Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread - Mod Note in OP, 25/08

ericzeking

Peist2007 wrote: »

The formation he played with at United may indicate he didnt play in a team with 3 centre backs but i am sure he had to, you know, prepare tactically for facing teams with 3 centre backs, no? He would have got to see exactly how the 3 centre back system evolved in Europe after the Ajax win in 1995. No?



What formation did you play in for 99% of your professional career at the very top?

I played in goals for my career, more GAA though for me, if you want to make it to 'the very top'...you have to pick one or the other!! :pac::pac::pac:


You are getting super excited by the fact I and others said his punditry was lacking....I actually referenced his lack of eloquence as to how he gets his point across.

No one is saying he doesn't understand football. We all loved him as a player.

You sound like a typical overly partisan blinkered fan, just because someone is a club legend you're going to revere absolutely everything about them, regardless. It's impossible to discuss anything with someone like that.

Lord TSC

It would be funny if we signed Khedira for the touted 15-20m, given they turned down a bid of 40m from us this time last year....

Zico

Lord TSC wrote: »

It would be funny if we signed Khedira for the touted 15-20m, given they turned down a bid of 40m from us this time last year....

I nearly forgot we tried to buy absolutely everyone last summer.:)

I'd love to see the look on Ed Woodward's face when the offer was accepted. He'd probably quit there and then realising he'll never understand how this stuff works.

Pro. F

nuxxx wrote: »

Scholes doesn't think the current CB's are up to it, obviously they were really exposed last Saturday and I get the point being made about the formation/setup not offering them enough protection. He cited Jones doesn't sense danger like a top CB should and none of them being good leaders on the pitch. The guy knows more about those players than anyone so to condemn them like that is pretty damning. We all know they're not Rio Vidic level but for him to say go out and buy Varane and Hummels to replace them is slightly worrying in inself

As of this moment Scholes has done nothing to prove that he is a reliable judge of centre-backs, that he has anything more than a basic midfielder's understanding of defensive organisation or that he has any understanding of the defensive shape of a 3412.

Just because he has was an excellent attacking CM and just because he has worked with these centre-backs does not make his opinions on them automatically valid. When, in expressing those opinions, he neglects to mention crucial considerations about the problems with the team's current defensive shape, then the validity of his opinion on the centre-backs has to be questioned.

secman

Pro. F wrote: »

As of this moment Scholes has done nothing to prove that he is a reliable judge of centre-backs, that he has anything more than a basic midfielder's understanding of defensive organisation or that he has any understanding of the defensive shape of a 3412.

Just because he has was an excellent attacking CM and just because he has worked with these centre-backs does not make his opinions on them automatically valid. When, in expressing those opinions, he neglects to mention crucial considerations about the problems with the team's current defensive shape, then the validity of his opinion on the centre-backs has to be questioned.

Except he wasn't a basic midfielder........................ oh to have an 18/19 yr old Scholesy.................

markcahill1985

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Some places are reporting Khedira could be available for 15m euro , .

Unfortunateyl Ed doesnt seem to have abrian when it comes to these things, Krros for 25m EUR and Fab for 30m EUR seemed like no brainers as well

super_furry

twam2008 wrote: »

I think one of the main points Scholes was making was that we lack a leader in defence, I don't think he would have said it about any of the past central defenders he worked with, it is a worry, and has been brought up on here a good few times already.

Still baffles me that United let two real leaders in Ferdinand and Vidic leave in the same season along with Evra who would have more of an influence than anyone currently in the United defence.

paulbok

MagicIRL wrote: »

Is that Fergie after getting that call from J.Magnier?

Peist2007

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Here what's all this about? Are you trying to say that all former footballers make excellent pundits, provide flawless analysis of tactics, and are perfect judges of player ability?

No. No i am not.

Maximus Alexander

secman wrote: »

Except he wasn't a basic midfielder........................ oh to have an 18/19 yr old Scholesy.................

We don't need another striker. :P

Peist2007 wrote: »

No. No i am not.

Well then it's not very clear what those comments are all about.

Peist2007

Lord TSC wrote: »

I can't sing, but I can tell you if you're in tune or not.

