Alas poor Carrick...forsooth, he's quite good now!

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber

Then its official. You are a lunatic

For me our defence gets put under pressure because it is sleeping. It keeps playing deep while our midfield is playing high. Our defensive line is too deep currently. That is why there keeps being a gapping hole between them and the midfield. They haven't adjusted to the fact we are now taking the game to opponents through out in attack. Rather than sitting back and hittng only on the counter like in our last 2 seasons.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber

Not in a defensive sense. He can't enhance the performances of our defenders. Of that I have no doubt. They have to step up to the plate.

sdb4884

His United career is all but over.

Alex

Why?

SharkyMcShark

It's really not, and he's going to get a chance in the next few weeks, I'll tell you that.

Stack

Actually its only our 2 center backs who sit deep and they have to do that because both our wide backs get forward. They also sit deep to provide depth in support when our mid has to play back and start again. On top of that its far more comfortable and easier for defenders to defend while facing the opposition goal rather than their own goal. Pretty much all top pro sides have their center backs sitting deep to provide an outlet and also to help them be in the right position to use delaying principles with respect to fast counter attacks.

Stretch

Anyone who thinks that the midfield 'system' we have atm has nothing to do with our defensive problems must know bugger all about football. Against Fulham and yesterday it was as clear as daylight how many times we were put under the kosh as Bolton strode through midfield. Scholes can't tackle to save his life, Fletcher is caught out of position. The opposition send men into the holes and then what? Viola, you have a scramble centre back pairing who aren't to sure who to cover. We apply this tactic to other teams and it works for us, why won't it work for them. Yeah, we've had some defensive mishaps but none more so than previous seasons. United's defensive style of play has always made me nervous. Evra had a shocker yesterday. But I thought Vidic and Evans did about as well as they could. A little more protection will assert more confidence and less incidence at the back.

Stack

Yeah when Park went on to the center mid spot we ended up with no midfield screen of the back 4, could have cost us a loss.

MadDogg

The first part of your post is spot on, but this part is obviously wrong. Our defence is certainly making more mistakes and imposing themselves less than in previous seasons. Now yes having a solid midfield ahead of them giving them more protection would certainly help them and breed more confidence, but that doesn't excuse the silly mistakes that some defenders are making.

Carl

A back 4 put under constant pressure is going to make more mistakes. There were times yesterday we were getting caught 3v3 with Bolton attacking. You cannot be so naive these days.

The way we are so open to the counter at the minute reminds me of Arsenal.

Carl

What other choice did Fergie have? Other than playing a 5 man midfield.

It's clear that the tactic is for Scholes to sit deeper and for Fletcher to do the running around but when Scholes naturally drifts forward it leaves it wide open.

To just say "well Fergie doesn't seem to have a problem" is a bit naive. I'd say Fergie will have a big problem at the way we are shipping goals at the moment and how teams like Bolton and Fulham are causing real problems.

Stretch

Exactly. It's not like we have defenders who aren't prone to blunders. Even Rio in top forms have fecked up some rather straight forward situations. At the moment it seems exaggerated because we are constantly under pressure at the back. It is just way too easy for opposition teams to penetrate us. I'm not defending some silly mistakes made by our defense but if we had a deep lying midfielder yesterday, half the mistakes would not have been there. Evra just had a shocker yesterday and looked shaky all game.

The one thing I will criticize our defense for is lack of concentration. We're slipping up at key moments. This combined with no protection in front of them is why we're defending like honkey's. At least that's my couch potato take on it...

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber

Which defeats the purpose of our midfield playing high.

They can do that much closer to their midfield. Not miles and miles away like they are currently doing.

Watch Barc aplay. Their center back do not stay that far form their midfield. Even though they are always the deepest player in the team. Right now our defence is leaving too much between itself and our midfield. No amount of tackling or positional play can close that hole when you are using a 2 man center midfield with two out and out wingers. It's up to the defence to step up and squeeze that gap into oblivion.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber

Utter bullshit.



Vs Everton they had 3 midfielders protecting them and they threw away a 2 goal lead. Wake up.

Stretch

You could attempt to give a better response than that. And what 3 midfielders are you talking about? None of the 3 were sitting back and 'protecting' them at all. Which games have you been watching? I for one have seen average teams cut through our midfield like a hot knife through butter and then seeing Vidic and Evans scrambling not knowing who to mark, already backing up towards our goal. Thats a recipe for a fuck up if ever I saw one.

