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

Maximus Alexander

zerks wrote: »

Has to be posted.

That's a really good edit, respect to that person's PS skills.

Cantona's Collars

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

That's a really good edit, respect to that person's PS skills.

Wait 'til you see the video in the humour thread,whoever did it is a genius.

Flint Fredstone

bucketybuck wrote: »

Really? Why don't you answer a few questions asked...

If he isn't good enough, why is he even there? If he is there, why isn't he given more chances? And what do you think this situation does for his development?

I've already answered, you must be skimming.

UnitedIrishman

The only thing about the youth debate that I disagree with is that you can't on the one hand say Van Gaal isn't giving them a chance because he isn't playing the likes of Perreira and Januzaj and then say it's only down to injuries when the likes of Rashford and Lingard are getting started ahead of them. Injuries has a large deal to do with it but there's also a good chance that the other lads have passed out the two mentioned in terms of application and form in training.

jimmytwotimes 2013

Wud be wary of any deal for James Rodriguez, think he's a decent player but not that quick and we badly need pace in the team.

For what he'd probably cost, I'd stay away from him.

TheDoc

RE: Squad issue. Even with a more meaty squad, I'd imagine the injuries suffered over two seasons would still take its toll.

That some positions are being filled by youth players is exactly why you have youth acadamies and reserve teams.

I think there I some good criticism of Van Gaals choice of squad size (although this was a known factor upon his arrival) but there is no keeping happy 3rd choice players at a big club unfortunately.

Apart from the striker position, I don't think there can be genuine criticsm of the squad. Perhaps CB, but wasnt Blind played there in pre season? So clearly was something going he was thinking about.

I could understand why apart from a world class signing, Van Gaal would have been happy with Smalling, Jones,Rojo ,Blind and McNair going into the season. And injuries aside, even factorin a few, I could see why he would be happy enough.

I think there this, and should be , some mitigation for two major injury crisis' in his two seasons. And I see no indication that it is causd by Van Gaal or his training.

TheDoc

zerks wrote: »

They were discussing it on Off The Ball last night,seems the 2 aren't in Zidane's plans.

Surely the president's plans, as the manager is inconsequential and I'd be surprised if Zidane lasts next season.

I'd be all over Isco like a rash. Rodriguez I'm not so sure. Can never settle with an opinion on him.

bucketybuck

TheDoc wrote: »

I think there this, and should be , some mitigation for two major injury crisis' in his two seasons. And I see no indication that it is causd by Van Gaal or his training.

Mitigation for what? Our abject performances over the course of two seasons have not been as a result of injuries.

adox

The small squad has cost Utd dearly. So he wants a small squad and will rely on youth players also if needs be. The youth players (for the most part) only get a look in if there are injuries, which turns into a self fulfilling prophecy.

If we had a bigger squad of senior players the team would be rotated more, the likes of Martial wouldnt be playing every game and we are blessed he lasted so long before getting injured.

It could easily be argued that we wouldnt have as many injuries if the same players werent playing as many games.

reducing the squad size after getting back into the CL was madness and was always going to cost him his job.

Mitch Connor

TheDoc wrote: »

RE: Squad issue. Even with a more meaty squad, I'd imagine the injuries suffered over two seasons would still take its toll.

That some positions are being filled by youth players is exactly why you have youth acadamies and reserve teams.

I think there I some good criticism of Van Gaals choice of squad size (although this was a known factor upon his arrival) but there is no keeping happy 3rd choice players at a big club unfortunately.

Apart from the striker position, I don't think there can be genuine criticsm of the squad. Perhaps CB, but wasnt Blind played there in pre season? So clearly was something going he was thinking about.

I could understand why apart from a world class signing, Van Gaal would have been happy with Smalling, Jones,Rojo ,Blind and McNair going into the season. And injuries aside, even factorin a few, I could see why he would be happy enough.

