Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2016 - Mod Warning link in OP 20/3

Mitch Connor

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Saying he's not giving youth a chance, but is instead being forced into it is completely wrong headed.

In your opinion.

In my opinion if he had a fully fit squad to pick from last night than Riley would not have started at left back, Rashford would not have started up front. I reckon if Fellaini was fit last night he probably would have started ahead of Rashford, for example.

For me, to say he is giving youth a chance and developing players he would need to be picking those youth players ahead of more experienced players, when the opportunity is there to do so - but I feel the only player he has done this with (and done it fairly consistently) is Lingard. Every othe rplayer people praise him for developing has been thrown in to the side because all the other options in their position were injured.

As I said last night - look at the Rashford debut as an example.

LVG went in to September with 2 senior strikers and one youth striker in the first team squad - Rooney, Martial and Wilson.

Wilson got feck all game time or chances. Wilson was loaned out (when Keane was already out on loan) leaving us with just Rooney and Martial - with Rashford seemingly next up. Rashford appeared in not squads, never mind playing for the first team and Fellaini was used as the next man up in attack rather than Rashford, as was Memphis.

Keane comes back into the squad having asked (himself) for his loan to be terminated as opposed to LVG deciding it was time to give him a chance. Keane only gets into the match day squad after Rooney gets injured - and gets into the match day squad ahead of Rashford who had been (arguably) the 3rd or 4th choice striker at the club for 4 months - because there were only 2 or 3 other strikers at the club.

Keane then gets injured and then so does Martial - with Rooney and Fellaini also still injured. So Rashford comes into the side - when the only options available to LVG at this point, due to injuries, are to play him or move Memphis up front and bring Pereira in.

So, while we have some claming LVG should be praised for showing faith in Rashford and giving him a chance - I feel his actions over the course of the season show that he was only played because LVG had no other choices left.

In the same vein, I wouldn't praise Pellegrini for giving youth a chance vs Chelsea last weekend because, with 6 debutants in one game, I don't feel there was any planning involved in playing those players - other than to give senior players a few more days off and give himself a handy excuse for putting the FA Cup on lowest priority and basically throwing the game.

For managers to get praise for developing young players, imo, there needs to be a pattern to how and when the players are played, there needs to be some sort of plan and integration of the players into the match day squad and first team on occasions that aren't dictated solely by injury issues.

bucketybuck

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Saying he's not giving youth a chance, but is instead being forced into it is completely wrong headed.

For me this argument goes like this:

- Van Gaal is playing the kids.
- He is playing the kids because he has no other option.
- He has no other option because he cut the squad down to the bare bones.
- He cut the squad down to the bare bones because he wanted to play the kids.

Stated like that it all sounds like a reasonable plan, yes? He always wanted to use and develop the kids, yes?

The problem with it is that it isn't supported by the managers actions elsewhere. He hasn't handled most of the kids particularly well, he has messed more than a few of them around, he hasn't made any of them better than they were a year ago.

But most importantly, he has not used those kids except when he had to, only in emergencies. If he is all about the kids why do you only see them when we are stuck? When you think of developing youth you think of playing a kid alongside senior pros in the proper situations, against smaller teams and with older players there to protect and guide them. When does Van Gaal do that? How many times has an available senior player been dropped for a kid in the name of player development? Take the Newcastle game for example, the perfect game to play Varela and give him experience, but instead we see Ashley Young at right back. You never see a crap Mata taken out to give Pereira some development time, we never saw a putrid Rooney taken out to give Wilson some experience.

No, we only see these lads when Van Gaal has absolutely no other choice, and it completely undermines any attempts to claim his squad choices were all about trusting the kids.


Eta: Beaten I see, but the point is the same.

Polo_Mint

Id like to see Lingard, Rashford, Pereira, McNair, Wilson, Depay, Martial, Borthwick - Jackson, Blackett, Varela , Shaw and Schneiderlin building United future.

This would bring excitement back to United

Maximus Alexander

Why would he be dropping more talented and experienced senior players to start academy products instead? This almost never happens - there has to be a reason to drop your first string players, and more often than not it's down to injury. He still elected to get rid of third and fourth choice senior players and draw on the youth teams instead.

Now you make a pretty compelling argument that he has handled it badly, that maybe these players should have appeared in more squads and made some late sub appearances, etc. But that's a totally separate argument to saying that he hasn't relied on youth, hasn't given them a chance, and that it's basically an accident.

This can be valid:

bucketybuck wrote: »

- Van Gaal is playing the kids.
- He is playing the kids because he has no other option.
- He has no other option because he cut the squad down to the bare bones.
- He cut the squad down to the bare bones because he wanted to play the kids.