Feed Me

Watch our goals against column improve once Carrick is back in the side.

We play one of the most ultra attacking formations in the league at times, and it is costing us slightly. Not many teams play 2 strikers, two wingers and two central midfielders away from home - one of whom is thirty five!

Stretch

...and who can't tackle and one who wanders into attack too often leaving us exposed when we lose the ball...

Feed Me

At Old Trafford the combination is fine.

It's not a slight against either Fletcher or Scholes, but it would be more prudent for us to play Carrick away from home.

Been saying for a while that I think we'd pick up defensively when he comes back, along with Rio.

Sultan

None of our currently fit midfielders have enough discipline to hold their position. Feed Me is correct, once Carrick is back fit and on form our defence will look solid. The downside is we'll likely score less goals.

Name Changed

Carrick would have improved us defensively obviously but he wouldn't have stopped the 2nd goal.

The thing is, if we bring in Carrick, who comes out? Scholes or Fletcher? If you take out Scholes, then there is nobody close to his passing ability on the team. If you take out Fletcher, then there is no midfielder breaking forward making the runs into the box and nobody closing down the opposition. We may be strengthened defensively either way but severely weakened offensively.

There are strengths and weaknesses in every midfield pairing.

I still believe it comes down to tactics. It is clear as day that it is our current tactics to have Scholes pulling the strings and Fletcher breaking forward at every single opportunity. Fergie is obviously sacrificing us defensively but that's his decision. We'll score more than them mentality. Scholes hasn't got the legs to get up and down as much as he used to, and obviously it's physically impossible for Fletcher to be in two places at once, so it's simply the tactics.

In away games, maybe the answer would be to get a more defensively minded midfielder in the game.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber

You are clearly not worthy of one. Because you are under the false impression you know best about football because you are perceiving problems in our midfield.

Are you mad? VS Everton Oshea Scholes and Fletcher mostly sat deep. On occasion Fletcher broke forward. But we spent that whole game mostly playing Everton on the counter. Yet once again despite the extra man in midfield we threw away a 2 goal lead.

The ones you clearly paid scant attention to. This below is not even worthy of a response frankly:

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber

Nor the first. Not any for the goals we conceded vs Liverpool and Everton.

My biggest gripe is people want us to sacrifice an extra place in attack to protect a defence that isn't doing its job.



Maybe. But I'm not convinced it will help. Our defence keeps simply making silly mistakes and wrong decisions. There is no reason why they insist on playing so far behind Scholes and Fletcher when we have the ball. That is why we ar eso eaily hit ont eh coute. We are nor compact enough from back to front. We are like an army with stretched supply lines. To blame it all just on our midfield is naive in the extreme.

MadDogg

Barca won't have all of their midfielders get as high up the field at the same time as what we have so far this season. At least one of them will always drop back a little deeper for two reasons - 1) help protect against the counter-attack; and 2) give the ball carriers an option for the easy pass if necessary.

Why is it all about either the 'attack' or the 'defence'? Attackers focus on the attack. Defenders focus on the defence. Midfield are supposed to bring a good balance between the two. And at the moment the defensive side of their game isn't up to scratch.

Well, the offside rule is one reason. If everyone of our midfield is in the final third or out wide and there is a huge gap in the centre of the park (which is happening quite regularly) it's not like the defenders can step up to that position seeing as opposition players would be able to just stand on the halfway line and be completely free.

You may be onto something and the defence should be sitting higher than they are. In fact, you probably are. But that doesn't excuse how easily our central midfield is getting brushed aside.

Nobody is blaming it all just on our midfield. Or if they are then that is ridiculous and they are going far overboard to make a point or they don't know what they are talking about. However, I'd say the same thing about anyone completely ignoring the defensive aspect of the game that they should be providing (but aren't).

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber

Well the unlike us use 3 midfielders. We don't. Yet even with there 3 in midfield their defence plays high up the pitch, helping to squeeze teams in.

You tell me. For I've not suggested any thing close to that.

I don't agree. Right now its our defence beyond a shadow of a doubt not doing their job at all. And when that happens even the work of the midfield can look very poor. No mater how good they are actually playing.

Our midfield is hardly ever always in the final third. Even if they were, our defence has no business being behind the center line in such a case. But currently our defence hardly ventures beyond it. Which creates that dangerous chasm between our midfield and the back 4. The chasm that is a source of all defensive woes when counter attacks are made.

