Hargreaves - one signing too many?

John the Writer

I know that hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I really do get the feeling that Hargreaves has been a completely unnecessary signing. Obviously we all knew the need to sign an additional midfielder over the summer, and none of us could have expected Anderson to bed into the side in the manner he has. I get the feeling that ferguson persisted with this transfer due to the song and dance made about the lad the previous summer, but I also get the feeling he may well be re-evaluating Hargreaves' status in our squad. I think there might be something about the Veloso rumours, and if this move was to become a reality, I think Owen could well be the player to make way.

Now I realise that scholes won't play forever and Fletcher might not have Hargreaves' quality, but he's clearly injury prone, and he seems to be somewhat of a liability.

I didn't envisage Anderson being the player he is, and his ability to dominate a midfield and make crunching tackles renders what Hargreaves offers to the team almost redundant.

So what say you, was Hargreaves one signing too many?

Cold_Boy

No.

John the Writer

Suprisingly insightful post. Nice.

Count Duckula

I say you're a spastic.

Eyepopper

Thats a hell of a lot of bullshit in such a small space...

Lizard King

I know what you mean and I kind of agree with the main point of your post. We didn't really need him, but we know how stubborn Fergie is and once he'd declared that he wanted to sign him it was inevitable.

Ruben

I don`t really see where you get the idea that Fergie might be re-evaluating OH status in the squad. As far as I know, he has started just about every game he has been fit for. If anything, he might be getting too much playing time IMO.

He does seem to be a bit injury prone though, which is worrying, but hopefully that`s something he can shake off. Scholes probably has a couple of years left and should Veloso come, then it will most likely be Darren who gets sold.

bergen

He'l be very important in the latter stages of the season. Mark my words.

John the Writer

The standard Caf retort. Excellent stuff.

Why not take your head out of your arse and make an arguement that illustrates the purpose of Hargreaves' signing.

Or might that entail a little too much individual thought.

DiaboliQue

You're quite a spastic yourself.

Scholesy

No, he can play RB too and has proved he is a fine DM.

peterstorey

I wonder if you got locked into the "we want him - we're going to get him" syndrome which tends to ignore the fact that the world moves on. Compare Barca and Henry. He looked like a reasonable buy a year ago if you wanted to play a 3-man CM in Europe. A year on he looks not to have shrugged off his injury problems plus (unexpectedly since you'd have given him 12 months to bed in) Anderson looks like the business

Cold_Boy

No.

Eyepopper

Hargreaves was bought mainly for his experience in Europe in my opinion..

To say he's a liability and likely to be on his way is fucking ridiculous..... far from it I think he'll be paired with Anderson / Scholes to form our first choice CM pairing, Carrick & Fletcher being rotated.... if anyones on their way it will be Fletcher, his chances are getting more limited by the week..

Lizard King

Yup that's what I thought.

Ruben

I don`t think we would splash out 15 or so million pounds to get a player just because Fergie at one point decided he wanted him. He was bought for a reason, a very clear one as well. To give us a different option in the middle, which will come in handy, especially in Europe.

Lizard King

He's clearly not a liability and I don't think that is what John was trying to say. He's a bit unecesary though in my opinion. We don't need a holding midfielder if we play 4-4-2 (which we should do, every single game!)

I can see Fletcher being sold in the summer, unfortunately.

John the Writer

That's a fair point. I just feel that we could probably recoup the majority of Hargreaves' transfer fee at this point. If he continues along the injury blighted path that has been walked by Saha, his transfer value will be decimated.

I simply feel that the fighting qualities the midfield had lacked are epitomised by Anderson, a player several years younger than Hargreaves.

I understand that questioning his status in the squad a few months in might seem a tad over the top, however i don't see anything in his game that hasn't been offered by our little Brazilian. Thus, in my opinion, making him an expensive luxury as opposed to an integral squad member.

Utd heap

I find this debate bizarre.
Hargreaves will become a key player for us come the action end of this season.

John the Writer

You might well be right, and like I said, hindsight is a wonderful thing. I just don't want us to be lumbered with another injury prone player we'll never recoup our money on.

Lizard King

If he stays fit.

Eyepopper

Think back to Milan last year.... they beat us because we showed them too much respect... for games like that we need a tough tackler to break up play, win the ball in CM and give it to Scholes, Ronaldo etc do their stuff,,,, thats exactly what Hargreaves is..... we dont have anyone else for that role...

charlenefan

This thread is beyond stupid

That is all

John the Writer

He's not going to be of any use if he's on the treatment table, and anyway I'm not totally convinced. I think Anderson shows those qualities in abundance.

Count Duckula

John the Writer

It's posts like this I find stupid. I'm trying to generate a genuine debate, if you have anything to add that's great, but ending a post with 'that is all' doesn't make you sound all knowing. It makes you sound like a dick.

Bape

Fergie rates Hargreaves above Carrick, I thought that was obvious.

ih8cheatskiscum

Hargreaves and Anderson are an ideal pairing

charlenefan

Says you who thinks signing Hargreaves was one signing too many

Okay.......