Hargreaves - one signing too many?

Julian Denny · 17th December 2007, 16:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

Anderson possesses far more bite and mobility than Scholes ever did

That is a very outlandish statement. Scholesy is one of the best players this club has produced. Anderson's been here five minutes and you come out with that. Steady on there !

AttackingFlair · 17th December 2007, 16:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

The idea that SAF splashed 18m on Carrick and then 17m on Hargreaves so that they could be rotated week in and week out seems ludicrous to me. Did he sign Carrick and then realised it was a mistake ? What about Fletcher ?

Yeah he splashed that amount of money on two central midfielders but then also splashed roughly the same amount on an even better midfielder in Anderson.

I see things like this, in the future Scholes will have retired which would leave us with... Anderson, Hargreaves, Carrick, Fletcher. Now let's assume (not saying it is/will be) that Anderson/Hargreaves is the first choice partnership. Now say Anderson gets injured, we're kind of fucked with creativity in midfield and that's why we'd need someone like Carrick to step in for cover, we can't rely on Fletcher to do that nor Hargreaves. If Hargreaves gets injured then Carrick/Fletcher can cover depending on what option we'd need e.g more steel then Fletcher.

Maybe it was a bit of overspending but then again, in the future we will be well sorted out with our central midfield.

Ekeke · 17th December 2007, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Instant Karma

He signed Obi Mikel who got blinded by the Chelsea roubles. He wanted to sign Hargreaves and Bayern were not willing to sell before last season. We had also let Keane go and even Smith was injured. Ballack went to Chelsea. Fergie probably didnt like the dodgy Mascherano deal who he said was offered to us.

Other than playing OShea in midfield, SAF didnt have much choice but to overpay for a premiership class player like Carrick. We were desperate for a midfielder and he was the best among those willing to join us.

Rubbish.

We signed Obi Mikel, a passing specialist. It didn't work out, so we signed another.

The same could be said of Senna and Hargreaves. Initially we were after Senna, but the Glazers wanted us to sign an English player. Hargreaves isn't English, but he plays for England so he was the next best thing.

Kevin · 17th December 2007, 17:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

That is a very outlandish statement. Scholesy is one of the best players this club has produced. Anderson's been here five minutes and you come out with that. Steady on there !

Strange over the top reaction. All he said in that post was that Anderson is faster than Scholes. Which is true.

Just like a player can be faster than Zidane without doing his status and abilities injustice.

MadDogg · 17th December 2007, 17:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

That is a very outlandish statement. Scholesy is one of the best players this club has produced. Anderson's been here five minutes and you come out with that. Steady on there !

He only said that Anderson has more bite and mobility than Scholes, not that he's better. And it's obvious that Anderson is a much more physical player, both in power and speed.

Instant Karma · 17th December 2007, 17:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ekeke

Rubbish.
We signed Obi Mikel, a passing specialist. It didn't work out, so we signed another.

Passing 5 yards to Scholes/Giggs/Ronaldo or hoofing the ball behind a slow Bolton defence for Rooney to chase doesnt make Carrick a passing 'specialist'. When he actually creates some chances in the final third of the pitch or provides a telling pass, you can come back here and post about his passing prowess. Rio is normally 2 yards behind Carrick most of the time and he is good enough to complete the same pass 9 times out of 10.

But to be fair, Carrick has the natural skills to be a fantastic player. Its just that his instinct is to hang back rather than go forward even when there is a lot of space ahead. If SAF can get him to attack more, he can be brilliant for us. He already has the ability to get into space and be available to receive the ball but he normally does it only in our half whereas Fabregas does that even in the attacking third.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ekeke

The same could be said of Senna and Hargreaves. Initially we were after Senna, but the Glazers wanted us to sign an English player. Hargreaves isn't English, but he plays for England so he was the next best thing.

Did SAF call you and inform that Senna was a transfer target? The media linked us with every midfielder on the planet - Gattusso, Derossi, Makoun, Senna, Vieira, Cambiasso, Yaya Toure, Gravesen, Nolan, Reo Coker etc.

Ekeke · 17th December 2007, 17:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Instant Karma

Passing 5 yards to Scholes/Giggs/Ronaldo or hoofing the ball behind a slow Bolton defence for Rooney to chase doesnt make Carrick a passing 'specialist'. When he actually creates some chances in the final third of the pitch or provides a telling pass, you can come back here and post about his passing prowess. Rio is normally 2 yards behind Carrick most of the time and he is good enough to complete the same pass 9 times out of 10.

You don't have to be an attacking midfielder to be a passing specialist.

Quote:

Did SAF call you and inform that Senna was a transfer target? The media linked us with every midfielder on the planet - Gattusso, Derossi, Makoun, Senna, Vieira, Cambiasso, Yaya Toure, Gravesen, Nolan, Reo Coker etc.

