Discussion in 'Manchester United Forum' started by Carl, Aug 28, 2010.
All I've said in this debate is that Carrick's as good as all these players currently. If he sustains this level of form, then he's a match for the likes of Toure and Modric.
Carrick's not without his weaknesses, but neither are the other two. The only thing stopping posters from admitting Carrick is currently one of the best in the PL is a consideration of his lean spell. Unfair, given he's clearly over it.
He's in the running for our PotY - good enough for me to confirm he's been one of the league's best CM.
Going back to toure I don't think he's better nor carrick better than him I think they're roughly the same. The thing with toure though is that as I said because of his power he is very noticeable.
The other thing I've noticed with toure is that people talk up his attacking ability, which to be fair is good but then compare him to say carrick but don't acknowledge their respective positions and conditions they play in. First of all though I would say that in these last few seasons going forward carrick himself should have done more. As ive said before that has been his stumbling block. Not taking am enough reaponsibility in attack. He's worked on that though and you can all see what he has to offer there.
However there are differences between toure and carrick. Last season toure got praise for his attacking play but at the same time that was his job. Silva played wide and it was toure, flanked by two defensive midfielders in Barry and de Jong. Toure was specifically there to attack. And he did it well, he didn't have the best return but it was good. However I think people have seen this and used it to show that when toure plays he offers that going forward and his defensive abilities. But that's not really true. It's one or the other. If carrick had that same freedom I reckon he'd get a good return as well. He's got a good shot he just doesn't get forward enough to use it.
This season toure has played further back and has been much more reserved going forward. He's got goals though still tbf to him but he's not attacking to the same extent as he he did last season. Also again some of his better attacking displays have come when city go cautious and stick him in attacking midfield.
The thing toure has though that carrick doesn't is Barry. Barry is a natural centre mid who can be relied upon to do his defensive work and do it well. Toure knows he can go forward at times because Barry is capable of covering. Out of the two toure goes forward more than Barry, subsequently Barry had less of an attacking impact. At united though only fletcher can be seen as being able to be relied upon in that same manner. Scholes although he has looked randomly fitter this season has needed protection from carrick. Carrick has to cover for him a lot which means he can't go forward as much. Ando is a liability at times. I suppose giggs is pretty good but if giggs is playing he will inevitably be the more attacking of the two. Now this is not completely due to carricks partner as I said in the past carrick himself has not been willing to do enough, but his choice of partners at united means that the majority of the time he has to be more defensive then toure does at city. At the end of the day though I don't think toure has considerably more talent going forward but I think he gets more of a chance to show it.
I've argued this before - in my opinion, if we're looking for central midfielders this season, only Modric can claim to have been better in the league than Carrick.
And, for me, that's only because Carrick's season started later.
Given Yaya has often had at least one, if not two holding midfielders giving him licence to attack, his productivity has been nothing Earth shattering.
16 goals in 75 games is very average fare.
Yeah, Touré's more of the blood and thunder type of midfielder - see Gerrard. He's not really the kind of midfielder who'll dictate the game from a central role. I think his season's been a little bit hyped to be fair, he's not been in the class of Modric or Carrick(who were the league's best midfielders by far until Scholes showed up).
Care to respond to this post? You're doing Toure a disservice continually in this thread, hes far better than you're making out. First he couldnt 'control a game', and now hes poor attacking wise as well. It's a miracle he starts for city at this rate.
Thats rubbish. The only player who makes more passes is Arteta. In the entire league.
How would you define 'dictating the game from a central role' out of interest? Surely its getting on the ball, which he does more than anyone else in Citys squad, and making passes, no?
City enjoy a great deal of possession - Touré and Barry are very adept at stroking the ball between themselves(or in Barry's case, carry the ball out wide to his fullback, then run back into the middle for no apparant reason).
Carrick's a much better progressive passer from what I've seen, and he's much better at dictating the tempo of the match. Touré is good in that he'll give you a burst of energy or a dash forward when you need to inject some pace into a game, but he's no where near Carrick in terms of passing range, or playing through the opposing midfield.
And defensively I'd say there's no contest. Carrick's the far superior reader of the game, and brings much more balance defensively to the team. Don't forget that Touré's always got at least one holder next to him, Carrick IS the holder.
Tbf though theon stats like those don't mean a great deal. As I said I rate toure but saying he has 20% more passes doesn't mean a great deal. I'm sure Parker has a pretty high pass rate and number of passes but I've seen him do about 3 pointless one twos with one of their centre backs under no pressure countless times. Also tbf our set up is very much about quick break aways and using the wingers. City's play is much more focused centrally in a similar way to arsenals so they're likely to rack up high pass counts.