If we're cutting down on people who haven't played professionally from having opinions, we can shut this entire forum down....

And i apologise if that is what has been taken from my comments. Not saying that at all.

Pro. F

Robson99 wrote: »

You bet me to it Peist. From Scholes not knowing what hes talking about to not having heard of a 352 system before because we played 442. What total tarmac talk.
I think its fairly safe to assume Scholes could educate everyone here as to tactics formations etc.
Also it shouldn't take centre half long to understand the basics of defending no matter what formation the are set up in. They are pros gettin paid week in week out.
Judging him on 5 min air space after the game and not going into a detailed explanation is also muck. I'm pretty sure he could have spent an hour on the subject if time allowed

I'm judging what he said in this written piece which was posted in the thread last night. He has no excuse for not mentioning the single biggest problem with United's defending on Saturday when he wrote such a long article and was so critical of the centre-backs.

I also clarified previously that I'm sure he understands other aspects of football, that were more closely related to his position, very well. The "not knowing what he's talking about" comment was specifically regarding the centre-backs and his analysis (or lack of) of the defensive set-up of the formation.

And nobody said that he hasn't heard of the 352. That is a straw man.

We aren't talking about the basics of defending. I'm sure Scholes can do those when on the pitch and has an understanding of them. We're talking about his ability to analyse a team shape and his knowledge of the defensive workings of a 3CBs/2WBs system.

There's also the issue of his ability to get his thoughts in order clearly for when he is forming an opinion and presenting an argument. Something that his career as a professional footballer will have given him no particular training for.

There have been countless great players who have gone on to be shít pundits and managers. There is no reason why Scholes should be any different.

UnitedIrishman

Pro. F wrote: »

As of this moment Scholes has done nothing to prove that he is a reliable judge of centre-backs, that he has anything more than a basic midfielder's understanding of defensive organisation or that he has any understanding of the defensive shape of a 3412.

Just because he has was an excellent attacking CM and just because he has worked with these centre-backs does not make his opinions on them automatically valid. When, in expressing those opinions, he neglects to mention crucial considerations about the problems with the team's current defensive shape, then the validity of his opinion on the centre-backs has to be questioned.

To be fair, he's also a UEFA B' qualified coach. Saying he's not able to judge center halfs is like saying center forwards turned managers can't judge any other positions bar center forwards.

I think he'd have picked up a fair bit of knowledge about them from playing in front of them since whenever.

Kirby

UnitedIrishman wrote: »

To be fair, he's also a UEFA B' qualified coach. Saying he's not able to judge center halfs is like saying center forwards turned managers can't judge any other positions bar center forwards.

I think he'd have picked up a fair bit of knowledge about them from playing in front of them since whenever.

I know a person who has the B license, and let's just say they aren't exactly a tactical genius. I wouldn't read too much into that.

Quandary

If scholes wants to start criticising Utd players, then before knocking Rooney and our young centre halves he should start with our midfielders. Cleverley and Fletcher are barely good enough to be back up players at this stage.

I honestly think if we sort the midfield so many things would fall into place. The defence would have protection and Mata/Rooney would be getting plenty of quick ball in to feet. Herrera is able to do this but not when he's scampering around in front of the defence trying to break up opposition attacks.

No more signing a no.10/winger/defender and expecting them to adapt and play a position they are not suited to.

Please for the love of whoever, just sign a decent centre midfield player

Zico

Pro. F wrote: »

When, in expressing those opinions, he neglects to mention crucial considerations about the problems with the team's current defensive shape, then the validity of his opinion on the centre-backs has to be questioned.

What qualifies you to judge his judgement?

What have you done in your life that has allowed you to identify these crucial considerations Paul Scholes has overlooked?

You may disagree with him but it's coming across as though you think you know better, which is a bit of a fantasy unless you are actually a professional coach at one of the world's biggest clubs.

twam2008

super_furry wrote: »

Still baffles me that United let two real leaders in Ferdinand and Vidic leave in the same season along with Evra who would have more of an influence than anyone currently in the United defence.

