Hargreaves - one signing too many?

Eyepopper · 9th December 2007, 18:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by REd FUn DevIl

Hargreaves is a ball winner and a experienced player and was obviously what we needed, it seems some on here just forgot that he was expected to arrive the same summer that Carrick did but Bayern did not sell so we just had to move on. Finally this summer we got him so he is starting as first choice cause thats what Fergie thought when he first wanted him.

Champions League Winner
German League Winner
German Cup Winner
Former European U21 Player of the Year

But.... despite all that "Owen Hargreaves".... bit of a boring name like... doesnt even sound remotely foregin... lets sell him..

Younited.7 · 9th December 2007, 18:28

The latter stages of the champions league are where we will see why Fergie signed him

a_devil_inside · 9th December 2007, 18:33

we needed someone to stop Saha from being lonely

John the Writer · 9th December 2007, 18:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmashedHombre

I say you're an idiot and if you have nothing useful to say, then just bother. That goes for the rest of you as well. Seriously, whats the point? It was a well constructed post and is exactly what we need in the United forum.

Anyway I kind of agree with you john. I would much rather we hadn't bought Hargreaves, especially considering the price we paid for him. I think he is our fourth best CM, fifth if you include Giggs. Should have kept the money and gone for a striker. 17mil can get you a lot more than Hargreaves.

This is the thing. Clearly the point I made is contestable, but it's something that's crossed my mind recently so I figured I'd try and generate a bit of debate, cos I'm a proper debater and that. If people disagree, that's fine, it is afterall simply my opinion. What I don't get is people criticising the Caf due to its lack of intelligent posts then calling someone all the spastics under the sun when they make a point that might be considered a little contentious. Anyway, enough of that.

I wouldn't necessarily say that he's our 4th best CM, but I do agree that his transfer fee could've been much better utilised. Like I say, hindsight is a wonderful thing and I was as pleased as anyone when he signed, but I'm just not feeling the move anymore. I'm just not feeling it.

redpie · 9th December 2007, 18:34

The mix is right. Without the fabled fourth striker we need the extra midfield players.

VidaRed · 9th December 2007, 18:35

shit thread.

we need him in the champions league and not against the likes of derby and wigan

FlawlessThaw · 9th December 2007, 18:36

Hargreaves - Anderson is the future of United's central midfield. Like it or not but that's how it is. And I personally believe that will be quite a wonderful partnership.

John the Writer · 9th December 2007, 18:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by VidaRed

shit thread.

we need him in the champions league and not against the likes of derby and wigan

Shit post.

I disagree.

John the Writer · 9th December 2007, 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlawlessThaw

Hargreaves - Anderson is the future of United's central midfield. Like it or not but that's how it is. And I personally believe that will be quite a wonderful partnership.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see Hargreaves work out. I just think he'll miss a lot of vital games and if you were to offer me his transfer fee back, I'd take it.

Kiwi Red · 9th December 2007, 18:41

VidaRed is completely correct, and everyone with any sense knows that this is the case - Hargreaves was not bought to help us win the Prem League, but to solve our problems in Europe.

Case in point = Kaka with Milan last season. Over the two legs, he dominated us, pulled all the strings, and whilst we won the first leg, we were eventually smashed in the second.

Hargreaves was bought because Carrick is not tough enough to play the role of defensive, hatchet man, whereas Hargreaves is. OH's main use will be to stop the likes of Kaka exploiting the space in our midfield, when we play top teams in Europe.

GE · 9th December 2007, 18:44

Sahargreaves.

Dannyboy · 9th December 2007, 18:44

John, I think you bring up some good points and I myself have thought the same thing. Like you said it may be to early to judge but My thinking is he will be integral come the late stages of the CL and in the coming years when Scholes role diminishes. I don't think he was bought as an impact player.

REd FUn DevIl · 9th December 2007, 18:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by John the Writer

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see Hargreaves work out. I just think he'll miss a lot of vital games and if you were to offer me his transfer fee back, I'd take it.

Whatever you say wont change nothing

He is gonna play whether you like it or not

Live with it

John the Writer · 9th December 2007, 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dannyboy

John, I think you bring up some good points and I myself have thought the same thing. Like you said it may be to early to judge but My thinking is he will be integral come the late stages of the CL and in the coming years when Scholes role diminishes. I don't think he was bought as an impact player.

Those are fair points. I understand the point that he'll be useful in the latter stages of the champions league, I just have little confidence in his ability to maintain fitness.

People can call me a muppet or a spastic (at which point someone immediately posts 'muppet' or 'spastic' or both) and that's grand, I'll sleep easy, but no one has said anything that makes me believe that Hargreaves is anything other than an expensive luxury.

manux399 · 9th December 2007, 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiwi Red

VidaRed is completely correct, and everyone with any sense knows that this is the case - Hargreaves was not bought to help us win the Prem League, but to solve our problems in Europe.