That is the thing. They look like they are being easily brushed aside because of that chasm. In that chasm they are out numbered by the team launching the counter. All the counter attacking side has to do is with play between flanks and the midfield look like they are scampering and out of position. Yet the chasm being there isn't even their fault.


There are some who are. They think having Carrick would improve the defenders play. However that would happen...


At times the midfield has been at fault. But not in the last 3 league games. In our last 3 league game our midfield's work has been consistently undermined by the defence and its errors.

MadDogg

It's not just being caught in the final third. One midfielder (normally Fletch) goes forward, the other (normally Scholes) gets drawn out wide, and suddenly that chasm is there in the middle of the field in front of the defence. I've seen it happen countless times already this season. There is absolutely nothing the defenders can do about that situation.

If we're playing 442 and one of the central midfielders is Scholes, we simply can't have the other one getting too far out of position. Scholes doesn't have the legs to cover that space, and it's far too easy (especially if Scholes moves away from that area as well and isn't able to get back) for opposition players to go straight through the area where they should be.

Saying that Carrick would improve the defenders play isn't putting all the blame on the midfield. It's acknowledging the defenders are having problems and have been making mistakes, but that it's being amplified by the lack of protection that they are being given. Not caused by that, but amplified.

hungrywing

I'm pretty sure everyone sees it this way. Basically the same thing RedSky is saying as well: we just all word it differently. I think Chief is just getting a bit married to his initial statements out of frustration, which is completely understandable given the magnitude of the defence's recent gaffes.

Of course Carrick doesn't make the defenders individual performances better; but he does stop attacking moves from developing before the defenders come under undue pressure. In fact, he's very good at that. Just go back and read all the token "he's not a typical midfield enforcer, but he uses his reading of the game to intercept and defuse attacks" type comments that were showered upon him during the glory years.

Plus Carrick in a 4-4-2 makes the opposition that much more wary of committing too much to attack as his passing ability coupled with that ability to break down your attack means you're vulnerable on the counter. The real interesting thing about Carrick is precisely that nice blend between defensive ability plus passing ability, a combination which also renders him a bit stifled in a midfield three. But that's a whole other discussion.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber

There is plenty they can do about the so called chasm. If they were awake they'd push up and not be that far from Scholes. There is no valid reason what so ever for Scholes to drift slightly wide during an attack and have no one next to him in the middle of the field just because Fletcher is in a more advance position. That is classic proof the defensive line is too far back wards. If they are pushed ups close to Scholes, they would help keep the center compact, allowing enough time for the second midfielder and the fullbacks to drop back to help stem the counter.

You can do it if your defence isn't sleeping. The notion that the midfield should not get that far beyond the center line is a fallacy. The problem we are having is our defence stays too far back, and keeps making wrong decision after wrong decision even when dealing with simple counters. A backline must always advance further forward when its 2 man midfield pushes up to avoid a chasm developing in front of it. Without any exceptions. That Back 4 also shouldn't have a weakness in dealing with counters. Right now ours can't deal with even the most harmless one. (i.e the second Bolton goal and the penalty of Liverpool at OT) No amount of extra protection in front of them, as the Everton game showed, would change that. I insist our defence alone is letting itself down.

It is. That is basically saying the midfield is the main reason that chasm in front of the defence exist. Which I'm 100% sure is incorrect. Even if Carrick was playing and Scholes/Fletcher were the ones advancing. Carrick all alone in the center of the field would be no defence against a counter attack with the defence always as far back as it has been this season. The counter attacking side would simply switch play between flanks, drawing him away from the center and switch it up again before the retreating fullback and winger can help him out, into the empty center . That is how Arsenal time and again 2 seasons ago were being hit cold by every counter. Despite Song being an excellent shield for the back 4. The defence would either be too far from Song or too spread out and attacking whenever counters started. Leaving Song resembling a fireman trying to put out too many fires ala Carrick vs Barca in that 2008 final.

ciderman9000000

Assuming that SAF and our defence aren't complete morons then, Chief, what is the benefit of the defence sitting deeper and leaving this 'chasm'? They can't just be doing it by mistake, surely, so there must be some tactical advantage to such a system, right?