I know, there seems to be a real lack of planning, was reading an article earlier that spoke to a former Director of football at Chelsea, he was saying that any big transfers should be started 6 to 12 months in advance, you know what players you need to replace you work out your list of targets and start working on them. The United transfer approach over the last few windows seems pretty haphazard. Surely we had some kind of planning for Carrick, Rio, Vidic, Evra in place?

Chelsea’s former Director of Football Operations, Mike Forde, who oversaw the recruitment of some of the world’s biggest players to the Premier League, spoke of what’s needed to land a high-profile name. "You’re always evaluating the economics. If you’re a big team and you’re signing big players, you’re doing your work six, nine or sometimes 12 months out so there’s a lot of preparation from data and various reports. It’s a long, drawn-out process and the bigger the player, the more time you have to spend to make sure it’s the right option.”

Peist2007

ericzeking wrote: »

I played in goals for my career, more GAA though for me, if you want to make it to 'the very top'...you have to pick one or the other!! :pac::pac::pac:


You are getting super excited by the fact I and others said his punditry was lacking....I actually referenced his lack of eloquence as to how he gets his point across.

No one is saying he doesn't understand football. We all loved him as a player.

You sound like a typical overly partisan blinkered fan, just because someone is a club legend you're going to revere absolutely everything about them, regardless. It's impossible to discuss anything with someone like that.

The bold bit. Dear God no. United were winning league titles with what i called at the time a poor team. Imagine what i think now? I find someone called EriczeKing calling me a blinkered fan to be funny too. Your entire Boards persona based on Eric Cantona? Ok!

And i swear i am not excited about this. I merely am pointing out that it is a pretty safe bet to say that Scholes knows more about setting a team up defensively and has seen more teams set up defensively in a professional context than anyone here. Saying that he is somehow demoted to your level because "he only played in a 442" is too silly to even elaborate on.

As for Jose Mourinho and Benitez mentioned above, i take the point. But it misses my point. I am not saying an ex player is automatically going to know the game inside out. But we arent talking about Duncan Ferguson here. Anyone who has ever watched Paul Scholes should see his innate knowledge of the game every time.

Maximus Alexander

UnitedIrishman wrote: »

To be fair, he's also a UEFA B' qualified coach. Saying he's not able to judge center halfs is like saying center forwards turned managers can't judge any other positions bar center forwards.

I think he'd have picked up a fair bit of knowledge about them from playing in front of them since whenever.

Like most United fans, if Scholes has something to say about football, I want to hear it. He's obviously going to have insights into the game that we don't have, but that doesn't make him infallible. There seems to be an attitude here that you can't question him, because who are you to disagree with him about anything?

The only way that line of reasoning makes sense is if we accept that Scholes is incapable of being incorrect, or misjudging something. That's obviously not the case. Otherwise, what would happen if Scholes and some other former footballer with a UEFA coaching qualification disagreed on something? They couldn't both be right - the universe would have to implode.

Peist2007

Zico wrote: »

You may disagree with him but it's coming across as though you think you know better, which is a bit of a fantasy unless you are actually a professional coach at one of the world's biggest clubs.

Which is the basis of my point. I found Pro F's statement to be funny.

Hank Scorpio

Pro. F wrote: »

As of this moment Scholes has done nothing to prove that he is a reliable judge of centre-backs, that he has anything more than a basic midfielder's understanding of defensive organisation or that he has any understanding of the defensive shape of a 3412.

Just because he has was an excellent attacking CM and just because he has worked with these centre-backs does not make his opinions on them automatically valid. When, in expressing those opinions, he neglects to mention crucial considerations about the problems with the team's current defensive shape, then the validity of his opinion on the centre-backs has to be questioned.

Scholes has played at the very top for 2 decades, the word basic doesn't come into his criteria. At a professional level Scholes and all the other players would have been involved and drilled into so many defensive scenarios working with the defenders. We're talking about the very top here in professional sport. Of course he has a high level understanding of defensive organisation, he has a high level understanding of everything that's involved in football because that's his job and what he was trained to listen to, practice and drill day in day out for over 20 years

On the 2nd point he has not only played as an attacking midfielder but also a holding midfielder who controlled the tempo of games and was one of the best in the world is doing so. Again this shows his intelligence in understanding different positions and adapting to them. I think you really underestimate the level involved for all personel working at the very top in professional sport.

