a reason.

How many times has Cleverley let players get away from him? Not that many. Certainly not enough to say he's not good enough for United. If you want to prove me wrong then make a list of times when he let players get away from him, it should be easy to do if it happens as often as you say.

There is a reason why you and others say that he is off the pace every game. It's because you have convinced yourselves that he is not good enough for United and you are looking for evidence of his failings constantly, ignoring his decent passing, pretending that his number of tackles and interceptions is some how unacceptable, even though they match the numbers of many sought after PL CMs, and criticising his defensive positioning when you don't actually understand that part of the game enough to talk about it.

keane2097

Pro. F wrote: »

There is a reason why you and others say that he is off the pace every game. It's because you have convinced yourselves that he is not good enough for United and you are looking for evidence of his failings constantly, ignoring his decent passing, pretending that his number of tackles and interceptions is some how unacceptable, even though they match the numbers of many sought after PL CMs, and criticising his defensive positioning when you don't actually understand that part of the game enough to talk about it.

This is patently correct. Deriding Cleverley's position before Sandro got the ball there is as obvious an example of confirmation bias as your likely to see in a soccer discussion.

That being said, very good posting in the last few hours - interesting reading, wp all involved.

Your Airbag

@ Pro f

Not sure how much point there is in going on with this, you rate Clev, I don't and nothing is going to change your mind.

You mention Scholes and Modric not having great assist stats also and being good MF's, you must realise this is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. Those two players have amazing passing ability which is what make them good, Clev doesn't. Saying they are good without those assist stats and so can Clev is nothing to go on, they obviously have so much to their game that Clev doesn't.

The list of players you compare his defensive work rate to are nothing special. I never hailed Spurs as having a great midfield, their league position is an accurate reflection this. Okay Clevs numbers are not below par defensively but average and he is on par with Fellaini but still behing Carrick, comapring him and Carrick is no contest really.

Carrick is better as you said defensively and for key passing. If Clev is not matching or bettering him defensively or creating anything what exactly is he doing for us? this is in a pair where Clev is the attacking MF and Carrick the anchor man. He is doing less of both defense and attack.

Take Giggs against Leverkusen or when he came on against Cardiff. He showed more attacking threat with his passing against Cardiff than Clev did with 90mins on Sunday.

All the stats quoted about passing % and tackles made are the bread and butter stuff of a players game but as I said there are things you see that don't translate into stats. Chances created was zero for sunday and is for many matches, his passing maps show limitations on the final third. What stats don't show is when he turns and passes the ball backwards to a defender rather than run into space with the ball or attempt to make an incisive forward pass, instead it goes down as a successfully made pass and his % goes up. You mention Moyes tactics but under both Moyes and Fergie and I have seen Clev turn to face his own goal and pass the ball there rather than take the opportunity to take the ball forward at times when there is an opportunity to do this. Either he knows he doesn't have the ability to do this and and rather than risk losing the ball the simple ball to the side or backwards is easier for him.

Its good for his pass % rate but does not make him a good MF, this is what we see when we watch him play.

Timmyctc

Have to agree now with Airbag. Absolutely no sense bringing Scholes and Modric into this. The latter two regularly dictated the tempo of games and their passing spread was something to admire. You can defend Cleverly's passing range till the cows come home but he is a severely limited footballer and his passing is very ordinary.

Your Airbag

keane2097 wrote: »

This is patently correct. Deriding Cleverley's position before Sandro got the ball there is as obvious an example of confirmation bias as your likely to see in a soccer discussion.

That being said, very good posting in the last few hours - interesting reading, wp all involved.

When I say position I mean more than just one factor. The area and distance his is in proximity to his defense and the attacking player.

Where Clev is is fine (inbetween Sandro and Jones) but the distance in that space is not, he is too close to his back four and too far from Sandro.

He rushes in and gets turned and is playing catch up, Jones leaves Clev to it when he should of helped and Clev get turned again. When the ball gets played in he was behind Jones who was containing the wide area.

He should have been in front of him and as the ball is played into Sandro he takes a step further way from Sandro toward his back four. Jones should have been in behind and was poor too but it was Clevs man. Once engaging Sandor he lets himself get turned even though Sandro has his back to him and doesn't catch him again.

keane2097

Your Airbag wrote: »

When I say position I mean more than just one factor. The area and distance his is in proximity to his defense and the attacking player.

Where Clev is is fine (inbetween Sandro and Jones) but the distance in that space is not, he is too close to his back four and too far from Sandro.

