Discussion in 'Manchester United Forum' started by B Cantona, Aug 22, 2009.
whats that got to do with anything?
you'd think the club would be able to rustle up a T-bone and a sunbed ffs
A genuinely nice post this is.
Darren Fletcher is an example to us all of how talent is nurtured under Sir Alex Ferguson. He believed in him when others doubted his sanity and Fletcher's own talent. But behind the scenes he saw the potential and gave him enough opportunities to realise it. The more you play, the better you get. Who would have thought it? Thats why we should have patience with our young and talented players. Its not easy to see the finished article in a rough diamond but surely they deserve enough time to prove themselves. I hope others are afforded such support that has helped Darren Fletcher to become invaluable to our team.
He has done it every time he has played.. Thus making him much more dangerous than most of our other players.. One thing is certain.. when Gibson takes a shot 2/3 times it is on the money.. He will either score, hit the target or at the very least have the keeper scrambling..
Exactly it is his shooting ability alone that makes me think he is better than Fletcher when he was his age! to be a constant goal threat is the wish & dream of most CM's..
I'd still like to know why he didn't start against Liverpool at OT
But I should point out that our seemingly terrible record without him includes relatively unsurprising defeats against Liverpool home and away, Arsenal away and Barca, as well as respectable draws against Villa, Tottenham (LC final) and Everton (FA semi).
I said it last year, and I'll say it again. Darren Fletcher is one of the best cms in the world.
(I didn't say it before last year, though. Then I was making fun of him.)
I thought when he just started, he was just an average player who was good at playing safe and keeping the ball. Then in few seasons time I think he develops his workrate quite well, developed into quite a team player but still looks nothing special to me. Back then I thought he could be our new Phil Neville or Butt.
However last season was a different story. He started to develop so many different aspect of his game (box to box, passing and dictating play, scoring a few goals) and become a very all rounded and reliable player. Also, we all know he is such big game player as well as being our most consistent midfielder too.
This season, I have high hopes for him. He started to play like a Keano to me (not kidding) and I think he is currently indispensable to our team.
Very nice post Brad.
Darrens main qualities are his tireless running, chasing down, back, and his occasional forward runs in the opposition penalty area - which are ideal qualities in a central midfielder. Rather than say he's now our number one midfielder, I prefer to say he should be the first on the team sheet to partner Carrick, Giggs or Scholes who gives us that creative touch.
That's because he was played mostly out of his preferred position. Beckhams transfer to Madrid, and a bad injury to Ole, who was to supposed to be Beckhams' replacement whilst the young Ronaldo was learning his trade, Fletcher was mostly made to share the right side of midfield with Ronaldo which I reckon was detrimental to his development, leading to most punters basing their opinion of him as a player.
Fletcher's move to his natural position in the FA Cup semi-final against Arsenal was his coming of age, and finally convinced the coaches of his strengths. Actually had it not been for Hargreaves injury record, we might not be discussing Fletchers merits - having played so few games the season before last he was rumoured to want to leave.
So this "fletcher divide" then. I wonder does it still exist?
Is it basically every single United fan in the world on one side - and mozza on the other?
I was never one of his biggest critics, but I certainly wasn't a fan either. Hated seeing him on the right wing, but felt he was an acceptable squad player in the centre (a lesser version of Nicky Butt basically).
That period where he was regularly playing with Keano and Scholes in a three man central midfield (04/05?) was an interesting one for me. I didn't feel he was good enough to be a regular starter, but at the end of the day the results game after game proved we were more successful with him there. He just bought the legs and mobility that Keano no longer had.
We played horrible football in that period, turgid infact
I'd also be right
Oh, you're serious.
Word to the wise, when your opinion differs from absolutely everyone else it's clearly anything but right.
Yes we did. However, results-wise we were better with Fletch in there than without.
Nothing in particular about how well Fletch played in that period, it was more about just having those extra legs to allow Keano to still do his thing. I'll be the first to say that I hoped we bought someone better than Fletcher to play that role (which I guess we eventually did with Carrick), but until we did buy that player we did need Fletcher in there.
It was just a rumour he wanted to leave. Fergie would never have let it happen.
I remember when Hargreaves arrived I told people on here Fletcher would get more games and develop better because we'd be able to rotate our midfield more, due to the added depth. Getting far more games in his natural role. I was roundly ridiculed at the time. But in the end, it seems I've been proven right.
No, everyone else is wrong.
Mozza, your such a fool.