Did SAF call you and tell you Senna wasn't a transfer target? He came out and said it himself (Senna) and there was no noise from our end saying its not true. And none of the other players were linked anywhere near as heavily as Senna, who openly talked about the move and gave the reason why talks broke down.

Julian Denny · 17th December 2007, 18:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

Strange over the top reaction. All he said in that post was that Anderson is faster than Scholes. Which is true.

Just like a player can be faster than Zidane without doing his status and abilities injustice.

What ? "Far more bite and mobility than Scholes ever did ". What does that prove anyway ? It's just a needless put down - even a partial one and quite irrelevent to this "discussion". Hardly surprising I had to spring to the ginger prince's defence ! Someone has to protect our heritage you know.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 1st January 2008, 12:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by lem8sh

Makalele is ten times the midfielder hargreaves is. Superior in everything apart from stamina perhaps,better passer, tackler and def better reader of the game. He's getting old now but hargreaves and makalele at his age is uncomparable.

You can't be serious

Makelele can't pass well or tackle. Those are not components of his game. He doesn't have more stamina than Hargreaves. Not by a long short. Neither has he ever been as fast. All he is brilliant at is game reading interception. He has never been or will ever be a true midfielder. Makelele is as limited as they come. Yet he was the best at what he did/does. Which is being a destroyer of opponents play. For a team that plays 4-4-2/4-2-3-1 I'd take Hargreaves over him at any stage in his career.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 1st January 2008, 12:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad Cantona

Damn I missed this thread

Hargreaves is class, and with him at the end of last season, I think we might well have added to our European tally. But that's just my speculation. I know this: we don't have another player like him at the club, and despite what some doubters might claim, he's one of the worlds best in his position. As usual, someone is criticised as not good enough after a spell of being injured (and in this case only just bloody arrived at the club). He will get fit again and prove himself. I think he's been excellent when he's played this season, this idea that he doesn't offer enough for a team that likes to attack from all positions is a complete misnomer too. He'd start ahead of Carrick for me in a vital game any day of the week, alongside Scholes if fit. I can't wait for that partnership to unfold. Anderson and Carrick hardly shoddy backup, it's fantastic strength in depth we haven't had for arguably 10 years now

Nail on the head

John the Writer · 22nd January 2008, 10:51

I don't think he's doing much to prove me wrong.

Striker10 · 22nd January 2008, 11:16

maybe. In the league, cups we don't really need him, especially with Andersons progression. In Europe home and away you'd hope his style is what we need. You'd hope. Against the top teams

You got to be fair also though - he's missed so many games and had no pre season. Hopefully he'll come into his 'own' in the second half of the season. The fact he's limited doesn't really matter. If he wins the ball, gives it, keeps it simple..he'll be worth it lol

All he has to do is protect the back four. Kaka had an absolute field day in the semi final second leg - it should not be happening

fredthered · 22nd January 2008, 12:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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?

Forget the muppets, I actually tend to agree with you.

For what United paid for him and the impact hes had, I dont think he was as necessary as some would have us believe.

I for one would have preferred to see us spend the £18 million on a striker and get shot of sicknote in the process.

Sam#1 · 22nd January 2008, 12:45

I really don't have a problem with Hargreaves. He'll do a job for us that needs doing, and hopefully he'll help us conquer Europe, but I do feel that he is nowhere near an £18 million player, and for that kind of money, we could/should have got someone so much better.

Alex · 22nd January 2008, 12:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

What ? "Far more bite and mobility than Scholes ever did ". What does that prove anyway ? It's just a needless put down - even a partial one and quite irrelevent to this "discussion". Hardly surprising I had to spring to the ginger prince's defence ! Someone has to protect our heritage you know.

Are you kidding, I am as much a fan of Scholes as anybody, but what I said was true, no matter how a good a player Scholes has been for Manchester United

Eyepopper · 22nd January 2008, 13:26

Are we still talking about this?

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 22nd January 2008, 15:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by John the Writer

I don't think he's doing much to prove me wrong.

It's no one's fault you're blind.

REd FUn DevIl · 22nd January 2008, 15:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eyepopper

Are we still talking about this?

He is the man of the moment, didnt you see?

rotherham_red · 22nd January 2008, 16:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredthered

Forget the muppets, I actually tend to agree with you.

For what United paid for him and the impact hes had, I dont think he was as necessary as some would have us believe.

I for one would have preferred to see us spend the £18 million on a striker and get shot of sicknote in the process.

Aye, you can add me to the list an'all...

All 3 United · 22nd January 2008, 16:44

Hargreaves hasn't had the impact we were all hoping for (especially give the transfer fee), mainly due to injuries. Give the lad time you can see he has the quality, given a bit more luck with injuries he will become first choice central mid alongside Anderson.