He rushes in and gets turned and is playing catch up, Jones leaves Clev to it when he should of helped and Clev get turned again. When the ball gets played in he was behind Jones who was containing the wide area.

He should have been in front of him and as the ball is played into Sandro he takes a step further way from Sandro toward his back four. Jones should have been in behind and was poor too but it was Clevs man. Once engaging Sandor he lets himself get turned even though Sandro has his back to him and doesn't catch him again.

There is nothing wrong with his position before the ball goes to Sandro and the GIF Pro. F posted shows it pretty clearly.

Cleverley gets to Sandro and has slowed down almost to the point of stopping before Sandro turns him the first time. Getting caught by the turn is pretty bad, but it isn't due to bad positioning or rushing prior to it, he's in position to defend against Sandro in plenty of time.

Just as a sidenote, I would have thought consensus was Sandro is easily amongst the best midfielders in the league, is that not the case?

Vic Vinegar

keane2097 wrote: »

Just as a sidenote, I would have thought consensus was Sandro is easily amongst the best midfielders in the league, is that not the case?

Class player, no doubt about it.

kryogen

IvySlayer wrote: »

He was amazing against Barcelona tbf

Amazing is a bit strong

MANUTD99

Not sure if already posted. 10th Dec on ITV. Keane/Viera documentary

Jimmy Iovine

Trailer for it below.

I'm looking forward to this more than Christmas itself :pac:. Could make for an amazing show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd_waLIBXsw

Timmyctc

Rooney our POTM for November. Sell him!

TheDoc

It's odd when you look back the start of last season, Cleverly was being touted as a hero and saviour for our Midfield, and I was being labelled a moron for saying we should chill out and see how he progress'.

Felt it was make or break for Anderson and Clev this year, but more so Cleverly. We know what Anderson can do, and he seems to always buy himself another year. Cleverly however is showing very little promise truth be told.

If we are going to stick with a 4-4-2, it requires we have a multi functional midfielder, and to be fair, two of them. It is why we have been lackluster this year. We cant have it both ways, if we are going with two in midfield, it's going to stink at present, we just don't have a box-to-box creative midfielder who can link up the play.

I thought Cleverly would be good at this but if I'm honest, I think his qualities lie elsewhere. He is a terrier. He has a tremendous engine and can hassle opposing players. He just seems to operate to quickly, he needs to calm down a little and get more confident on the ball. Time is on his side, just not at United.

I have to say as I've been watching us this season I've been every match just been more disgusted in that Strootman has definitly appeared to be a massive loss. When you see what hes doing at Roma, it's precisely what we needed. I know you don't get them all, but if we are going to stick 4-4-2, then we need to have some serious boyos in the middle.

Just about the world and it's mother is rocking 3 in midfield these days, and we will just get over run time and time again.

I think Moyes needs to realise the 4-4-2 with our CM options isn't working. I won't waste my breath since it will never happen, but what we have at present are good defensive midfielders who have good short range passing, but not in a forward splitting motion.

We either deploy Kagawa inbetween Rooney and the midfield two, or we simply just stumble our way through the season at this rate

Hank Scorpio

TheDoc wrote: »

It's odd when you look back the start of last season, Cleverly was being touted as a hero and saviour for our Midfield, and I was being labelled a moron for saying we should chill out and see how he progress'.

I find it hard to believe anyone was saying that

Julez

nuxxx wrote: »

I find it hard to believe anyone was saying that

This happened. It was right around the time we beat Arsenal 8-2, Anderson and Cleverley were unreal together that day.

Your Airbag

Julez wrote: »

This happened. It was right around the time we beat Arsenal 8-2, Anderson and Cleverley were unreal together that day.

I remember this period, it included a 5-0 defeat of bolton. Its been said it was some of our best midfield play since the Scholes & Keane days.

Arsenal had a second string side out and Clev was off early in that Bolton game with an injury.

Ando and Clev have failed to go to another level since then, Ando has regressed and Clev stayed where he is without us ever playing like that since.

Scholes today has said its about time for Clev to kick on as he has been at UTD for a while now. Its a nice way of saying up your game to the next level. The trouble is I don't he think has a level up besides the workman stuff he does.

kryogen

Julez wrote: »

This happened. It was right around the time we beat Arsenal 8-2, Anderson and Cleverley were unreal together that day.

That wasn't at the start of this season though so................................................................

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

@ Pro f

Not sure how much point there is in going on with this, you rate Clev, I don't and nothing is going to change your mind.