Man Utd have basically the same amount of possession as City on average, there's less than one percent in it. So that isnt a reason at all for Toure having a higher pass rate than Carrick, their respective teams have the ball just as much.
Carricks no doubt got a better passing range, but he doesnt use it and his passing is often restrictive. He's undoubtably got the talent to hit longer balls, but he generally doesnt. That being said, Toures range isnt greatly inferior to Carricks in my opinion, I've watched City plenty this season and he completely controls the games, just as Carrick does for us. He's got 4 assists this year, to Carricks 1, and like I said makes more passes per game than anyone else in the league bar Arteta. So I'm not seeing where this opinion that he cant control a game like Carrick comes from. It's simply not true, if you watch City he gets more touches than anyone, the vast majority of play goes through him, so how does he not dictate the tempo?
As for being better defensively, no doubt Carrick reads the game better than Toure, it's no contest and Carricks probably the most talented player in the league positionally. However Toure brings a physique to midfield which contributes hugely to the defensive side of things just as much as offensive, teams find it very hard to play through him as he's so imposing. So I'd consider them both assets to defensive, albeit in different ways.
As for Carrick being the only holding player at United, Toure was the same at Barcelona and performed just as well as at City. So you cant level a criticism at him that his performances depend on a midfield partner in DM, it isnt true.
In relation to this, if you think it through, Carrick being the most defensive midfielder makes it considerably easier for him to control the game, or dictate the tempo as you said. He recieves the ball from the back constantly, and isnt put under the same level of pressure as the more advanced centre mid. This allows him time, space to pick passes and knock it around with the full backs. So the fact that you've pointed out Toure plays more advances actually makes his superior passing stats more impressive.
They mean a great deal more than just saying, "Toure cant control the tempo". How is disagreeing with that statement, and providing some stats to back it up, more meaningless than just a random statement? They arent the be all and end all of the argument obviously, but at the same time the fact he gets on the ball so much and makes the most passes in the league, makes a mockery of the statement that he cant control a game. It's genuinely ludicrous.
As for pointless one twos, undoubtably Toure makes these, but then, so does Carrick. He often just keeps play ticking over at the back, playing the ball wide to Evra, recieving it back and playing it to Rio etc. Like you say, Parker does as well... as does Modric, Arteta, Adam etc. Keeping possession is part of the game and all midfielders do it. Xavi does it at Barcelona, doesnt change the fact that he's the best passer of the ball in the world.
There's only so much you can use statistics for, mate.
Carrick do use his passing range. A lot. Using your own statistics, you might notice that roughly 60 % of his passes have been hit forward this season.
Yaya Touré, on the other hand, is one of the midfielders in the league who plays the ball sideways the most(Top 3 I believe) - a critique often levelled at Carrick earlier - with approximately 40 % of the passes going sideways.
What does this tell me? It tells me that Touré is a more cautious and not as progressive passer as Carrick, which should it's bit to increase his passes and his percentage of successfull passes(Scott Parker as expected passes sideways even more than Touré, with Britton at the top) - which I told you in my last post, without resorting to the use of statistics, but my eyes. But if you need a translation.. (Stats courtesy of whoscored.com)
True, well I don't agree that toure can't control the tempo, I think he can I was just saying that stats like that don't mean a great deal, not to me anyway. There's a difference though between what xavi and say Parker do though in regards to those passes. Every midfielder will make simple passes like that to keep things ticking over but the best ones can make harder passes as well in a game and retain there accuracy. That's what I'm saying. I've seen Parker go through most games and not attempt one difficult pass but because he makes lots of short and unpressurised passes he'll have high passing numbers and accuracy. Now I'm not saying toure is the same but just that a stat like that doesn't produce enough information. The context of the passes make a lot of difference. Also as I said because of the nature of how city set up the majority of their players are central. That means that there's usually a player nearby for a pass. Our team in comparison usually has a lot more space between players as we have two out and out wingers who tend to stay wide and then we have Rooney who switches between playing as an out and out striker and as a deeper player.
Regardless though I don't want to put toure down. I think he's an excellent player in the same way carrick is. Toure has shown more balls over his career than carrick no doubt but in talent terms I don't see a difference. Toure has more power and can get stuck in, carrick is a better reader of the game. Toure has the edge going forward probably but carrick is a better passer. Overall they'd probably be an excellent combo tbh.
Carrick doesn't make the most of passing range in the slightest, not even close. Granted, this year he has improved and is becoming more direct, but its still way off what he is capable off and what I'd like to see him do. As I've said before though, I think that's a tactical instruction from SAF, and he's been directed to retain possession.