And he can still have handled it badly. They're separate arguments.

Mitch Connor

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Why would he be dropping more talented and experienced senior players to start academy products instead? This almost never happens - there has to be a reason to drop your first string players, and more often than not it's down to injury.

This just isn't true though.

Many, MANY players get their debuts and play games because the management team feel they are ready for the chance, the opposition and game allows (in theory) for some experimentation and the management team feel a senior player could be rested in favour of giving a young player.

You have stated this arguement previously too, and I completely disagreed with it then as well - young players can, and are, developed and brought into first team squads without injuries meaning there are literally no other options.

Did Beckham only get into the team because of injuries (along with a few other young players) or did Fergie feel a home game vs Galatasaray (i think) was a good game to blood a few younger players? Did Fergie only play young players in the League Cup because all the senior players just happened to be injured for those games?

Injuries CAN be a reason for players to be given a prolonged shot in the first team but it is hardly uncommon for players to be introduced and used in the first team on a rotational basis because the management team feel they are ready.

bangkok

great training session last night, hopefully we can give a good performance this sunday. Hopefully that was the turning point for Memphis

bucketybuck

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Why would he be dropping more talented and experienced senior players to start academy products instead?

Because thats what you need to do if you actually want young players to develop. You create the best environment for them to learn, and in the main they learn most by first playing without pressure in suitable games alongside experienced teammates.

Why drop experienced players for academy products? Because sometimes you take the long view and make the change so that when the time comes those kids will have had some prior experience.

This almost never happens - there has to be a reason to drop your first string players, and more often than not it's down to injury.

What about resting young players like Martial before he gets injured? What about taking underperforming players like Mata or Rooney out for a few games? These kids are our squad, so what about simple squad rotation? And what about player development?

There are plenty of reasons to drop a player for a game and don't forget, I'm not talking about dropping the first team for a load of kids, but simply taking a player out here and there at the right times to give these kids some gametime. Van Gaal doesn't do that unless he is stuck.

Maximus Alexander

Mitch Connor wrote: »

This just isn't true though.

Many, MANY players get their debuts and play games because the management team feel they are ready for the chance, the opposition and game allows (in theory) for some experimentation and the management team feel a senior player could be rested in favour of giving a young player.

You have stated this arguement previously too, and I completely disagreed with it then as well - young players can, and are, developed and brought into first team squads without injuries meaning there are literally no other options.

Did Beckham only get into the team because of injuries (along with a few other young players) or did Fergie feel a home game vs Galatasaray (i think) was a good game to blood a few younger players? Did Fergie only play young players in the League Cup because all the senior players just happened to be injured for those games?

Injuries CAN be a reason for players to be given a prolonged shot in the first team but it is hardly uncommon for players to be introduced and used in the first team on a rotational basis because the management team feel they are ready.

Using the likes of Beckham as an example doesn't really lend any weight to your position to be honest. You're relying on an exceptional talent to prove the point - is there anyone under 20 at United that you'd put on Beckham's level?

Maximus Alexander

bucketybuck wrote: »

What about resting young players like Martial before he gets injured? What about taking underperforming players like Mata or Rooney out for a few games? These kids are our squad, so what about simple squad rotation? And what about player dvelopment?

There are plenty of reasons to drop a player for a game and don't forget, I'm not talking about dropping the first team for a load of kids, but simply taking a player out here and there at the right times to give these kids some gametime. Van Gaal doesn't do that unless he is stuck.

As I said, I'm not arguing that he hasn't handled it badly. I said only a few days ago that Martial needed a rest. The fallacy that he didn't intend to have to rely on youths this season is what I have a problem with.

bucketybuck

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Using the likes of Beckham as an example doesn't really lend any weight to your position to be honest. You're relying on an exceptional talent to prove the point - is there anyone under 20 at United that you'd put on Beckham's level?

Then don't look at Beckham, look at one of his teammates, Nicky Butt.

Butt was brought into the squad around the same time as Beckham, a great player but not exceptional and he was often rotated into the team in league and cup games as a squad option, and not necessarily because of any injuries.

What about Fletcher, did he only play when everybody else was injured? Did Wes Brown only get on the field when everybody else was injured?

Mitch Connor

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

As I said, I'm not arguing that he hasn't handled it badly. I said only a few days ago that Martial needed a rest. The fallacy that he didn't intend to have to rely on youths this season is what I have a problem with.

Having to rely on them and only using them when absolutely required by circumstance is not showing faith or displaying good development though - which is the arguement (whether he should be getting praised for it). His stubborn use of the same core of first team players in 99% of games, when the squad was small, has been stupid - and shown poor regard for both the senior players and the youth players he should apparently be praised for showing faith in.