You obviously think there is a reason to continue since you have given a response to everything I said. So let's continue.

Your Airbag wrote: »

1You mention Scholes and Modric not having great assist stats also and being good MF's, you must realise this is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. Those two players have amazing passing ability which is what make them good, Clev doesn't. Saying they are good without those assist stats and so can Clev is nothing to go on, they obviously have so much to their game that Clev doesn't.

2The list of players you compare his defensive work rate to are nothing special. I never hailed Spurs as having a great midfield, their league position is an accurate reflection this. Okay Clevs numbers are not below par defensively but average and he is on par with Fellaini but still behing Carrick, comapring him and Carrick is no contest really.

3Carrick is better as you said defensively and for key passing. If Clev is not matching or bettering him defensively or creating anything what exactly is he doing for us? this is in a pair where Clev is the attacking MF and Carrick the anchor man. He is doing less of both defense and attack.

Take Giggs against Leverkusen or when he came on against Cardiff. He showed more attacking threat with his passing against Cardiff than Clev did with 90mins on Sunday.

4 All the stats quoted about passing % and tackles made are the bread and butter stuff of a players game but as I said there are things you see that don't translate into stats. Chances created was zero for sunday and is for many matches, his passing maps show limitations on the final third. What stats don't show is when he turns and passes the ball backwards to a defender rather than run into space with the ball or attempt to make an incisive forward pass, instead it goes down as a successfully made pass and his % goes up. You mention Moyes tactics but under both Moyes and Fergie and I have seen Clev turn to face his own goal and pass the ball there rather than take the opportunity to take the ball forward at times when there is an opportunity to do this. Either he knows he doesn't have the ability to do this and and rather than risk losing the ball the simple ball to the side or backwards is easier for him.

Its good for his pass % rate but does not make him a good MF, this is what we see when we watch him play.

1 I brought up the point about Modric and Scholes to show that the chance creation stat is not a useful criticism of a CM. Even top level CMs can have relatively low chance creation numbers. We can both agree that stats don't show everything, there's nobody disputing that so you don't need to keep saying it.

It doesn't matter if Scholes and Modric are/were so much better than Cleverley. How good he actually is is what we are debating, and I am not saying he is as good as them anyway.

2 Okay so we are clear. You now agree that that particular criticism you, and others, have used against Cleverley was unfounded. That's one down anyway.

3 This is changing the argument from "Cleverley was shocking on Sunday and is our stand out worst CM this season" to "Cleverley is not as good as Carrick." I started this conversation to defend him from the absurd abuse he has been getting on this thread. The criticisms - that he doesn't get on the ball at all, that he doesn't pass it forward, that his defensive positioning is a liability, that his number of defensive actions is below normal - are all horse shíte. I have proven each one of those claims to be so.

With regards to the question of what he brings to the team the answer is a good volume of precise and consistent passing all over the pitch and an ability to keep possession even in a tight spot. That is an important job for a CM and so far this season he has been consistently better at it than any of our other CMs. He hasn't been amazing at it, but he certainly hasn't been stand out awful like some people on here are claiming.

Comparing Cleverley's passing yesterday to Giggs' against Leverkusen and Cardiff is completely unfair. Leverkusen were beyond hopeless defensively and didn't press, and Cardiff were chasing the game and leaving gaps at the back when Giggs came on.

4 You say that there are things you see that don't translate into stats and then immediately follow that up with a stat. Let's be clear, we both agree that stats don't tell the whole story and we both agree that some stats can give us some insight.

A CM consistently controlling and passing it short inside the opposition half is not as simple as you think. There are many who fail to do it as well as Cleverley. What held him back under Fergie was lack of regular game time and what is holding him back under Moyes, the same as everybody else, is rigid and dysfunctional tactics.

You are criticising his completed passes stat as if that is the only one that I am pointing out to you. Stop going on about his pass completion and look at his pass direction and location. If he really is, as you claim, a player who passes it backwards to defenders so often then why is it that he is regularly the first or second midfielder on the pitch in terms of forward passes and passes in the attacking third?

If Cleverley's passing chart shows his limitations in the final third then Dembele, Sandro and Jones must be completely incapable of playing at this level, because Cleverley's is better than any of theirs.

Pro. F

TheDoc wrote: »

It's odd when you look back the start of last season, Cleverly was being touted as a hero and saviour for our Midfield, and I was being labelled a moron for saying we should chill out and see how he progress'.