I think there this, and should be , some mitigation for two major injury crisis' in his two seasons. And I see no indication that it is causd by Van Gaal or his training.

There can be some mitigation with regards the injuries. the amount we have had in defence is shocking.

However - he went into this season with Smalling, Jones, Rojo and Blind as the senior CB options.

Injury prone. Injury prone. Injury prone. Completely unproven and gamble (has done well, to be fair).

To have not added a top CB to that lot in the summer was a terrible decision, imo.

At full back it is unfair to think he should have planned for Valencia, Shaw, Darmian and Young to all be injured but also having Valencia and Young as prominent full back options was stupid to begin with.

Up front/in attack is where the excuses stop though, imo.

He didn't want Januzaj or Keane in the squad, so any injuries to them is meaningly in the argument - he planned to be without them. He went into the season with Rooney (a form/fitness worry), Martial (and adaption/development worry) and Wilson as the only recognised strikers in the squad. Got rid of Wilson then too (and had no plans to recall Keane at the time). To create such a lack of forward options in the squad was a disgrace - and the injuries aren't surprising either - Martial has been ran into the ground. No selection rotation to speak of.

For the majority or our crap performances this season, we have had a side close to what you have to consider LVGs first choice out.

Look at the line ups in the following games and tell me where the missing significant players are (that LVG didn't chose to exclude).

Newcastle 0-0.
Swansea 1-2.
Arsenal 0-3.
CSKA 1-1
PSV 0-0

Got bored at that point - look at the season and line ups here: http://www.stretfordend.co.uk/seasons/season2016.html

In most cases of poor results I don't think you can look at the line up and argue it was down to being decimated by injuries. 1 or 2 players might be missing but that is surely relatively normal for football - not having a squad to cope with it, deliberately, is not. For example, losing one striker (rooney) and only having one other striker to call upon through decisions you have made is not a mitigating circumstance - it is a failure to plan ahead or manage a squad properly.

In reality, it is only the last couple of weeks that you could argue the injuries have really hit the crap fan (rooney and martial's injuries in quick succession) and we did fine in terms or performances and results in that time.

jayo26

Injuries aside the biggest problem with united under lvg has been style of play and not been able break down smaller teams and no passion or determination in the team thats not down to injuries the simple fact is the team seemed to have turned a corner in this regard in past few weeks apart from Sunderland and first game against Midgetland so it be intresting to see if it carries on as the injuried players come back.

TheDoc

bucketybuck wrote: »

Mitigation for what? Our abject performances over the course of two seasons have not been as a result of injuries.

I think it's a mitigating factor in the argument over squad size. I'd assume any management team worth their salt would work in some forecasting for injuries, and two seasons now we have had exceptional/edge cases regarding injury pileup.

I get what people are saying, just not sure how realistic is it to maintain a bigger squad and keeping everyone happy and motivated.

The striker point and CB point I'll agree with. But I get the vibe that in some cases people are questioning why we don't have like a 3rd choice specialist right back or a third choice winger of genuine quality. Where it's rare to see it in any squad, nevermind at a club where all players should be pushing hard for a first team spot, and our "squad players" would historically be first team players in a large portion of other PL clubs.

So I guess I'm trying to ascertain where people are having the issue. If it's up front and at Cb, I'll concur. If it's people beating Van Gaal over the fullback positions for example, I think that is a bit extreme.

Mitch Connor

TheDoc wrote: »

I think it's a mitigating factor in the argument over squad size. I'd assume any management team worth their salt would work in some forecasting for injuries, and two seasons now we have had exceptional/edge cases regarding injury pileup.

I get what people are saying, just not sure how realistic is it to maintain a bigger squad and keeping everyone happy and motivated.

The striker point and CB point I'll agree with. But I get the vibe that in some cases people are questioning why we don't have like a 3rd choice specialist right back or a third choice winger of genuine quality. Where it's rare to see it in any squad, nevermind at a club where all players should be pushing hard for a first team spot, and our "squad players" would historically be first team players in a large portion of other PL clubs.