Had he created a small squad and used the young players to help keep the senior players fresh and fit, then yes - brilliant. But having created a small squad (to give youth a chance) and not actually use them until he has no choice shows a complete lack of faith in those young players - because he clearly doesn't want to use them unless he has no alternative choice

Maximus Alexander

bucketybuck wrote: »

Then don't look at Beckham, look at one of his teammates, Nicky Butt.

Butt was brought into the squad around the same time as Beckham, a great player but not exceptional and he was often rotated into the team in league and cup games as a squad option, and not necessarily because of any injuries.

What about Fletcher, did he only play when everybody else was injured? Did Wes Brown only get on the field when everybody else was injured?

To be honest, I don't recall the exact circumstances that led to players getting their chances from 12 to 25 years ago. Were better players who were fit and didn't need resting dropped for them in important matches? It's beside the point anyway, because again, I'm not arguing that LVG has handled the youth players well.

Mitch Connor

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

To be honest, I don't recall the exact circumstances that led to players getting their chances from 12 to 25 years ago. Were better players who were fit and didn't need resting dropped for them in important matches? It's beside the point anyway, because again, I'm not arguing that LVG has handled the youth players well.

But surely the argument has to be he has handled them well if people are saying he should be praised for showing faith in them and developing them. If he has handled it badly how can you praise him over it?

Maximus Alexander

Mitch Connor wrote: »

But surely the argument has to be he has handled them well if people are saying he should be praised for showing faith in them and developing them. If he has handled it badly how can you praise him over it?

I'm really not looking for anyone to praise him Mitch, I just get a bit tired of people losing the run of themselves looking for things to criticize by saying things like, for example, he isn't giving young players a chance except by accident. It's not true. He intended to use them, even if he's made a balls of it.

rob316

LVG has always been a very good manager to bring through youth players. Did it at Barca and Bayern its his handling of established players has always been his problem.

I gotta wonder if ye are interested in bringing through youth, why appoint Mourinho who has zero track record in it?

bucketybuck

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Were better players who were fit and didn't need resting dropped for them in important matches?

Its not about the important matches, of course the best team gets selected for those, its about the marginal matches, the places where you do have a little leeway to make changes.

The example I keep coming back to is Varela. Thrown in at the deep end against Wolfsburg he did an acceptable job, he got another game at Bournemouth and did well again. Our next game was against a crap Norwich side, I would fully have expected Varela to be given further gametime there to settle into his role and gain confidence. Nope, dropped for a winger to play at full back.

The Newcastle game came shortly after that. Newcastle, a crap team in horrendous form, surely the perfect time to give Varela another game? Nope, Ashley Young at full back again.

I don't want the kids playing in the crunch matches, but if we are going to use them then do it right and play them at the appropriate times, play them against the Newcastles and Norwich's of this world. If we did that maybe they would be ready for the days when we have 13 players injured and Arsenal up next.

rob316

rob316 wrote: »

LVG has always been a very good manager to bring through youth players. Did it at Barca and Bayern its his handling of established players has always been his problem.

I gotta wonder if ye are interested in bringing through youth, why appoint Mourinho who has zero track record in it?

Yep, looking to eat both pieces of the pie

bucketybuck

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I'm really not looking for anyone to praise him Mitch, I just get a bit tired of people losing the run of themselves looking for things to criticize by saying things like, for example, he isn't giving young players a chance except by accident. It's not true. He intended to use them, even if he's made a balls of it.

It is true.

He intended to use them? If we didn't have 13 players missing these lads would not be near the team, its a butchering of the word "intended" to use it here.

I am pretty damn confident that Van Gaal did not intend to use Rashford this season. He did not sit there at the start of the season and consider him in his first team plans. If he did, then why was the only recently recalled Will Keane in the Shrewsbury squad ahead of him?

bucketybuck

rob316 wrote: »

I gotta wonder if ye are interested in bringing through youth, why appoint Mourinho who has zero track record in it?

We are interested in bringing through youth.

But our goal is to win titles.

Maximus Alexander

bucketybuck wrote: »

It is true.

He intended to use them? If we didn't have 13 players missing these lads would not be near the team, its a butchering of the word "intended" to use it here.

I am pretty damn confident that Van Gaal did not intend to use Rashford this season. He did not sit there at the start of the season and consider him in his first team plans. If he did, then why was the only recently recalled Will Keane in the Shrewsbury squad ahead of him?

If any manager had 13 players missing they'd be using players that weren't in their first team plans. What kind of argument is that?