No, that is not what happened. He was not touted as a hero and saviour. I and some others said he had done enough to be given a chance. And then I derided you for saying something like you would need to watch him play another 30 games before you could say whether he was a good player or not.

I also seem to remember you, about half way through last season, saying that you had finally decided and that you thought he was really good player.

Rayne Wooney

Tbh I can pull up stats that show Moses had a decent game against Hull and yet there's a majority in the Liverpool thread asking for him not to wear a red shirt again on the back of his performance.

From what I remember watching the match and thinking at the time, Cleverley was muck from what I saw and the neutrals I was watching the game with thought the same, nobody else's opinion is going to change what I thought of him in that game.

Liam O

Cleverley was up against a 3 man midfield with a very deep lying player beside him. This leaves a lot of space that he is responsible for, probably more than any other player on the pitch. The distance between players is atrocious sometimes and that's the biggest thing that has to change imo.

Julez

kryogen wrote: »

That wasn't at the start of this season though so................................................................

It was the start of the season before last so........................................................................................

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

When I say position I mean more than just one factor. The area and distance his is in proximity to his defense and the attacking player.

Where Clev is is fine (inbetween Sandro and Jones) but the distance in that space is not, he is too close to his back four and too far from Sandro.

He rushes in and gets turned and is playing catch up, Jones leaves Clev to it when he should of helped and Clev get turned again. When the ball gets played in he was behind Jones who was containing the wide area.

He should have been in front of him and as the ball is played into Sandro he takes a step further way from Sandro toward his back four. Jones should have been in behind and was poor too but it was Clevs man. Once engaging Sandor he lets himself get turned even though Sandro has his back to him and doesn't catch him again.

No he should not have been closer to Sandro. If Cleverley hadn't been behind Jones when the ball was out wide then there would have been no cover. If he had been closer to Sandro and/or in front of Jones, like you say he should, then that would have taken him out of the diagonal line of cover behind Jones. He was on that diagonal line of cover at a good distance from Jones and directly in line with Sandro (he looks over his shoulder to check where Sandro is early on in the clip).



The step back that Cleverley took was actually just a moment before the ball was played centrally, it was a step to keep the covering line. And he dashed out of that line as soon as the ball was played centrally like he is supposed to.

That's how the modern zonal defensive shape works. What you want him to have been doing is some sort of man marking. That's a completely different defensive system.

Jimmy Iovine

Pro. F wrote: »

No he should not have been closer to Sandro. If Cleverley hadn't been behind Jones when the ball was out wide then there would have been no cover. If he had been closer to Sandro and/or in front of Jones, like you say he should, then that would have taken him out of the diagonal line of cover behind Jones. He was on that diagonal line of cover at a good distance from Jones and directly in line with Sandro (he looks over his shoulder to check where Sandro is early on in the clip).



The step back that Cleverley took was actually just a moment before the ball was played centrally, it was a step to keep the covering line. And he dashed out of that line as soon as the ball was played centrally like he is supposed to.

That's how the modern zonal defensive shape works. What you want him to have been doing is some sort of man marking. That's a completely different defensive system.

He reacts to Jones' movement with the little step back. Until Sandro gets the ball.

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

You obviously think there is a reason to continue since you have given a response to everything I said. So let's continue.



1 I brought up the point about Modric and Scholes to show that the chance creation stat is not a useful criticism of a CM. Even top level CMs can have relatively low chance creation numbers. 1. We can both agree that stats don't show everything, there's nobody disputing that so you don't need to keep saying it.

2. It doesn't matter if Scholes and Modric are/were so much better than Cleverley. How good he actually is is what we are debating, and I am not saying he is as good as them anyway.

2 Okay so we are clear. You now agree that that particular criticism you, and others, have used against Cleverley 3. was unfounded. That's one down anyway.

3 4. This is changing the argument from "Cleverley was shocking on Sunday and is our stand out worst CM this season" to "Cleverley is not as good as Carrick." I started this conversation to defend him from the absurd abuse he has been getting on this thread. 5. The criticisms - that he doesn't get on the ball at all, that he doesn't pass it forward, that his defensive positioning is a liability, that his number of defensive actions is below normal - are all horse shíte. I have proven each one of those claims to be so.

With regards to the question of what he brings to the team the answer is a good volume of precise and consistent passing all over the pitch and an ability to keep possession even in a tight spot. That is an important job for a CM and so far this season he has been consistently better at it than any of our other CMs. He hasn't been amazing at it, but he certainly hasn't been stand out awful like some people on here are claiming.