So I guess I'm trying to ascertain where people are having the issue. If it's up front and at Cb, I'll concur. If it's people beating Van Gaal over the fullback positions for example, I think that is a bit extreme.

My squad issues:

In terms of numbers there are problems at CB (especially as 3 of the 4 senior CBs were injured a good bit last season) and up front specifically. Given the lack of game time given in the hopes of developing Januzaj or Pereira I also have issues with the numbers in the AM positions (wide or central).

The full back positions have been an injury mess you couldn't think of - but my problem here is more so quality - I contend Young and Valencia are rubbish full backs and relying on them in those positions from a quality point of view was insane. And I actually like Young as a player, and think he is one of the better ones at United in terms of application and work-rate. As a first or second choice FB though... no thanks.

However, I also don't think injuries are the reason for where we are this season in terms of league position or CL failings - were have been crap in both with enough of the first choice 11 or senior players to pick from; the failings are down to the football that has been played, not the squad position of the players playing it.

bucketybuck

TheDoc wrote: »

So I guess I'm trying to ascertain where people are having the issue. If it's up front and at Cb, I'll concur. If it's people beating Van Gaal over the fullback positions for example, I think that is a bit extreme.

The issue doesn't need to be over analysed.

Before the season started multiple posters clearly and repeatedly stated that our squad was not going to cope when the injuries hit. Low and behold, the injuries hit and the squad didn't cope.

When everybody says something is going to happen you don't really get to use excuses, even if there are mitigating factors they are really going to sound hollow after the fact.

Its only a minor point anyway, as pointed out previously injuries are not the root of our problems this season.

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

I get the feeling that the tide has turned somewhat with van Gaal after the week and the falling on the ground and the passion he showed has made the fans think, hey, maybe this guy can come good for us.

You're probably right. There are a lot of stupid people who will have their opinions swayed by that kind of irrelevant stuff.

Nalz

adox wrote: »

The small squad has cost Utd dearly. So he wants a small squad and will rely on youth players also if needs be. The youth players (for the most part) only get a look in if there are injuries, which turns into a self fulfilling prophecy.

This sentence can some up the last month.... and retrospectively LVGs reign as Uniteds manager.

Great simple post adox.

v3ttel

bucketybuck wrote: »

Really? Why don't you answer a few questions asked...

I would have thought he didn't answer this, because the answers to the questions you asked were blatantly obvious.

However, if you insist on having someone break it down for you....

bucketybuck wrote: »

If he isn't good enough, why is he even there? If he is there, why isn't he given more chances? And what do you think this situation does for his development?

He is 20, he is a good prospect. He is not better than Mata who is our current #10. He may not be good enough right now, but with experience of being in and around the match day squad and developing through training and playing for the U21s, he may be good enough in the future.

Do you sell any players who are good prospects because they aren't at their peak level when they are 20? Do you loan the player when the squad is already paper thin? Do you stick him into the team and leave a better player on the bench to just to aid one players development when you're already heavily reliant on kids? The answer to all to all questions is no, if we need to be explicit.

bucketybuck wrote: »

If he is there

I can assure you he is at the club at the time of writing this.

bucketybuck wrote: »

why isn't he given more chances?

Mata is our #10 and is a better player than Pereira, who is best suited to that position. Pereira isn't good enough defensively to be trusted at part of a 2 in CM. Martial, Memphis, Young and Lingard are better wide options. Herrera and Rooney are better #10s when asked to play there. Mata (rightly or wrongly) was deemed to be another better wide option.

bucketybuck wrote: »

And what do you think this situation does for his development?

It is not preferable over guaranteed first team football. Januzaj and Wilson have gone on loan but haven't played week in week out.

If the optimal option isn't available, getting him integrated into the first team squad, giving him chances when the opportunity arises and playing regularly for the U21s is the next best thing.