Perhaps it's the most effective way to play against an inferior team, because though we leave ourselves open to the counter, two deeper lying CB's will make a much easier target to play back to should our wingers/fullbacks run into a dead end; keeping possession should therefore be easier as there will always be a safe get-out clause waiting deep in the centre of the field to receive the ball when needed so we can go forward again having stretched their shape a little. Obviously the risk then would come from any misplaced passes when attacking; losing possession would be costlier (as we're wide open to counte-attack), but keeping possession should be easier (as there will always be an easy option should we run into trouble whilst attacking the wings), so it's an intentional trade-off. Unfortunately we've lost possession far too much this season and it's cost us dearly.

anver

Carrick set to return for United

Tue, 28 Sep 09:20:26 2010



Michael Carrick could make his first-team return for Manchester United in their Champions League group stage clash with Valencia on Wednesday.

The midfielder has not started a game for United since the Community Shield and, although he did join up with the England squad for their opening Euro 2012 qualifiers, he was then sent for an injection to try to ease the discomfort from a niggling Achilles problem.

Sir Alex Ferguson reported on Friday that Carrick had returned to training and the former Tottenham star was on the flight to Spain this morning that departed without the injured Wayne Rooney.

Feed Me

Good news. He'll be an important returnee.

Here's to an upturn in form.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber

There isn't one. I highly suspect that is why SAF has been consistently baying at his defence since the season begun. It's rather clear he is not happy with what they've been doing of late. If I'm not mistaken in this, when Rio returns to the line up, we will witness a marked difference in how far the defence is pushing up. For Rio is the best we have at organizing our back 4 in that way

That is the thing though. What you are describing is not what our defence is actually doing. When our midfield advance our center backs stay well behind the center line. That firstly, does not enhance our chances of keeping possession. Secondly, it leaves us open to the counter, because we become too stretched as a team. I'm convinced our current perceived lack of compactness is more of a defence issue than a midfield one. For we have already once this season increased the midfielders in front of the same defence yet precipitated the same results.

That is true. But the thing is loss of possession during a game is a given. How you counter that is by how compact your team is so that transition of play doesn't hurt you as far as it depends on you. If your defence is not that far behind your midfield, it is far easier to deal with counter attacks. That is why a side like Barca for example, even when they lose possession are hardly ever successfully hit on the counter. Because they remain compact through out despite the adventure of the fullbacks. Their center backs are never that far from the closest center midfielder. Currently we've lost that compactness because our defence isn't pushing up far enough. Even if we paired Carrick and Fletcher/ Scholes together, they'd have to be very deep in order to close that chasm the defence keeps letting occur. Which would in turn make us concede more territory to the opposition, force us to play on the counter like we did vs Chelsea in the community shield and resultantly, make us less aggressive upfront and scoreless than we are doing right now. Yet SAF's tactics this season are clearly more geared towards taking the game to the opposition. IMO when our defence finally re-adjusts to our midfield being more aggressive than in the past 2 seasons, our current defensive woes will largely disappear.

Name Changed

Agree with the Chief completely ^

hungrywing

Great ball for Hernandez' goal.

Michael Carrick. At his best when he has people making intelligent runs ahead of him. As great as Valencia is, that type of fixed-winger situation doesn't let Carrick produce what he's capable of.

askabob

It was Gibson that assisted Hernandez but yes, that is what Carrick excels at. He did it a few times in this game by putting both Obertan and Park through.

Dion

Wasn't that Gibson?

Brwned

He was excellent when the game opened up, and hopefully that'll give him a kick up the arse, but he looked just as subdued as ever in the first half.

Still nice to have that bit of composure in midfield with him.

Donut

Carrick had his best game in awhile today, regardless if the pass to Hernandez was his (it wasn't though?).

He had a lovely ball to Park and overall played well.

Devilton

He will have moments of class which will tease and frustrate the supporters but will he ever become a dominant midfielder? I don't believe so. The promise of that player was once a reality, but now years on we just have to reconcile ourselves with the fact that he's a good player, who's just a few pegs short of ever becoming great.

For me, he's still better then Gibson will ever become and as such should continue to get games, but long term Fergie will already know he needs to look elsewhere for the genius to replace Scholes when he calls it time on his career.

hungrywing

Okay I just found out it was Gibson. I was watching highlights and the commentator said it was Carrick. I don't know what to say except I still believe in Carrick, and the point still stands about him and fluid attackers in front of him (i.e. not Valencia-type wingers and Berba v1.0) And the commentator may have been watching my stream, watching me watching him in the stream, until the quality degenerated to the point where no one knew who anyone else was.

Pogue Mahone

Best game in ages.

Now pleeeeeeeeeeease keep it up, Michael, there's a good lad.