My original point was I would trust Scholes judgement of United defenders for obvious reasons, we have no idea the level involved in understanding the game in all positions compared to someone like him, even though some of us want to believe we do

secman

Scholes vision on a pitch was just quite unbelievable.. a treasure to behold...... can't be that bad off a pitch ..just sayin

UnitedIrishman

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Like most United fans, if Scholes has something to say about football, I want to hear it. He's obviously going to have insights into the game that we don't have, but that doesn't make him infallible. There seems to be an attitude here that you can't question him, because who are you to disagree with him about anything?

The only way that line of reasoning makes sense is if we accept that Scholes is incapable of being incorrect, or misjudging something. That's obviously not the case. Otherwise, what would happen if Scholes and some other former footballer with a UEFA coaching qualification disagreed on something? They couldn't both be right - the universe would have to implode.

I'm not disagreeing win the fact that people can disagree with his opinion, I'm merely disagreeing with the someone's opinion that he doesn't know anything about center halfs. That was hard to write and I've probably still articulated it wrong! :pac:

Peist2007

nuxxx wrote: »

Scholes has played at the very top for 2 decades, the word basic doesn't come into his criteria. At a professional level Scholes and all the other players would have been involved and drilled into so many defensive scenarios working with the defenders. We're talking about the very top here in professional sport. Of course he has a high level understanding of defensive organisation, he has a high level understanding of everything that's involved in football because that's his job and what he was trained to listen to, practice and drill day in day out for over 20 years

On the 2nd point he has not only played as an attacking midfielder but also a holding midfielder who controlled the tempo of games and was one of the best in the world is doing so. Again this shows his intelligence in understanding different positions and adapting to them. I think you really underestimate the level involved for all personel working at the very top in professional sport.

My original point was I would trust Scholes judgement of United defenders for obvious reasons, we have no idea the level involved in understanding the game in all positions compared to someone like him, even though some of want to believe we do

And again. I think i should pay some lads to put my point across better

bullvine

secman wrote: »

Scholes vision on a pitch was just quite unbelievable.. a treasure to behold...... can't be that bad off a pitch ..just sayin

Gazza had unreal vision as well wouldnt take his opinion of football though!

Peist2007

I think the opinions of guys like Scholes are vital at this time. If we tell the Class of 92 that their day has gone then we will be jettisoning the wisdom of real winners. Given the complete muppet we have trying to make us a complete laughing stock in terms of transfers, i think it is no harm the likes of Scholes outlining publicly that 5 top players are needed.

Felexicon

Just flicked over the last few pages.

Is Scholes out of retirement?

super_furry

bullvine wrote: »

Gazza had unreal vision as well wouldnt take his opinion of football though!

Gazza didn't play alongside and train alongside almost everyone at Old Trafford right now.

Pro. F

UnitedIrishman wrote: »

To be fair, he's also a UEFA B' qualified coach. Saying he's not able to judge center halfs is like saying center forwards turned managers can't judge any other positions bar center forwards.

I think he'd have picked up a fair bit of knowledge about them from playing in front of them since whenever.

I didn't say that he's not able to judge centre-halfs. I said, as of this moment Scholes has done nothing to prove that he is a reliable judge of centre-backs.

I know a guy who holds a B licence. I've seen him run his training sessions and talked to him while we both watch a game from the sidelines. He's a nice fella, but his knowledge is nothing unusual at all.

I've seen plenty of UEFA pro-licensed managers working in the very highest leagues who are poor judges of centre-backs.

secman

bullvine wrote: »

Gazza had unreal vision as well wouldnt take his opinion of football though!

Not a patch on Scholsey on or off a pitch...... Gazza unfortunately has mental health issues.. god love him...........wish him well.

keane2097

.

secman

deleted.........

keane2097

secman wrote: »

Lovely.............

Hadn't refreshed the page - have deleted the gif now. Apologies, not my form.

bucketybuck

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

There seems to be an attitude here that you can't question him, because who are you to disagree with him about anything?