If Pereira has been so grossly mistreated, why did he sign a new 4 year contract a couple of months ago?

I am pleased to have signed my new contract. I would like to thank the manager for giving me the opportunity to join the first-team squad.

I am at the right club to continue my development as a player and to learn as much as I can.

If he's good enough, he'll play. Can someone change that Wilson drowning gif to say PEREIRA!

Vic Vinegar

Classic v3ttel!

Pro. F

TheDoc wrote: »

I think it's a mitigating factor in the argument over squad size. I'd assume any management team worth their salt would work in some forecasting for injuries, and two seasons now we have had exceptional/edge cases regarding injury pileup.

I get what people are saying, just not sure how realistic is it to maintain a bigger squad and keeping everyone happy and motivated.

The striker point and CB point I'll agree with. But I get the vibe that in some cases people are questioning why we don't have like a 3rd choice specialist right back or a third choice winger of genuine quality. Where it's rare to see it in any squad, nevermind at a club where all players should be pushing hard for a first team spot, and our "squad players" would historically be first team players in a large portion of other PL clubs.

So I guess I'm trying to ascertain where people are having the issue. If it's up front and at Cb, I'll concur. If it's people beating Van Gaal over the fullback positions for example, I think that is a bit extreme.

You are trying to portray the situation of maintaining an appropriately equipped squad as far more difficult and rare than it actually is. You are doing so in order to defend Van Gaal in the face of his obvious failings. It was obvious to many at the start of the season that Van Gaal had left the squad dangerously under staffed, but you defended his decisions and you're still doing so now, even after the issues that were predicted all came to pass.

Nobody is (nor was at the start of the season) saying that we need a specialist third choice right winger, like you are trying to pretend. But it is obvious that we need a better selection of wingers for the formation we are trying to play.

We started this season with Mata, Martial, Memphis, Young, Valencia and Lingaard as the wing options. Mata wasn't a good player in that position; Memphis was new to the league; Martial was new to the league and needed to cover up front; Young and Valencia weren't particularly good; Lingaard was an untested, young player. Just add one quality option to that position and the prospects for the team would have improved immeasurably. That would have pushed Mata to 10, where he's a much better player, and Young and Valencia further down the pecking order. Young and/or Valencia might have gotten the hump and eventually wanted to leave the club, but that would not have adversely impacted this season and would have been relatively easy to deal when it eventually happened next summer or later.

So there you go. There's one position fixed when you couldn't imagine any solution better than the one Van Gaal chose and you defended. Despite what you would like to portray it was extremely simple.

Cantona's Collars

Pro. F wrote: »

You're probably right. There are a lot of stupid people who will have their opinions swayed by that kind of irrelevant stuff.

I think he'll still be gone at the end of the season and Woodward moved to concentrate on the commercial side with somebody brought in to deal with transfers.
It is a nice change to see LVG on the sideline instead of sitting scribbling notes during games,maybe he has realised to interact more and also allow the players more freedom in games.Mata benefits most from a roving role instead of being stuck within a defined 10 yard space along with everybody else.I've said it umpteen times that movement and pace trumps possession football time and again.

bucketybuck

v3ttel wrote: »

I would have thought he didn't answer this, because the answers to the questions you asked were blatantly obvious.

So why couldn't he answer?

However, if you insist on having someone break it down for you....

I didn't.

He is 20, he is a good prospect

. Never said he wasn't.

He is not better than Mata who is our current #10.

Never said he was.

Do you sell any players who are good prospects because they aren't at their peak level when they are 20?

Never said we should.

Do you loan the player when the squad is already paper thin?

Never said we should

Do you stick him into the team and leave a better player on the bench to just to aid one players development when you're already heavily reliant on kids?

Thats not really the discussion now is it.

The answer to all to all questions is no, if we need to be explicit.

Not the answer to any question asked unfortunately.

I can assure you he is at the club at the time of writing this.