Hargreaves was forever injured, he had absolutely no effect on how much we rotated since he never played long enough to need a rest
What pissed me off in that period the most was that every Tom, Dick and Harry was blaming the kid for the not so beautiful football we were playing. As if it was his fault Keane was past it and Scholes was in the worst form of his career in that period.
The lad was carrying those two players physically, and at time playing wide midfield, to the detriment of the development of his own game yet was getting no recognition. It used to make my blood boil.
Scholes wasn't physically shot, Fletch was a bit poop in formation we weren't very good at playing.
In his first season Hargreaves wasn't forever injured. & we rotated our midfield more than we did in any other year previously. Its no surprise that was the year Fletcher actually started to shine.
Bullshit, Fletcher spent his time caryring both Keane and Scholes. It's infact they who were the poop and not him. They escaped criticism simply because of their reps. It was pure scape goatism.
Rotation happened as we bought players who were better then Fletcher to replace either Scholes or Carrick in the center on occasion.
Fletcher did not start to shine two seasons ago (not that he has since), he didn't start either of the semi finals of the champions league nor the final, some performance that
Well that mean 3 seasons later Carrick managed to carry Scholes all on his own without even an aging Keano to help him
Carrick didn't do any serious carrying. Scholes was on fire the season Carrick arrived. Fletcher in comparison as a kid was carrying a past it player and a totally off form one. Whilst devoid of any experience and not playing in a role natural to him. Only someone like you would dare compare the two.
Scholes was on fire because Carrick did more for him then Fletcher could
He wasn't carrying them Chief. Keane was still the number one midfielder there, but he just no longer had the legs to do everything in a two man midfield which he had to with Scholes back then. Fletcher was providing those legs and mobility, but was only doing what many other players would have been able to do. To say that he was carrying them is as blind as Mozza saying that Fletcher was pointless.
Scholes re-invented himself in 06/07 as a deeper lying player which meant he no longer needed to be looked after. If he'd done that a few seasons earlier he may well have been able to play next to the aging Keane without needing Fletcher. But he didn't, which meant we did need Fletch in there.
Maybe a point could be made for Keane and Fletch together carrying Scholes in that period. That's about it.
I can't agree with that. Physically Fletcher was carrying them a lot. There is little doubt about this. They mainly took care of the football while he took care of the running and harder work. Yet he always got slated for our bad football at the time. Yet he wasn't responsible for the flow or creativity of our play. They both were.
Truth is Scholes simply lost form badly after his marvelous 2003 year up till 2006, when his eye recovered. That was all there was to it. Because once Veron left he he had begun to operate from deeper and started off well. But form then deserted him, till he recovered from the eye injury at the start of the 2006/07 season.
I disagree. They both carried Scholes its true. But Fletcher was doing a lot of physical work for both Keane and Scholes. Much to his own detriment.
He was my least favorite player for quite some time. I remember wondering why Fergie was picking him ahead of Richardson
He's now an absolutely integral part of the team. Honestly feel he's more important than Carrick. They say he's not as creative as Carrick, but his turning up in the box today was great to see.
Fair enough, it was a good read.
Fletcher has become a top class player and i think his name should be first on the namesheet.His combative play,chasing opponents like a man possessed reminds me of gattuso.But he also times his runs into the box and i believe we will get more of him at his peak.
Fletcher played the least amount of games the year Hargreaves' was purchased.
There is a divide with most regulars at OT but obviously not on the CAF (with the odd exception). Some think he is sublime others simply think he shouldn't be anywhere near the first 11. While all agree he has significantly improved.
He is a player that finds space and that is great when you have the ball but the problem is when we don't have the ball he still finds space! Thats not me just knocking him you watch him in any match when the opposition are attacking (if you cant spot him look for the ref!)
He is fine if it's his man who has got the ball he will then track all the way but when opponents are making runs off the ball he just lets them go without communicating this to a defender.
His passing has improved and now plays some balls forward, his finishing is still very poor. Yes he has improved sufficiently to justify his place in the squad but first name on the team sheet for central mid is just taking it too far.
great post Brad - in fact probably the best post I have ever seen from you
I always thought Fletcher would be a decent squad player but didnt expect much more from him - last year he really stepped up his level and I would agree that he is now our first choice midfielder
the interesting question is, if Hargreaves hadnt got injured, would Fletcher have ever got his chance? I doubt it, would probably be playing for Everton or something
Edit: just realised you wrote this specifically for the blog so I am less impressed now
That opinion's not knee-jerk in the slightest, is it?
Separate names with a comma.