No, this whole argument began when Scholes mildly criticised our defenders and then one poster said Scholes opinion should be disregarded because of blah blah reasons.

Adamocovic

I was going to read the few pages I've missed but judging by it I don't think I will bother. Seems mostly talk about Scholes, he must have released a new article about us. Don't think I'll bother reading arguments about his opinions.

Hopefully we get another signing before the window closes, if not I imagine a lot of people will be unhappy.

Corvo

Adamocovic wrote: »

I was going to read the few pages I've missed but judging by it I don't think I will bother. Seems mostly talk about Scholes, he must have released a new article about us. Don't think I'll bother reading arguments about his opinions.

Hopefully we get another signing before the window closes, if not I imagine a lot of people will be unhappy.

They'll be unhappy anyway, seems a genuine theme.

Liam McPoyle

SSN reporting that Beckenbauer (sp) reckons Khedira would fit in perfectly at Munich.

No chance we would get him if we were up against them and probably if Arsenal make a move either.

Larry Wildman

I'm not convinced that having the Class of '92 around is such a great idea.

By all means, celebrate the past but there's a counterargument that having these guys around undermines what the current regime is trying to achieve.

We all know that good players don't necessarily make good coaches, so perhaps Scholes' opinion isn't that worthwhile at all?

MagicMarker

Larry Wildman wrote: »

I'm not convinced that having the Class of '92 around is such a great idea.

By all means, celebrate the past but there's a counterargument that having these guys around undermines what the current regime is trying to achieve.

We all know that good players don't necessarily make good coaches, so perhaps Scholes' opinion isn't that worthwhile at all?

The class of 92 are not around. Giggs is asst manager and Nicky Butt is a coach, that's it. Scholes/Beckham and the Nevilles are not involved.

Let LVG worry about that kind of stuff, you can be sure if he wasn't happy about he'd make changes.

newballsplease

Scholes was spot on with what he said. The fact he was still in the team at such a late age tells the story.
Utd have been lacking quality in Central midfield for years now.
Its got on top of the team now and it seems the club will suffer for years unless it is addressed now.
I have no idea why LVG wouldnt be interested in Toni Kroos but surely a bid had to have been made? If not its bizarre.
If the club goes without signing a top class central midfielder before the window closes, theyre up sh*t creek.
Di mario wont solve that issue.

Pro. F

Zico wrote: »

What qualifies you to judge his judgement?

What have you done in your life that has allowed you to identify these crucial considerations Paul Scholes has overlooked?

You may disagree with him but it's coming across as though you think you know better, which is a bit of a fantasy unless you are actually a professional coach at one of the world's biggest clubs.

This is all I have done:
- Watched a lot of football, both in the flesh and on TV
- Played a little bit of football
- Read four or five coaching/tacitcs books
- Watched about three or four good coaching videos and a lot of shorter and/or lower quality ones
- Read a few autobiographies
- Read a lot of websites of widely varying quality
- Spent a lot of my time talking and thinking about football on here over the last five years or so

Now with that background, I've formed an opinion that a static back line of 5 defenders with only two midfielders protecting the entire width of the pitch in front of them is not going to work defensively. I've never seen any team play like that successfully and I have never heard of any coach or thinker on the game advocating it as a good idea.

Any defensive tactical work I have seen, heard or read talks about the importance of balance, width and depth in defence. Any analysis or explanation of the 3CB/2WB system I have seen talks about the importance of players (be it midfielders or wing-backs) moving between the two defensive lines (back-line and midfield) to fill in the gaps to keep the width and depth when defending.

When you watch United defending at the moment you can see that this is clearly not happening. When defending, the three CBs and two WBs most often line up in a straight line across the pitch and the two central midfielders are left to chase shadows trying to cover the width of the pitch (they get occasional help from the front three). That leaves oceans of space for the opposition in front of our back line and allows them to play through balls and long shots with ease.

