Hargreaves - one signing too many?

CnutOfAllCnuts · 13th December 2007, 11:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by lem8sh

You really showed your football knowledge with that reply

Not really.

What I really showed with that reply was how much I was laughing when I read Peter's post.

redmanc · 13th December 2007, 11:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

and Carrick (I hope !)

It will be Anderson playing with Hagreaves.

redmanc · 13th December 2007, 11:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterstorey

Yeah, but there's limited and limited. All the players you mention have something about them that lifts them out of the Robbie Savage stakes: Makelele's positioning/ball use/game reading; Mascherano's tackling; Gatutuso's all over the pitch combativeness; Essien's sheer power. Hargreaves has no such outstanding quality in my view.

If you really believe that you are a spastic.

Julian Denny · 13th December 2007, 11:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmanc

It will be Anderson playing with Hagreaves.

Back to square one in this chat ? My guess our midfield will consist of OH, Anderson and Giggs when my choice would be OH, Carrick and Anderson with Giggs on the bench. However, Fergie won't drop his skipper will he ?

redmanc · 13th December 2007, 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

Back to square one in this chat ? My guess our midfield will consist of OH, Anderson and Giggs when my choice would be OH, Carrick and Anderson with Giggs on the bench. However, Fergie won't drop his skipper will he ?

Fergie would be mad to play anything other than; Ronaldo, Anderson, Hargreaves & Giggs as our midfield away at Anfield

Julian Denny · 13th December 2007, 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmanc

Fergie would be mad to play anything other than; Ronaldo, Anderson, Hargreaves & Giggs as our midfield away at Anfield

I don't think he would be mad if he played Carrick - it would be our best selection but it won't happen. By the way Ronnie can no longer be described as a midfielder nowadays.

CnutOfAllCnuts · 13th December 2007, 11:45

Jules, you are a bit obsessed about this...

Julian Denny · 13th December 2007, 11:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by CnutOfAllCnuts

Jules, you are a bit obsessed about this...

Yes you're right. It stems from the the time I tried to answer my own question - "why on earth would we want to buy Hargreaves - why do we need him at all ?". I'm certain the three man central midfield is what Fergie has in mind. However, OH's prolonged injury woes, Carrick's up and down form, Giggs being captain and can do no wrong status, as well as the quality of opposition so far have been combining factors as to why my reasoning hasn't come to fruition (yet !). It may still.

ih8cheatskiscum · 13th December 2007, 11:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

Yes you're right. It stems from the the time I tried to answer my own question - "why on earth would we want to buy Hargreaves - why do we need him at all ?". I'm certain the three man central midfield is what Fergie has in mind. However, OH's prolonged injury woes, Carrick's up and down form, Giggs being captain and can do no wrong status, as well as the quality of opposition so far have been combining factors as to why my reasoning hasn't come to fruition (yet !). It may still.

Hopefully Giggs will tuck into the 3-man midfield when defending with Rooney tracking back at the left. Then when we attack we will have Tevez and Rooney up front with Giggs and Ronny on the flanks plus Hargreaves and Anderson to come through from midfield

CnutOfAllCnuts · 13th December 2007, 12:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Denny

Yes you're right. It stems from the the time I tried to answer my own question - "why on earth would we want to buy Hargreaves - why do we need him at all ?". I'm certain the three man central midfield is what Fergie has in mind. However, OH's prolonged injury woes, Carrick's up and down form, Giggs being captain and can do no wrong status, as well as the quality of opposition so far have been combining factors as to why my reasoning hasn't come to fruition (yet !). It may still.

Sir Alex rules in mysterious ways

Personally, I believe he can be an excellent player in a two man centre midfield with either Scholes or Anderson. Don't think Carrick and Hargreaves will work too well though.

Julian Denny · 13th December 2007, 13:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by CnutOfAllCnuts

Sir Alex rules in mysterious ways

Personally, I believe he can be an excellent player in a two man centre midfield with either Scholes or Anderson. Don't think Carrick and Hargreaves will work too well though.