Case in point = Kaka with Milan last season. Over the two legs, he dominated us, pulled all the strings, and whilst we won the first leg, we were eventually smashed in the second.

Hargreaves was bought because Carrick is not tough enough to play the role of defensive, hatchet man, whereas Hargreaves is. OH's main use will be to stop the likes of Kaka exploiting the space in our midfield, when we play top teams in Europe.

Bang on same reason he wanted to buy Gattuso three years ago..!

KingEric7 · 9th December 2007, 18:51

I can see what the thread starter is getting at in a way, even though i wouldn't say it was an unnecessary signing. None of us could've predicted the rise of Anderson in such a fashion. He seems to combine the best attributes of Carrick and Hargreaves which means that having both of them could be seen as a bit unnecessary. However, we have incredible squad depth now as a result of these signings. I only hope that Carrick doesn't suffer as a result of the two signings because he is an excellent player.

Count Duckula · 9th December 2007, 18:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by John the Writer

but no one has said anything that makes me believe that Hargreaves is anything other than an expensive luxury.

Well then what's the point? You asked for people to say why he was a good signing, plenty of people have and you've said they're wrong.

If you're not going to be convinced then don't say you're starting a debate to that end.

notiboiboi · 9th December 2007, 18:52

I think you realise how important hargreaves is when we play against teams like milan,barcelona in the away legs...

He would prevent us from being overun in midfield, so we could play our game...

In the league, we usually outplay teams, so the importance of hargreaves is not noticed by some yet...

John the Writer · 9th December 2007, 18:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by REd FUn DevIl

Whatever you say wont change nothing

He is gonna play whether you like it or not

Live with it

Jesus, that was all a bit serious!

I think you're missing the point. I like it when he plays. It's just that he's injuerd moreso.

Dannyboy · 9th December 2007, 18:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by John the Writer

Those are fair points. I understand the point that he'll be useful in the latter stages of the champions league, I just have little confidence in his ability to maintain fitness.

People can call me a muppet or a spastic (at which point someone immediately posts 'muppet' or 'spastic' or both) and that's grand, I'll sleep easy, but no one has said anything that makes me believe that Hargreaves is anything other than an expensive luxury.

His fitness is a worry and hopefully not long term and the good thing is we don't have to rush him back into the squad. Don't worry about all the people calling you muppet or spastic, people in glass houses comes to mind. I don't know about luxury but we have done it in the past.

Feedingseagulls · 9th December 2007, 18:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by John the Writer

People can call me a muppet or a spastic (at which point someone immediately posts 'muppet' or 'spastic' or both) and that's grand, I'll sleep easy, but no one has said anything that makes me believe that Hargreaves is anything other than an expensive luxury.

You could, had you been interested, have chosen to read and comment upon the recent thread concerning Hargreaves (cunningly disguised under the title 'Owen Hargreaves' I'll admit).

Instead we get another thread caused by 'midfield gun jumping'.

friendlytramp · 9th December 2007, 18:56

Count Duckula- biggest spastic on Redcafe?

Feedingseagulls · 9th December 2007, 18:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by John the Writer

Jesus, that was all a bit serious!

I think you're missing the point. I like it when he plays. It's just that he's injuerd moreso.

That isn't really the central theme in suggesting OH is 'one signing too many' though is it? Your original points really don't seem to be centred on the fact he's injured.

John the Writer · 9th December 2007, 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Count Duckula

Well then what's the point? You asked for people to say why he was a good signing, plenty of people have and you've said they're wrong.

If you're not going to be convinced then don't say you're starting a debate to that end.

No I started the thread to garner opinions. That doesn't mean I have to agree with them.

All I'm saying is that a few Champion's league fixtures hardly make a player a necessity. Of course you could argue that the revenue generated by winning the trophy more than compensates for the money outlaid, but Hargreaves is the only player in our squad mooted as a big game specialist. What if he misses these big games? What's his purpose then? Ronaldo is necessary. Rooney is necessary. Hargreaves, in my mind, simply is not.

I don't hate the lad. In fact, he's cool. I even like his hair. I just don't think he's necessary.

Alex · 9th December 2007, 19:02

John the Wanker

John the Writer · 9th December 2007, 19:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feedingseagulls

That isn't really the central theme in suggesting OH is 'one signing too many' though is it? Your original points really don't seem to be centred on the fact he's injured.

Semantics surely? There are two key points I feel. 1) Hargreaves offers little that Anderson doesn't. 2) He's more than likely injured.

1 + 2 = we don't really need him.

In conclusion: One signing too many.

Sorry, if that seems a little abrupt or whatever, I'm just trying to keep it as concise as possible.

John the Writer · 9th December 2007, 19:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

John the Wanker

Can't really argue with that.