By keeping the squad small, he needed to lose a lot less than 13 players before having to draw from the youth setup - and he clearly knew this!

bucketybuck

bucketybuck wrote: »

We are interested in bringing through youth.

But our goal is to win titles.

So on that note who do you want as manager so?

Mitch Connor

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Yep, looking to eat both pieces of the pie

Well we have already missed out on two other two level managers who do have a record of bringing through youth and at this stage (for me) it looks like Mourinho and Pochetino are the only viable candidates. Pochetino would be more suited, but has less of a track record in winning trophies.

Mourinho is a successful manager and suited to the pressures at United, imo, and I also think if there are youth players that are sufficiently talented, he will play them (personal opinion). I would not, however, want him overseeing the youth football in any way - that should be for Butt (and others).

With the state United are in, they need someone who they can be confident in to bring success back to United - and I would say Mourinho is the standout in that regard.

If in turn he ignores youth completely, I will criticise him for it - and not praise him for playing the 6th choice left back when the other 5 are unavailable to play there.

Mitch Connor

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Well we have already missed out on two other two level managers who do have a record of bringing through youth and at this stage (for me) it looks like Mourinho and Pochetino are the only viable candidates. Pochetino would be more suited, but has less of a track record in winning trophies.

Mourinho is a successful manager and suited to the pressures at United, imo, and I also think if there are youth players that are sufficiently talented, he will play them (personal opinion). I would not, however, want him overseeing the youth football in any way - that should be for Butt (and others).

With the state United are in, they need someone who they can be confident in to bring success back to United - and I would say Mourinho is the standout in that regard.

If in turn he ignores youth completely, I will criticise him for it - and not praise him for playing the 6th choice left back when the other 5 are unavailable to play there.

No he's not the best option if you want to blood youth and be succesfull

Why do people continuously ignore the possibility of getting Simeone

He's done wonders with the Athletico Madrid academy

Mitch Connor

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

If any manager had 13 players missing they'd be using players that weren't in their first team plans. What kind of argument is that?

By keeping the squad small, he needed to lose a lot less than 13 players before having to draw from the youth setup - and he clearly knew this!

But only turning to them when the injuries rob him of any other option shows zero faith in the players in the first place. It is a very odd scenario LVG has created.

Creating a small squad where youth will have to be used does indicate faith in youth.
Not playing them until his hand is forced indicates no faith in them.

Ie. He didn't feel he could rest Martial at any point and bring Keane, Wilson or Rashford in for him, regardless of the game.

You can argue he has shown faith - as you have done - through how he has built the squad.

You can argue he has shown no faith - as I and others have done - by the actual use of the squad.

For me: actual use trumps possible intention.

Mitch Connor

M!Ck^ wrote: »

No he's not the best option if you want to blood youth and be succesfull

Ok, but that isn't an argument I made.

Mitch Connor

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Ok, but that isn't an argument I made.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Well we have already missed out on two other two level managers who do have a record of bringing through youth and at this stage (for me) it looks like Mourinho and Pochetino are the only viable candidates. Pochetino would be more suited, but has less of a track record in winning trophies.

Simeone

bucketybuck

M!Ck^ wrote: »

So on that note who do you want as manager so?

I stated my opinion on this many times. Even accepting his potential faults the only logical choice is Mourinho, and he should have been in months ago.

Mitch Connor

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Simeone

Seperate arguments - having missed out on Pep and Klopp, Mourino is the last of the 'big three' available, and Pochetino is the only other manager I see as a viable candidate right now.

My arguemtn for Mourinho is that he is the manager United could be most confident in to bring United success.

It may come at a cost of youth players, but I am not entirely convinced of that. I don't think Madrid, Inter or Chelsea have a great record regarding youth regardless of Mourinho - so I don't know that failures to bring through young players can be blamed on him entirely, and not put at least somewhat on the culture of the clubs involved - have their been a rake of young prodigies that have burst on to the scenes at those clubs since he left them?

Also, I do think United are moving away from determination to have a core of youth developed players (if that determination really existed) and more towards the instant success from money philosophy that prevails in football. Its not worked for us - obviously.

Maximus Alexander

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Ie. He didn't feel he could rest Martial at any point and bring Keane, Wilson or Rashford in for him, regardless of the game.

You can argue he has shown faith - as you have done - through how he has built the squad.

You can argue he has shown no faith - as I and others have done - by the actual use of the squad.

For me: actual use trumps possible intention.

I agree with the bolded part, Martial should have been rested sooner and I said as much myself several days ago. This certainly goes to an argument about LVG being poor at squad management, which is a different thing.