6. Comparing Cleverley's passing yesterday to Giggs' against Leverkusen and Cardiff is completely unfair. Leverkusen were beyond hopeless defensively and didn't press, and Cardiff were chasing the game and leaving gaps at the back when Giggs came on.

4 You say that there are things you see that don't translate into stats and then immediately follow that up with a stat. Let's be clear, we both agree that stats don't tell the whole story and we both agree that some stats can give us some insight.

A CM consistently controlling and passing it short inside the opposition half is not as simple as you think. There are many who fail to do it as well as Cleverley. What held him back under Fergie was lack of regular game time and what is holding him back under Moyes, the same as everybody else, is rigid and dysfunctional tactics.

You are criticising his completed passes stat as if that is the only one that I am pointing out to you. 7. Stop going on about his pass completion and look at his pass direction and location. If he really is, as you claim, a player who passes it backwards to defenders so often then why is it that he is regularly the first or second midfielder on the pitch in terms of forward passes and passes in the attacking third?

8. If Cleverley's passing chart shows his limitations in the final third then Dembele, Sandro and Jones must be completely incapable of playing at this level, because Cleverley's is better than any of theirs.

1. You mentioned his passing stats and reference a graph that you posted iirc and then want me to stop talking about passing stats? Thats a bit bizzare since its the origin of the discussion and what YOU wanted to talk about and now you are tired of others doing this??

2. It does matter and you essentially prove my point for me here. You say he is good at what we are debating but not as good as those players, this point has been made many times, he is good at the basics and not much more. This is my whole point he does the bread and butter stuff but offer none of the qualities those other players do which is an attacking creative threat, he doesn't or can't do this because he is limited. Its obvious when you watch him that he is very limited.

3. It was not unfounded, he is not defensively as good as Carrick as you have said, you seem intent on comparing him to Spurs players. I have higher hopes for a player in the UTD starting 11 and would like to compare him against the best in the league, which I don't think Carrick is either this season btw. Again you help make my point, Clev is about Spurs level atm not UTDs.

4. The argument never changed, he has been our poorest MF this season, He has less chance creation and defensive work than Carrick who is out of form and Fellaini who is trying to settle into UTD and playing with an injury is about the same level as him. Who else is there beside Carrick and Fellaini? Giggs? He showed more attacking intent against Cardiff but we get to this later

5. I don't remember saying he didn't get on the ball? You seem to rate very basic passes very highly. I agree with the fact his defensive work compared to Jones and the other Spurs MF's on Sunday was at the same level. I don't think you have proved anything about him being unfairly slated, his limitations as a player and lack of ability to create still stand.

6. I'm not surprised you consider an example of good creative play against another team unfair for use given Clevs inability to do it. You don't get to pick and choose the other sides arguments. It would be easy to ignore it but its a valid point. Clev would not have attempted those passes that Giggs did. At 40 he is capable of more than Clev in MF, if only he had Clevs energy.

7. Again you want me to stop "going on about" a certain point, again ,generally you don't get to dictate what someone can say in a discussion when its relevant. Again some of the passes you listed are forward I would consider horizontal and its obvious what I meant. Having the slightest forward direction to them does not make out Clev to be in any way creative in that third. Again in that passing graph you posted he made no passes into the box or the vicinity of it. When you are willing to say he was the best and second most player making forward passes in the attacking third shows that you are willing to accept some pretty average passing and pass it off as him having any sort of impact in that area. I don't think you want to see any fault but he created zero for us Sunday, its not good enough.

8. Again you are happy to compare him to the Spurs players. I'm not.

bucketybuck

If anybody watched Tom Cleverley against Spurs and thought he had a good game then they clearly don't know anything about football.

Your Airbag

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

He reacts to Jones' movement with the little step back. Until Sandro gets the ball.

When he should be keeping an eye on Sandro not Jones, its obvious the ball was going to Sandro, nobody is on him.

kryogen

Julez wrote: »

It was the start of the season before last so........................................................................................

it is completely irrelevant to this current discussion, where the poster in question says, "I remember, at the start of last season" or words to that effect

Look, Im very sleep deprived an cranky, I apologise for getting snippy about something easily let go

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

When he should be keeping an eye on Sandro not Jones, its obvious the ball was going to Sandro, nobody is on him.

If Cleverley wasn't keeping an eye on Jones then how would he know what position to take up?