Sam#1 · 9th December 2007, 19:08

Last season: 'We need a DM to have any chance in Europe, it's obvious, even David Blunkett can see it'

This season: 'Why have we signed a DM, all he does is defend, he never gets the ball forward, Anderson (who is actually an AM) can do the job so much better than Hargreaves, lets sell him'

Simon Adebesi · 9th December 2007, 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by GE

Sahargreaves.

I can see what youve done there.

Gets to the root of my worry about Hargreaves. If the boy can stay fit then Im sure he will play an important part in United success over the coming years, it is great to have depth in that position - and players who offer different things.

sincher · 9th December 2007, 19:11

I think he's done pretty well so far, when he's been fit. He's never going to be amazing, but you can see why we bought him.

9th December 2007, 18:28	#42 (permalink)
Younited.7 united.7 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: St Evenage Posts: 1,904	The latter stages of the champions league are where we will see why Fergie signed him

9th December 2007, 18:33	#43 (permalink)
a_devil_inside Big footed hermaphrodite Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Little Britain Posts: 23,483	we needed someone to stop Saha from being lonely

9th December 2007, 18:34	#45 (permalink)
redpie Reserve Team Player Join Date: May 2001 Location: Mrs Merton's box room Posts: 2,109	The mix is right. Without the fabled fourth striker we need the extra midfield players.

9th December 2007, 18:35	#46 (permalink)
VidaRed First Team Sub Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 6,537	shit thread. we need him in the champions league and not against the likes of derby and wigan

9th December 2007, 18:36	#47 (permalink)
FlawlessThaw most 'know it all' poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: London Posts: 8,501	Hargreaves - Anderson is the future of United's central midfield. Like it or not but that's how it is. And I personally believe that will be quite a wonderful partnership.

9th December 2007, 18:41	#50 (permalink)
Kiwi Red Youth Team Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 234	VidaRed is completely correct, and everyone with any sense knows that this is the case - Hargreaves was not bought to help us win the Prem League, but to solve our problems in Europe. Case in point = Kaka with Milan last season. Over the two legs, he dominated us, pulled all the strings, and whilst we won the first leg, we were eventually smashed in the second. Hargreaves was bought because Carrick is not tough enough to play the role of defensive, hatchet man, whereas Hargreaves is. OH's main use will be to stop the likes of Kaka exploiting the space in our midfield, when we play top teams in Europe.

9th December 2007, 18:44	#51 (permalink)
GE Captain Rio Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Greater Manchester Posts: 8,005	Sahargreaves.

9th December 2007, 18:44	#52 (permalink)
Dannyboy Reserve Team Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In your hard drive looking at your pics Posts: 1,088	John, I think you bring up some good points and I myself have thought the same thing. Like you said it may be to early to judge but My thinking is he will be integral come the late stages of the CL and in the coming years when Scholes role diminishes. I don't think he was bought as an impact player.

9th December 2007, 18:51	#56 (permalink)
KingEric7 Winner of the Tabata bet Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: My best moment? I have a lot of good moments but the one I prefer is when I kicked the hooligan. Posts: 12,001	I can see what the thread starter is getting at in a way, even though i wouldn't say it was an unnecessary signing. None of us could've predicted the rise of Anderson in such a fashion. He seems to combine the best attributes of Carrick and Hargreaves which means that having both of them could be seen as a bit unnecessary. However, we have incredible squad depth now as a result of these signings. I only hope that Carrick doesn't suffer as a result of the two signings because he is an excellent player.

9th December 2007, 18:52	#58 (permalink)
notiboiboi Reserve Team Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,107	I think you realise how important hargreaves is when we play against teams like milan,barcelona in the away legs... He would prevent us from being overun in midfield, so we could play our game... In the league, we usually outplay teams, so the importance of hargreaves is not noticed by some yet...

9th December 2007, 18:56	#62 (permalink)
friendlytramp Reserve Team Player Join Date: May 2004 Location: Bury Posts: 1,001	Count Duckula- biggest spastic on Redcafe?

9th December 2007, 19:02	#65 (permalink)
Alex First team crossdresser Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: 39°44′21″N 104°59′5″W Posts: 13,303	John the Wanker

9th December 2007, 19:08	#68 (permalink)
Sam#1 First Team Regular Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: I'm in love with a girl I can't have :-( (It's not JLS) Posts: 12,521	Last season: 'We need a DM to have any chance in Europe, it's obvious, even David Blunkett can see it' This season: 'Why have we signed a DM, all he does is defend, he never gets the ball forward, Anderson (who is actually an AM) can do the job so much better than Hargreaves, lets sell him'

9th December 2007, 19:11	#70 (permalink)
sincher Les jeux sont Fait Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: YSC Posts: 13,542	I think he's done pretty well so far, when he's been fit. He's never going to be amazing, but you can see why we bought him.