I would argue that that is by far the biggest issue with the defence at the moment (it's very early days yet, most likely LvG will sort it) and I argued that it would cause these problems when I watched games in pre-season. Both goals on Saturday were scored by unmarked men in front of our deepest line of defenders. So to criticise our young centre-backs in a long and detailed written piece, making specific reference to the last game, with not a single mention of this problem with the team shape is not in any way convincing that Scholes has a valid opinion on what is going on defensively.

Now, you can go ahead and mock my lack of experience in the game and how I have educated myself on the subject. I have no authority to appeal to beyond a reasonable knowledge I searched out myself and a well formed argument. You can go ahead and assume that because Scholes was a great creative central midfielder that his opinion is automatically more valid. You can assume that even though he didn't mention any of it in his long and detailed article, where he criticised the defenders, that he does indeed know about the defensive shape issue but just chose not to, or forgot, to mention it. However, given the number of great players who we have seen to go on to be awful managers and pundits, I think those are very ill-advised assumptions to make.

Pro. F

secman wrote: »

Except he wasn't a basic midfielder........................ oh to have an 18/19 yr old Scholesy.................

I didn't say he was a basic midfielder. He was an exceptional creative midfielder and, at best, a passable midfield defender. So his understanding of defending can be expected to be of the basic type that a midfielder would have.

Peist2007

Pro. F wrote: »

I didn't say he was a basic midfielder. He was an exceptional creative midfielder and, at best, a passable midfield defender. So his understanding of defending can be expected to be of the basic type that a midfielder would have.

What basic type of defensive knowledge do you think he has? Do you not see how presumptuous and laden with guesswork the above is?

I also thought United were playing with wing-backs and 3 centre halves rather than a "flat back 5"

steoin

Zico wrote: »

What qualifies you to judge his judgement?

What have you done in your life that has allowed you to identify these crucial considerations Paul Scholes has overlooked?

You may disagree with him but it's coming across as though you think you know better, which is a bit of a fantasy unless you are actually a professional coach at one of the world's biggest clubs.

Eh....appeal to authority much?

beno619

Leroy42 wrote: »

Madrid owe us nothing. You'll find the the players we sold them wanted to go and they paid us for them.

Ronaldo was the bargain of the century.

secman

It's all getting to us............ please let us have at least 3 more signings of top drawer players.. if only and then we could talk the forum UP.............. positive vibes............. we so much took them for granted. those posi vibes..............:D

Pro. F

secman wrote: »

Scholes vision on a pitch was just quite unbelievable.. a treasure to behold...... can't be that bad off a pitch ..just sayin

Vision when in possession on the pitch has more to do with a player's control of the ball than something special about their eyes or understanding of formations and tactics. When a player can control the ball well (and Scholes was near perfect at it) then they can spend more time looking around for the right pass or shot (and he had the skill to execute both of those perfectly too).

When he was defending, Scholes' positioning and tracking of runs was adequate at best. So there's an entire half of the game that he didn't read so well.

Pro. F

bucketybuck wrote: »

No, this whole argument began when Scholes mildly criticised our defenders and then one poster said Scholes opinion should be disregarded because of blah blah reasons.

He did not mildly criticise our defenders. That is bullshít.

beno619

Your Airbag wrote: »

I was thinking the exact same myself. He was all laughs doing his ice bucket challenge the other day too.

He seems to have little care about trying to push himself and become good player and a starter for UTD in one of our most in need areas. If he wanted to push himself he could become something as the need is there but he looks perfectly happy to be a bench warmer taking a wage from the club and joking around with the lads.

Ahh lads, Ando has long been the character in the dressing room.

He was saying his goodbyes after the confirmation on his Fiorentina loan, this mercenary line used on him is ott.

Peist2007

Pro. F wrote: »

Vision when in possession on the pitch has more to do with a player's control of the ball than something special about their eyes or understanding of formations and tactics. When a player can control the ball well (and Scholes was near perfect at it) then they can spend more time looking around for the right pass or shot (and he had the skill to execute both of those perfectly too).

When he was defending, Scholes' positioning and tracking of runs was adequate at best. So there's an entire half of the game that he didn't read so well.

Vision is more to do with spacial awareness. Ball control can be cited as an element to any skill in the game but, without an appreciation of the space, no amount of ball control can help you