You see that's where I have a problem. Why did SAF splash out 35m, or whatever the total was, for two players he didn't think would be compatible ? Personally, I think they are very compatible, together with Anderson or Scholes - particularly against opposition who are worthy of such a selection admittedly.

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber · 13th December 2007, 21:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mozza

Hargreaves runs around a lot, looks great but doesn't achieve much despite all of the effort expended, Carrick is efficient, does a lot more for the team in defence and attack, he's the better player.

That statement is as a true as your idea that Makelele was Chelsea's play maker in the 2 seasons they won the EPL trophy.

Feedingseagulls · 13th December 2007, 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by R0N4LD0

hey, that IS easy! how come no one ever explained it that way?

Probably because it's not strictly accurate...

Whilst it's true that the accusative case (object) requires whom (eg. 'whom did you kill?) many other cases need the form as well...

eg :

'To whom do you refer?'

'For whom is your message intended?'

ENJOY!

Feedingseagulls · 13th December 2007, 21:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ekeke

I didn't say we did play him in a 3? I said if he's anywhere near as good is made out, we'll never have to use him in a 3 man midfield.

Just to prove your stupidity, yesterday was my 22nd birthday. For those 22 years I've been a Manchester United fan. I've seen United play before of course, but your last point is indeed a valid one.

I'm amazed at your demonstration of autonomy in the first few years of your life (especially before you could communicate your wishes by speech!)

Feedingseagulls · 13th December 2007, 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by redmanc

If you really believe that you are a spastic.

Given he's an Arse fan that's something of a tautology.

(...and yes, he probably does believe that, the misguided Wengerite.)

peterstorey · 13th December 2007, 21:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feedingseagulls

Given he's an Arse fan that's something of a tautology.

(...and yes, he probably does believe that, the misguided Wengerite.)

That's a good trick - you've managed to be stupidly childish and tediously old- gittish at the same time.

Feedingseagulls · 13th December 2007, 22:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterstorey

That's a good trick - you've managed to be stupidly childish and tediously old- gittish at the same time.

Yet amazingly accurate!

If you wanted the shorter version, then I'd go for Boring's reply to your ludicrous post...

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterstorey

Yeah, but there's limited and limited. All the players you mention have something about them that lifts them out of the Robbie Savage stakes: Makelele's positioning/ball use/game reading; Mascherano's tackling; Gatutuso's all over the pitch combativeness; Essien's sheer power. Hargreaves has no such outstanding quality in my view.

...which was simply....

...

... to which I'll add

peterstorey · 13th December 2007, 22:26

...sans everything

Feedingseagulls · 13th December 2007, 22:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterstorey

...sans everything

= nothing

= pretty much what you usually post.

Shotgun raisin · 13th December 2007, 22:50

I'd actually agree with peterstorey there. I can't see how Hargreaves fits in. He's not disciplined or positionally aware enough to sit deep and hold, and he's not technically gifted or creative enough to be given a roaming role in a 2 man midfield.

I can only see him work as the spare man in a midfield 3. But seeing as we don't have the strikers to make that system work (and I don't think SAF will sell either Rooney or Tevez just to accommodate Hargreaves) I'm bemused as to his future in the team. My only hope for him is that he can be trained up to read the game better from a deeper position, and be our version of Mascherano. Until then I'd pick Carrick every time. He's twice the player Hargreaves is.

Feedingseagulls · 13th December 2007, 22:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shotgun raisin

I'd actually agree with peterstorey there. I can't see how Hargreaves fits in. He's not disciplined or positionally aware enough to sit deep and hold, and he's not technically gifted or creative enough to be given a roaming role in a 2 man midfield.