On the other hand, you yourself said earlier:

So Rashford comes into the side - when the only options available to LVG at this point, due to injuries, are to play him or move Memphis up front and bring Pereira in.

This would be a total Fergie move, Fergie who is hailed a promoter of young players. You only have to think back to Rafael in center midfield ahead of Pogba for an example of it. But LVG didn't do this, he put his trust in a young striker who, I think, had never even been in a first team squad before?

He could have hung on to Van Persie, or convinced Hernandez to stay. He could have said in January "Sh*t, Martial has played so many games this season that I've basically no backup for Rooney, I better pick someone up." But he made the clear decision that he'd have to draw from his youth team instead. It's not like this hadn't occurred to him. Yeah, he probably had Keane in his mind, how could he predict that his groin was going to explode after two minutes on the field? But even at that, he would have known that Rashford was next in line, whereas if he had four senior strikers this wouldn't be the case.

You can criticize his choices, I don't have a problem with that. But I don't agree that it was somehow unintended.

bangkok

M!Ck^ wrote: »

No he's not the best option if you want to blood youth and be succesfull

Why do people continuously ignore the possibility of getting Simeone

He's done wonders with the Athletico Madrid academy

because he has zero English. Would be a disaster

Mitch Connor

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

You can criticize his choices, I don't have a problem with that. But I don't agree that it was somehow unintended.

I would agree there may have been an original intention - it is still only 'may', as it could also be that LVG thought players like Lingard, Memphis, Martial, Rooney and Fellaini would (a) remain mostly uninjured for the season and (b) be versatile enough in the positions they can play that if one or two are injured, he can rotate the positions of the players to compensate that - meaning he did not build his squad on the basis he was confident Rashford could perform and score in the first team if required (and even his youth level record wouldn't indicate that was likely).

But my argument is more grounded in the fact that his lack of using the youth players at any point unless injuries force his hand show a lack of faith and a lack of intention to play them - otherwise they would have been integrated more so they wouldn't be an unknown factor when they were (basically) dumped into the first team in must win matches.

FutureGuy

Still horny today.

Can't wait for Sunday.

bucketybuck

FutureGuy wrote: »

Still horny today.

Can't wait for Sunday.

I would be very nervous about Sunday. Enjoyable as an easy win is, Arsenal are a far different outfit and could easily make mincemeat out of the team that played last night.

Lord TSC

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Why do people continuously ignore the possibility of getting Simeone

For me, there's a few things. The main thing, though, is he'd be an utter unknown in the PL; he's done very well in Spain, but that doesn't always translate over. Jose, and to an extent with Poch, is someone we know can do extremely well in the league. Jose is as close to a "sure thing" you can get.

As far as youth goes, I feel thats something you strive to achieve when you can't or already have built a stable foundation of success in some terms. Youth was a big part of United but came with a mix of players in their prime as well, and players with experience.

I'd be looking to bring in a few top tier players and winning trophies, THEN worry about bringing in youth.

Maximus Alexander

Mitch Connor wrote: »

But my argument is more grounded in the fact that his lack of using the youth players at any point unless injuries force his hand show a lack of faith and a lack of intention to play them - otherwise they would have been integrated more so they wouldn't be an unknown factor when they were (basically) dumped into the first team in must win matches.

Fair enough, although with the way the season has gone you could also argue that pretty much every game has been a must win match. :pac: I don't think it's a stretch to say the match day squads might have looked different if United were flying high at the top of the table.

Lord TSC

Link to the draw.

http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuropaleague/season=2016/draws/round=2000660/drawcentre/index.html

bangkok

at least we not going to Ukraine!!!

Maximus Alexander

Odds of United v Liverpool... improving...

RobertKK

Liverpool V Manchester United

Lord TSC

Liverpool

Cookie_Dough

Liverpool ha!! Will LvG keep up the streak!!!

Maximus Alexander

Yay we're in the quarter finals!

LuckyGent88

Good luck mods

bangkok

Liverpool V United on Paddys day.........world war 3

RobertKK

Lord TSC wrote: »

Liverpool

Punishment for the Mods :P :pac:

Lord TSC

Spurs vs Dortmund.

So thats two English teams out this round then...

Cookie_Dough

Spurs got Dortmund. That should be good. Hope we beat Liverpool, this place would be unbearable if they beat us:eek:

Lord TSC

RobertKK wrote: »

Punishment for the Mods :P :pac:

Two Pool/United matches in 1 week. Awesome :rolleyes:

RobertKK

Well the good thing is very little travel involved for the team.

LuckyGent88

Guess we keep lvg for another while then.
Not that he appears to be going anywhere anyway