Never questioned that.

Mata is our #10 and is a better player than Pereira

Never said he wasn't.

Pereira isn't good enough defensively to be trusted at part of a 2 in CM.

Never said he was.

Martial, Memphis, Young and Lingard are better wide options.

They have done well haven't they.

Herrera and Rooney are better #10s when asked to play there.

Thats nice.

If the optimal option isn't available, getting him integrated into the first team squad, giving him chances when the opportunity arises and playing regularly for the U21s is the next best thing.

Thats also nice.

If Pereira has been so grossly mistreated, why did he sign a new 4 year contract a couple of months ago?

Strawman.

bucketybuck

Vic Vinegar wrote: »

Classic v3ttel!

If you mean responding to what he thinks was said rather than what the actual discussion was then I agree.

bangkok

Pro. F wrote: »

You're probably right. There are a lot of stupid people who will have their opinions swayed by that kind of irrelevant stuff.

winning games and showing passion is irrelevant or was it just the falling on the ground??

Flint Fredstone

bucketybuck wrote: »

So why couldn't he answer?
I didn't.

. Never said he wasn't. Never said he was.

Never said we should. Never said we should Thats not really the discussion now is it. Not the answer to any question asked unfortunately.

Never questioned that.

Never said he wasn't. Never said he was. They have done well haven't they. Thats nice.

Thats also nice.

Strawman.

I told you a while ago that Pereira is regularly on the bench because we have a small, depleted squad. If it's not Pereira it's going to be another kid.
No injuries throughout the squad and he probably doesn't make the bench more than a handful of times. He still plays fairly regularly for the U21s, he's not rotting away as you seem to think.

Why do you keep saying I didn't answer that question?

Maximus Alexander

bangkok wrote: »

winning games and showing passion is irrelevant or was it just the falling on the ground??

These parts I suspect.

bangkok

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

These parts I suspect.

showing passion is a negative??

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

winning games and showing passion is irrelevant or was it just the falling on the ground??

There is nobody who reads this thread who is stupid enough to think that my post implied that winning games is irrelevant. Your choice to make such an idiotic response reflects the type of poster you are.

Maximus Alexander

bangkok wrote: »

showing passion is a negative??

Is it?

beno619

TheDoc wrote: »

I get what people are saying, just not sure how realistic is it to maintain a bigger squad and keeping everyone happy and motivated.

He's failed to do it with a small squad anyway so its a bit of a moot point.

bucketybuck

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

I told you a while ago that Pereira is regularly on the bench because we have a small, depleted squad. If it's not Pereira it's going to be another kid.
No injuries throughout the squad and he probably doesn't make the bench more than a handful of times. He still plays fairly regularly for the U21s, he's not rotting away as you seem to think.

Why do you keep saying I didn't answer that question?

Periera has started on the bench 32 times this season, his place there has had nothing to do with injuries.

bangkok

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Is it?

no its not a negative. It would be quiet high on a list of attributes for a new manager

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

showing passion is a negative??

showing depression is a negative??

hiding elation is a negative??

hiding everything is a negative??

being secretive is a negative??

being a secret agent is a negative??

working for the government is a negative??

working for the Russian government is a positive??

working in Russia is a positive??

LVG wants to manage in Russia now??

/bangkok debating technique

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

no its not a negative. It would be quiet high on a list of attributes for a new manager

So why did you say it was a negative then?

Maximus Alexander

Lol, this place and the reading comprehension.

bangkok

Pro. F wrote: »

showing depression is a negative??

hiding elation is a negative??

hiding everything is a negative??

being secretive is a negative??

being a secret agent is a negative??

working for the government is a negative??

working for the Russian government is a positive??

working in Russia is a positive??

LVG wants to manage in Russia now??

/bangkok debating technique

not funny

bangkok

Pro. F wrote: »

So why did you say it was a negative then?