REd FUn DevIl · 22nd January 2008, 16:59

I see a lot of people talking about his transfer fee but what the fuck did u expect? Carrick came on here for 17 millions and we are talking about a player from Spurs, add to that Carrick is and was the sub of Hargreaves on the England team. Hargreaves was at one of the greatest teams in europe so what the feck are you talking about?

Why dont you whine about Carrick price? its the fucking same shit and was at Spurs that is a average team.

Alex · 22nd January 2008, 17:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by REd FUn DevIl

I see a lot of people talking about his transfer fee but what the fuck did u expect? Carrick came on here for 17 millions and we are talking about a player from Spurs, add to that Carrick is and was the sub of Hargreaves on the England team. Hargreaves was at one of the greatest teams in europe so what the feck are you talking about?

Why dont you whine about Carrick price? its the fucking same shit and was at Spurs that is a average team.

Are you joking, it is just as common here as the Hargo complaints, the thing is had neither been signed the same people would be bitching about not having a DM or complete CM

Oldham · 22nd January 2008, 17:31

He has been a bit crap...

Pronewbie · 22nd January 2008, 18:46

Yeah but I'd give the lad more time with the amount of injuries he's been having. Just hope he isn't a sicknote.

nightcrawler · 22nd January 2008, 19:31

you guys do realise that we could have got mascherano for abut the same price as hargreaveas? a younger player with much more potential then hargreaves ever had.

GE · 22nd January 2008, 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightcrawler

you guys do realise that we could have got mascherano for abut the same price as hargreaveas? a younger player with much more potential then hargreaves ever had.

I would've loved Mascherano at United. Fantastic player.

I hope the scousers can't afford him. Id rather see him at any other club except them.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 22nd January 2008, 19:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightcrawler

..... a younger player with much more potential then hargreaves ever had.

22nd January 2008, 10:51	#491 (permalink)
John the Writer Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: The back of the classroom Posts: 730	I don't think he's doing much to prove me wrong.

22nd January 2008, 11:16	#492 (permalink)
Striker10 First Team Sub Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 6,316	maybe. In the league, cups we don't really need him, especially with Andersons progression. In Europe home and away you'd hope his style is what we need. You'd hope. Against the top teams You got to be fair also though - he's missed so many games and had no pre season. Hopefully he'll come into his 'own' in the second half of the season. The fact he's limited doesn't really matter. If he wins the ball, gives it, keeps it simple..he'll be worth it lol All he has to do is protect the back four. Kaka had an absolute field day in the semi final second leg - it should not be happening

22nd January 2008, 12:45	#494 (permalink)
Sam#1 First Team Regular Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Leroy Lita Posts: 13,367	I really don't have a problem with Hargreaves. He'll do a job for us that needs doing, and hopefully he'll help us conquer Europe, but I do feel that he is nowhere near an £18 million player, and for that kind of money, we could/should have got someone so much better.

22nd January 2008, 13:26	#496 (permalink)
Eyepopper First Team Regular Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Lowering the Tone since 2006 Posts: 13,732	Are we still talking about this?

22nd January 2008, 16:44	#500 (permalink)
All 3 United Reserve Team Player Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Manchester Posts: 1,542	Hargreaves hasn't had the impact we were all hoping for (especially give the transfer fee), mainly due to injuries. Give the lad time you can see he has the quality, given a bit more luck with injuries he will become first choice central mid alongside Anderson.

22nd January 2008, 16:59	#501 (permalink)
REd FUn DevIl First Team Regular Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: I Love Sugarcult Posts: 12,132	I see a lot of people talking about his transfer fee but what the fuck did u expect? Carrick came on here for 17 millions and we are talking about a player from Spurs, add to that Carrick is and was the sub of Hargreaves on the England team. Hargreaves was at one of the greatest teams in europe so what the feck are you talking about? Why dont you whine about Carrick price? its the fucking same shit and was at Spurs that is a average team.

22nd January 2008, 17:31	#503 (permalink)
Oldham Reserve Team Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,412	He has been a bit crap...

22nd January 2008, 18:46	#504 (permalink)
Pronewbie Peep Join Date: May 2004 Location: In front of My Computer (C:) Posts: 1,306	Yeah but I'd give the lad more time with the amount of injuries he's been having. Just hope he isn't a sicknote.

22nd January 2008, 19:31	#505 (permalink)
nightcrawler Youth Team Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 321	you guys do realise that we could have got mascherano for abut the same price as hargreaveas? a younger player with much more potential then hargreaves ever had.

22nd January 2008, 19:50	#508 (permalink)
Sam#1 First Team Regular Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Leroy Lita Post