Pro. F

bucketybuck wrote: »

If anybody watched Tom Cleverley against Spurs and thought he had a good game then they clearly don't know anything about football.

If anybody watched Tom Cleverley against Spurs and thought his performance was noticeably different to the standard fair from all of our midfielders this season then they clearly don't know anything about football.

This is fun.

KombuchaMshroom

Insert grandpa simpson walking in and straight back out gif here.

Some mileage being dragged out of this cleverley debate, especially that one gif of the sandro goal.

Thought everyone just came to the natural conclusion a long time ago that nobody in our center mid is really good enough.
Clev is a grand squad player to have but shouldn't be anything more than that really.

PhlegmyMoses

Pro. F wrote: »

If anybody watched Tom Cleverley against Spurs and thought his performance was noticeably different to the standard fair from all of our midfielders this season then they clearly don't know anything about football.

This is fun.

Our midfield has been pretty **** this year all up. Cleverley was poor against Spurs.

bucketybuck

Pro. F wrote: »

No, that is not what happened. He was not touted as a hero and saviour. I and some others said he had done enough to be given a chance.

Actually, you were somewhat more effusive than that.

Cleverley is world class for his age (which isn't even that young) and is good enough to be starting in central midfield for United imo.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80017411&postcount=7440

You pinned your colours to Cleverleys mast and now you will defend it to the death, but the simple fact is that the kid just ain't that good.

ElChe32

Anything to be said for Phil Neville togging out for tomorrow?

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

If Cleverley wasn't keeping an eye on Jones then how would he know what position to take up?

How about by being slightly ahead of Jones and closer to Sandro and maintaining a line with Jones there, he is behind him and not a keeping a direct line anyway, why not in front?

Players are containing out wide and the main threat is the ball to Sandro, everything else is pretty much covered threat wise.

This lead to the second goal but people refuse to see any wrong with it.

Pro. F wrote: »

If anybody watched Tom Cleverley against Spurs and thought his performance was noticeably different to the standard fair from all of our midfielders this season then they clearly don't know anything about football.

This is fun.

We have already established that Carrick has the greater attacking and defensive stats this season with the same amount of games played. So it is ntoiceablly below that level. Its not fun ,its painful repeating the same points. If you can't see a difference in quality between Carrick and Clev just let me know because there is no point "debating" the obvious if someone ignores it.

Your Airbag

ElChe32 wrote: »

Anything to be said for Phil Neville togging out for tomorrow?

Only if he is replacing Cleverly :pac:

Is the game on tv at all?

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

1. You mentioned his passing stats and reference a graph that you posted iirc and then want me to stop talking about passing stats? Thats a bit bizzare since its the origin of the discussion and what YOU wanted to talk about and now you are tired of others doing this??

2. It does matter and you essentially prove my point for me here. You say he is good at what we are debating but not as good as those players, this point has been made many times, he is good at the basics and not much more. This is my whole point he does the bread and butter stuff but offer none of the qualities those other players do which is an attacking creative threat, he doesn't or can't do this because he is limited. Its obvious when you watch him that he is very limited.

3. It was not unfounded, he is not defensively as good as Carrick as you have said, you seem intent on comparing him to Spurs players. I have higher hopes for a player in the UTD starting 11 and would like to compare him against the best in the league, which I don't think Carrick is either this season btw. Again you help make my point, Clev is about Spurs level atm not UTDs.

4. The argument never changed, he has been our poorest MF this season, He has less chance creation and defensive work than Carrick who is out of form and Fellaini who is trying to settle into UTD and playing with an injury is about the same level as him. Who else is there beside Carrick and Fellaini? Giggs? He showed more attacking intent against Cardiff but we get to this later

5. I don't remember saying he didn't get on the ball? You seem to rate very basic passes very highly. I agree with the fact his defensive work compared to Jones and the other Spurs MF's on Sunday was at the same level. I don't think you have proved anything about him being unfairly slated, his limitations as a player and lack of ability to create still stand.

6. I'm not surprised you consider an example of good creative play against another team unfair for use given Clevs inability to do it. You don't get to pick and choose the other sides arguments. It would be easy to ignore it but its a valid point. Clev would not have attempted those passes that Giggs did. At 40 he is capable of more than Clev in MF, if only he had Clevs energy.