I can only see him work as the spare man in a midfield 3. But seeing as we don't have the strikers to make that system work (and I don't think SAF will sell either Rooney or Tevez just to accommodate Hargreaves) I'm bemused as to his future in the team. My only hope for him is that he can be trained up to read the game better from a deeper position, and be our version of Mascherano. Until then I'd pick Carrick every time. He's twice the player Hargreaves is.

Have you read the rest of the thread?

Shotgun raisin · 13th December 2007, 23:03

No. Sorry. If your contention is with my agreeing with peterstorey (possibly because he's being twattish) I'll take it back under advisement. I stand by the rest of my post though. Though I'm sure it's all been said before and not just in this thread.

Feedingseagulls · 13th December 2007, 23:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shotgun raisin

No. Sorry. If your contention is with my agreeing with peterstorey (possibly because he's being twattish) I'll take it back under advisement. I stand by the rest of my post though.

Not really - it's more that your and Peter's views have been pretty much systematically demolished earlier in the thread.

Oh, and PS is always 'twattish' - so nothing new there.

Shotgun raisin · 13th December 2007, 23:11

But I'm right. Everybody seems to have been too distracted by his bad German perm to notice.

peterstorey · 13th December 2007, 23:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shotgun raisin

But I'm right. Everybody seems to have been too distracted by his bad German perm to notice.

Of course you're right but your argument will be "demolished" with a little green laffin' smilie.

choiboyx012 · 13th December 2007, 23:44

twice the player hargreaves is, yeah thats why he's starting over carrick every week.

Shotgun raisin · 13th December 2007, 23:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by choiboyx012

twice the player hargreaves is, yeah thats why he's starting over carrick every week.

Even I could start over Carrick every week. When he's injured.

FlawlessThaw · 13th December 2007, 23:52

People should come to terms with the fact that Ferguson picks the team. And he chooses to field Hargreaves over Carrick.

13th December 2007, 11:45	#327 (permalink)
CnutOfAllCnuts Bald Boring Cnut Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 21,096	Jules, you are a bit obsessed about this...

13th December 2007, 22:26	#338 (permalink)
peterstorey Winner of the 'Most pompous arrogant pretentious Gooner' title 2004 Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Happy those, who can remain at Highbury! Posts: 9,211	...sans everything

13th December 2007, 22:50	#340 (permalink)
Shotgun raisin Reserve Team Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: the path of the Mean Posts: 2,664	I'd actually agree with peterstorey there. I can't see how Hargreaves fits in. He's not disciplined or positionally aware enough to sit deep and hold, and he's not technically gifted or creative enough to be given a roaming role in a 2 man midfield. I can only see him work as the spare man in a midfield 3. But seeing as we don't have the strikers to make that system work (and I don't think SAF will sell either Rooney or Tevez just to accommodate Hargreaves) I'm bemused as to his future in the team. My only hope for him is that he can be trained up to read the game better from a deeper position, and be our version of Mascherano. Until then I'd pick Carrick every time. He's twice the player Hargreaves is.

13th December 2007, 23:03	#342 (permalink)
Shotgun raisin Reserve Team Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: the path of the Mean Posts: 2,664	No. Sorry. If your contention is with my agreeing with peterstorey (possibly because he's being twattish) I'll take it back under advisement. I stand by the rest of my post though. Though I'm sure it's all been said before and not just in this thread.

13th December 2007, 23:11	#344 (permalink)
Shotgun raisin Reserve Team Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: the path of the Mean Posts: 2,664	But I'm right. Everybody seems to have been too distracted by his bad German perm to notice.

13th December 2007, 23:44	#346 (permalink)
choiboyx012 Carrick>Hargreaves Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 2,571	twice the player hargreaves is, yeah thats why he's starting over carrick every week.

13th December 2007, 23:52	#348 (permalink)
FlawlessThaw most 'know it all' poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: London Posts: 10,545	People should come to terms with the fact that Ferguson picks the team. And he chooses to field Hargreaves over Carrick.