As for the 60% going forward, I think it's you who should probably use your own stats, and maybe a bit of common sense. You've said yourself that Carrick is the deep lying midfielder for United, but that Toure isnt for City. What should that tell you, 'with your eyes'? That Carrick has more passing options ahead of him, as he's often merely 5 yards away from the central defenders. Anyone who watches United can see that, I'm surprised you havent. Like I said in my last post, he recieves the ball from the defence and dictates play from there. In addition he constantly stays back shielding the defence, as you said yourself hes the holding midfielder.
In contrast Toure's starting possession is more advanced than Carrick, so he has less forward passing options. With Barry sitting behind him around him he racks up a lot of passes back to him, whilst maintaining his advanced position.
Also, you've clearly taken no account of Toures forward runs, which he makes constantly throughout a game, in contrast to Carrick who generally makes none. Considering the amount Toure breaks forward to the penalty box its foolish to compare his forward passing rate to Carricks, as he has Silva, Nasri and Aguero dropping off him, pulling out wide etc, and is under far more pressure. Carrick is sitting next to Rio and Evans and playing passes into Giggs or Valencia, compared to Toures who's attacking and laying off passes at the edge of the box. Want to have a think over which pass is more likely to end in a goal? If Toures so backward with his passing, why does he have quadruple the assists? Clearly Toure provides a more attacking threat, anyone who watches the two of them play knows that, its no contest. Trying to make out Carrick is more attacking with his passing, based on forward passes percentage is ridiculous. I bet De Gea has a 100% forward pass rate, is he more attacking too?
EDIT - Also, saying Toure plays the third most sideways passes shouldnt be a surprise FFS. He makes the second most passes overall, so obviously some are going to be sideways. Its a stupid stat, means nothing and is weighted against the players who get on the ball most.
It's not a sleight to say he's not a midfield dictator - not many players are. It's the key role in a team.
I didn't say his attacking was 'poor' - merely posted his stats and posited the view they were average.
This whole argument is getting ridiculous really. You're all trying to judge who is better based on minute little statistics that don't mean an awful lot. We'll never agree on who is the better player. I think it's madness to suggest Carrick is as good as Toure but it seems some of you dont. Fair enough. We're obviously not going to see eye to eye here at all.
Ash, I'm sure you make good points, but use some paragraphs and full stops, it's hurting my eyes.
In a nutshell Ash, the expectations are greater on Carrick than on Parker, simply because Carrick has not been producing what he is capable of until this season. Hence the title of this thread.
As good as Carrick is at shielding the defence, we know from his first season he is capable of much more. We are now seeing that form again this season.
Parker may be playing a more disciplined role for Spurs this season, because that is the role they need him to play, but the difference between the 2 is becuase whatever role Parker is asked to perform he gives everything he has.
Carrick has played within himself for at least a couple of seasons, thankfully he seems to have overcome that lack of confidence this season and is back to the player we all knew he was.
Parker has never had the ability of Carrick, but his desire to make a difference outweighs his fear of failure. Sometimes it is easier to play safe than to take responsibility. I feel Parker has always been prepared to take responsibility, more than Carrick. In Parkers current role for Spuds, he doesn't have to, nor do they want him to. He is there simply to provide a platform for the othewrs to get forward.
FWIW - I don't really think Carrick is better than Toure.
Still, interesting debate
That said Cina, my friend, when Carrick performs at the level he has been, there is a lot less between him and Toure than you would allow people to believe.
I'm not your friend buddeh! I won't argue that, but if you compare them in the last 4 years and not just the last 3 months then I can't see why anyone thinks Carrick is as good, personally. And it's not like Yaya hasn't been very good this season either.
He's not playing the third most sideways passes - his sideways passing percentage is the third highest in the league, for any midfielder with over 200 passes, per january 2012. Not backwards, sideways.
Also, I've already explained that Touré in my view is more of a box-to-box midfielder, an all-round player. I don't think his assists rates are particularly impressive for the supposed offensive player you claim him to be, with that array of attacking talent to play in.
However, I do think you're excaggerating his advanced position - Touré's got a lot of passing options in front of him at any given time. Aguero, Silva and Nasri makes sure at least one of them is threatening the space in between the midfield and defence of the opposing teams, and they've got great width in their fullbacks who push high up the pitch.
It's all well and good Carrick is playing as a deep midfielder, but actually Scholes is the one with the deepest starting position of the two of them now, and Carrick's form has increased, if anything, during his partnership with the old master.
Goodness me, it's a turn of phrase.
Not sure why you find me to be such an abrasive character tbh - your prerogative, I guess.