7. Again you want me to stop "going on about" a certain point, again ,generally you don't get to dictate what someone can say in a discussion when its relevant. Again some of the passes you listed are forward I would consider horizontal and its obvious what I meant. Having the slightest forward direction to them does not make out Clev to be in any way creative in that third. Again in that passing graph you posted he made no passes into the box or the vicinity of it. When you are willing to say he was the best and second most player making forward passes in the attacking third shows that you are willing to accept some pretty average passing and pass it off as him having any sort of impact in that area. I don't think you want to see any fault but he created zero for us Sunday, its not good enough.

8. Again you are happy to compare him to the Spurs players. I'm not.

1. No, I want you to stop going on about just his pass completion stats when what is also being discussed is his forward passing numbers and his passing in the attacking third numbers. (BTW the bit you highlighted for point number 1 is not really related to what you responded with.)

2. This is bullshít argument you've built for yourself. You criticised Cleverley for having a low average number of key passes. You claimed that that proved that he contributes nothing creatively. Yet when I point out to you that both Scholes and Modric (with Spurs) used to have low numbers in that stat you say that that criticism doesn't apply to them. You are talking complete bollocks.

3. It was unfounded. You criticised Cleverley for not having as many defensive actions as Carrick. Very few do, it's just another bullshít criticism which doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

You now admit that Cleverley is at about Spurs' level and that he was about the same as Jones' defensively on Sunday. Yet earlier you were saying that he was the one player who stood out on the pitch as being very poor. Link to post. That's a bit of turn around. The one player who stood out as very poor > about at the same level as all the other CMs on the pitch.

4. Keeping on with the chance creation as if it proves anything I see. Good for you.

5. I didn't say it was you who said he didn't get on the ball. As I said, I started to conversation to defend him against the absurd abuse he was getting on this thread.

6. Criticising Cleverley's performance against Spurs as not as attacking as Giggs' against Cardiff and Leverkusen is laughably dishonest. Cardiff were chasing the game when Giggs came on so of course there were more opportunities for attack and Leverkusen were practically playing a different sport they were so bad defensively.

7. I already said that he didn't create enough Sunday so I am obviously willing to see fault in him. What I am arguing against is spoofers like you who say that he stood out like a sore thumb he was so poor and then later admit that actually he was about the same level as the other CMs on display.

8. Yeah definitely. If Cleverley is as good as or better than Sandro, Dembele and Paulinho then he is definitely good enough for a place in our squad.

Pro. F

bucketybuck wrote: »

Actually, you were somewhat more effusive than that.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80017411&postcount=7440

You pinned your colours to Cleverleys mast and now you will defend it to the death, but the simple fact is that the kid just ain't that good.

And I went on to say:

People might not agree with my rating of him which is fair enough, but I think being reasonable at the very least he has shown enough to be deserving of a crack at the starting job in that creative central role.

What I am arguing against now is not a defence of him being world class for his age, he has fallen well off that curve. What I am arguing against is the more extreme bullshít claims that are being made about his current play.

Rayne Wooney said that Cleverley didn't get on the ball on Sunday, that the defence played hoofball and bypassed him. Dayne tried to claim that 2 tackles, 2 interceptions and 1 clearance isn't good enough at this level for a CM. Your Airbag said that Cleverley stuck out like a sore thumb as being very poor (yet now he says that he is at about Spurs' level and was about the same as Jones defensively) and that he only had 4 successful forward passes. That is what I am arguing against.

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

1. No, 1. I want you to stop going on about just his pass completion stats when what is also being discussed is his forward passing numbers and his passing in the attacking third numbers. (BTW the bit you highlighted for point number 1 is not really related to what you responded with.)

2. This is bullshít argument you've built for yourself. You criticised Cleverley for having a low average number of key passes. You claimed that that proved that he contributes nothing creatively. Yet when I point out to you that both Scholes and Modric (with Spurs) used to have low numbers in that stat you say that that criticism doesn't apply to them. You are talking complete bollocks.

3. It was unfounded. You criticised Cleverley for not having as many defensive actions as Carrick. Very few do, it's just another bullshít criticism which doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

4. You now admit that Cleverley is at about Spurs' level and that he was about the same as Jones' defensively on Sunday. Yet earlier you were saying that he was the one player who stood out on the pitch as being very poor. Link to post. That's a bit of turn around. The one player who stood out as very poor > about at the same level as all the other CMs on the pitch.

4. Keeping on with the chance creation as if it proves anything I see. Good for you.

5. I didn't say it was you who said he didn't get on the ball. As I said, I started to conversation to defend him against the absurd abuse he was getting on this thread.