I asked the question

bangkok

Pro. F wrote: »

Is it okay for an older player to do it? Why hold older players to a different standard?

its ok for an older player to do it?

its not ok for a younger player to do it?

working for the government is a negative??

working for the Spanish government is a positive??

working in Spain is a positive??

LVG wants to manage Real Madrid now??

/Pro.F debating technique

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

I asked the question

Oh that makes it okay then. Just fire away and ask any random, non-sequitur question that pop into your head in response to any point put to you. Sure there's no responsibility on anybody to stick to the topic at hand or reply coherently to what has actually been said.

Btw, I have a question:

Being a Mexican air hostess is a negative??

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

its ok for an older player to do it?

its not ok for a younger player to do it?

working for the government is a negative??

working for the Spanish government is a positive??

working in Spain is a positive??

LVG wants to manage Real Madrid now??

/Pro.F debating technique

But you see that is not true. I don't ask idiotic, non-sequitur questions in response to points that have been put to me. You do.

bucketybuck

Pro. F wrote: »

Being a Mexican air hostess is a negative??

Ooh, I know this one!

bangkok

Pro. F wrote: »

But you see that is not true. I don't ask idiotic, non-sequitur questions in response to points that have been put to me. You do.

no but you post crap about leon britton being the best midfielder in England. Just saying

Nalz

what the f'uck lads

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

no but you post crap about leon britton being the best midfielder in England. Just saying

Just when it seemed like you couldn't be any more childish you push the envelope again.

bangkok

Pro. F wrote: »

There is nobody who reads this thread who is stupid enough to think that my post implied that winning games is irrelevant. Your choice to make such an idiotic response reflects the type of poster you are.

Flint Fredstone

bucketybuck wrote: »

Periera has started on the bench 32 times this season, his place there has had nothing to do with injuries.

We have no idea how many times he would have been on the bench had there not been an injury crisis all season.

What is it you are arguing now anyway? That LVG thinks he's good enough to be on the bench but not the pitch? Who's benefit is it for to name him on the bench but not play him much? I don't think LVG would have any problem not picking him at all if he wasn't good enough to play any part.
Could it be he's there as a last resort to cover a player that gets injured?

No, let's just say van Gaal is ruining the lads career. Fits the narrative better.

bucketybuck

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

We have no idea how many times he would have been on the bench had there not been an injury crisis all season.

What is it you are arguing now anyway? That LVG thinks he's good enough to be on the bench but not the pitch? Who's benefit is it for to name him on the bench but not play him much? I don't think LVG would have any problem not picking him at all if he wasn't good enough to play any part.
Could it be he's there as a last resort to cover a player that gets injured?

No, let's just say van Gaal is ruining the lads career. Fits the narrative better.

But I never said that. Thats the problem with you, you have never responded to the actual discussion, instead constantly running off with strawmen I never said.

And by the way, there has not been an injury crisis all season. Periera has not been on the bench 32 times because of injuries.

Jayop

Manchester United ‏@ManUtd 12m12 minutes ago
Louis van Gaal tells #MUTV Martial, Darmian and Smalling could all face Watford: "Players are coming back. It is positive." #mufc

bangkok

Jayop wrote: »

Manchester United ‏@ManUtd 12m12 minutes ago
Louis van Gaal tells #MUTV Martial, Darmian and Smalling could all face Watford: "Players are coming back. It is positive." #mufc

Rojo could be ok as well, great news

Jayop

Personally I'd line up like this...

....................DDG
Varela - Smalling - Blind - Darmian/Rojo
Lingard - Herrera Morgan - Memphis
....................Mata
..................Martial


Keep Rashford on the bench and bring him on with 20 or 30 to go to give Martial a rest.

downwesht

We should stick with the kids for the rest of the season.Rooneys influence on the dressing room has been removed and all of a sudden the form of the team improves.The pressure is off them,Rooney in my opinion is not captain material and does nothing on the pitch to reorganise during a game.