I also feel Carrick's form has been on a steady incline since around February 2011. His lean spell of form is a long way behind him now.
Would be nice if every debate about Carrick could now overlook his poor 18 months. It happened - he's over it. Judging on current performance levels, he's a class act and one of the best in the league.
Which was my point - I think he's had a better season than Touré(quite comfortably), but I probably shouldn't waste all day debating it with some stat-freak. It's his opinion, I've got mine.
Our central midfield is competitive when Carrick's on form, basially. With pretty much every midfield bar Barcelona.
Our 'big game' performances with Carrick in the side this season would back that up.
I'm joking, it's just a quote from South Park. I have no beef. You're always good for a fun debate
it definitely has. I would expect it though. He's 30, usually the 'prime' point of a midfielders game. I'm glad it has come at a time our midfield has been lacking. I've never doubted his importance to our team, he's still the best midfielder we have after all.
To be fair, Carrick isn't exactly short of great attackers in front of him either
There is some strange logic at play in this page. Comparing 2 completely different players using passing stats is a bit bizzarre imo.
Stats are interesting, nothing more. They are proof of nothing. To compare Toure to Carrick is like comparing Vieira to Petit. Both are incredibly good at what they do. One is more versatile than the other, but specifically one has a more clearly defined role than the other.
So how do you compare a specialist with an all rounder? You can't really, there are benefits to both. You may have a personal preference over which type of player you would prefer, but it is all completely subjective really.
That's pleasing, because I had it in my head that you didn't like me. Which would disappoint me because I think you're a good poster. Glad we cleared the air.
I'd go with what you've said there - he's approaching the period of his career where we really ought to see him at his authoritative best for 3 or 4 more seasons.
I've hopes that he'll continue to mature as he ages, especially since his isn't an explosive style.
That's true, I've not denied that at all - just saying Touré can't blame his relative lack of forward passes on not having options in front of him.
The options Carrick has at his disposal obviously is a huge asset when trying to thread balls through the opposing midfield. His job is basically to provide those attacking players with the ball in as good positions as possible, and this season he's been doing it to perfection.
Which one are you referring to as a specialist midfielder? I actually think both have very rounded qualties which make them both highly effective.
Toure is more obviously versatile I suppose, being able to play attacking midfield and holding midfield with relative ease.
Carrick usually plays pretty deep but his skillset is very well rounded. He acts as both the defensive shield and dictates the tempo at the same time which is vital for us.
I think calling either a specialist midfield is pretty harsh, they're both great players with Toure being the much bigger name. If Carrick played like this for England (or got the chance to) I think neutrals would share our view of him being a great player. Just a shame he remains criminally underrated by those outside United.
Toure is capable as you say of playing different roles in midfield, but could not really be defined as a DM or AM. Carrick is very much a deep lying playmaker, more than a DM, and he is not really renowned for doing very much at all in advanced positions.
Depends on how you define Carrick's role. If you believe him to be a DM only, then that would not just be harsh, but wholly inaccurate. He is a deep lying playmaker in my view. A defensive midfielder with the passing ability to instigate attacks from deep areas. Alonso is the closest current example i see.
Tbf to the neutrals, if Carrick had played for the past 2 years like he has this season he would not be underrated by anyone. He has performed well within himself up until this season, and it is not inaccurate for anybody to claim he could and should have given more, he is certainly capable of it and has proved that point this season.
Tbh though mate I never disputed that what I said, which it sounds like you agree with, is that carrick is asked to do more for us then Parker is asked to do. As I said carrick has played within himself up to this last year but he has always been an excellent shield in front of the defence. However he's never got plaudits for that somewhat rightly so because we know he can and should do more then that, where as Parker has. Parker has/ is playing at his best and getting praise for it, carrick has been doing that role, maybe not in the same manner but as effectively for us all his time here and in much bigger games but rarely received credit because everyone is looking at what he was doing in an attacking sense. Like I said though I'm not putting down Parker or anything, I'd have him in our squad but all I was saying is that he's asked to do a lot less than carrick is.
Lol sorry mate I can get a bit carried away with the essays. I try to break it up when I can buy I should do it better. I'm always writing them in a rush on my phone when I've got some 3G. Tbf they're probably mostly rubbish anyway.
It isn't average for a midfielder who has never been considered genuine goal scoring threat. It's in fact expected.
That is completely in accurate assessment. Firstly, Gerard is the worst player to compare Yaya toure too.
secondly, the way City have looked lost in his absence should be plenty of proof that he does run things for them in central areas.
At Barca Toure was the only holder. So that bolded argument is kinda weak.
Separate names with a comma.