6. Criticising Cleverley's performance against Spurs as not as attacking as Giggs' against Cardiff and Leverkusen is laughably dishonest. Cardiff were chasing the game when Giggs came on so of course there were more opportunities for attack and Leverkusen were practically playing a different sport they were so bad defensively.

7. I already said that he didn't create enough Sunday so I am obviously willing to see fault in him. What I am arguing against is spoofers like you who say that he stood out like a sore thumb he was so poor and then later admit that actually he was about the same level as the other CMs on display.

8. Yeah definitely. If Cleverley is as good as or better than Sandro, Dembele and Paulinho then he is definitely good enough for a place in our squad.

You have a real inability to stay on point and I don't know why I'm even bothering as you have as it has been pointed out labeled Clev as world class which he is clearly not. Surely there is a movie on TV somewhere we can watch, its got to be better than this, life is too short. You rate Clev, once we get quality MF's he wont get a look in because he is not qaulity. Utd quality not Spurs quality,


1. Again you don't get to tell someone what to "go on about" or not. In future just give me a list of points or stats I can't use when discussing a topic. This should make it easier for you. I never put any limitations on you when you repeated the forward pass remark even though i explained some horizontals were a stretch to called forward passed but anyway, I think people have free reign when making a point.

2. Its not bs that criticism doesn't apply to them. Why not? because they had other areas to their games superior to that which they used over and over again. Such as? Oh I dunno maybe cause Scholes scored a sh*t load of goals and used to create lots of attacking play and dominated games and seasons and is considered one of the best players ever.

3. Again another point that proves Clev to be inferior to Carrick is bs and should not be used, I'm seeing a trend here of valid points against Clev that should not be used.

4. I said his defensive rate was equal to that of Jones and that of Spurs. Not his overall game, you want an example of superior mf play that was better or above Clevs on Sunday. How about Sandro taking on an opposition player, turning him inside out twice and scoring , you never included that one key stat when comparing Clev to the Spurs mf.

5. He is not getting abuse, its calling a poor player poor.

6. Covered already, I hope Giggs will start with Jones, we might see a defense splitting ball out of MF at least.

7. He was poor, he stuck out in the UTD MF, just because you don't like hearing it doesn't make it spoofing. Jones is a defender and makeshift MF and was as you said equal to him, not much of a compliment. Sandro did what he did to him as we covered, there was nothing equal about it. If Jones was on Sandro for that incident I can't see Sandro skinning him twice.

8. How many times did Spurs MF take on UTD players I know I saw one occasion, lead to a goal, you never went near those stats. Not that I care. I'm looking for a movie.

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

Rayne Wooney said that Cleverley didn't get on the ball on Sunday, that the defence played hoofball and bypassed him. Dayne tried to claim that 2 tackles, 2 interceptions and 1 clearance isn't good enough at this level for a CM. Your Airbag said that Cleverley stuck out like a sore thumb as being very poor (yet now he says that he is at about Spurs' level and was about the same as Jones defensively) and that he only had 4 successful forward passes. That is what I am arguing against.

The Spurs MF who were poor too and not playing anything great this season. Yet none of them ended up on their backside after being skinned twice.

But hey he made some slightly forward angled passes to the wing, he's obviously good enough.

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

How about by being slightly ahead of Jones and closer to Sandro and maintaining a line with Jones there, he is behind him and not a keeping a direct line anyway, why not in front?

Players are containing out wide and the main threat is the ball to Sandro, everything else is pretty much covered threat wise.

This lead to the second goal but people refuse to see any wrong with it.

The line is not supposed to be horizontal across the pitch, it's meant to be diagonal back deep with respect to the ball, except for the guy on the opposite wing (Kagawa in this case) who holds a bit higher.

If Cleverley was in front of Jones then Jones would have no cover.

The main threat is not Sandro, it's the player with the ball.

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

The Spurs MF who were poor too and not playing anything great this season. Yet none of them ended up on their backside after being skinned twice.

But hey he made some slightly forward angled passes to the wing, he's obviously good enough.

So are you changing your tack back again and now saying that he wasn't on the same level as Spurs' midfielders?

lordgoat

Pro. F you make a good argument. I don't agree with all of it. But positionally Clevs was in a perfect starting place for the goal, Jones ball watched a bit and could have come across quicker but Clev should have kept him on his left peg.

2moreMinutes

Pro. F wrote: »

The main threat is not Sandro, it's the player with the ball.

I watch a primary school team quite regularly who seem to have received this exact same coaching.