[PepsiCola]

Really hope we keep him next year, regardless of other signings.

Least of our problems this year. With others chipping in with more goals next year, Ibra could drive us to a title.

 

[Shuriken]

Really hope we keep him next year, regardless of other signings.

Least of our problems this year. With others chipping in with more goals next year, Ibra could drive us to a title.

Agreed. Even more so if his minutes are better regulated by Mou next season. We didn't pay a transfer fee for him and he's an established senior striker, a strong asset to be able to field. Despite some crucial misses, his overall contribution has been great.

 

[Treble]

We were clearly better with Zlatan. Not in terms of wins but in terms of play quality and chances created. Zlatan gave that team some swag.

Our best games at home and away were without Zlatan (in the first XI anyway): Chelsea and Celta. Celta away turned out to be the most important win so far. We created many chances and Celta were lucky to lose only 1:0. So no, I don't buy into the hype. Zlatan did well to score 28 goals but the whole team was set up to create chances for him - no other team in the PL has created so many big chances for their main striker. Nevertheless, he struggled to outscore Alli, not to mention fecking Defoe.

 

[el3mel]

Our best games at home and away were without Zlatan (in the first XI anyway): Chelsea and Celta. Celta away turned out to be the most important win so far. We created many chances and Celta were lucky to lose only 1:0. So no, I don't buy into the hype. Zlatan did well to score 28 goals but the whole team was set up to create chances for him - no other team in the PL has created so many big chances for their main striker. Nevertheless, he struggled to outscore Alli, not to mention fecking Defoe.

Taking only 2 games as an example for us better without him and neglecting all other dogshite matches is really weak argument. We can bring any good game we played with him and kill this argument before it starts. He was fundamental in our 6 wins run in December and was scoring and assisting all our goals.

The undeniable fact is we were creating more chances with him more than without him, and the style overall was better with him than without him. Only 2 good games without him won't deny this.

His ability to drop deep to hold the ball and link the play was a key part in our attacking build up and all the chances we created for him was because of his excellent positioning in the box at most balls to find the ball at his feet. Really hard to find a striker that drops deep to help in the build up then move forward to take the dangerous position in the box to wait for his chance, especially at age of 35 years old. All chances created for him proves that we were so fluent in the attack to create as many chances as well, denying and contradicting your point of us playing better without him.

Accept it or not : Zlatan's style of play was making us dominating the opposite teams and playing fluent attacking football against most teams, while after his injury and presence of Rashford up front we reverted to highly defensive approach and trying to do counters with that pace upfront , and we are shite at these counters leading the terrible performance we're playing right now. With Zlatan we never played on the counter for obvious reasons so we were playing attacking and dominating football that his style of play suits it and the performance was much better.

This is not against Rashford as he's doing a good job as possible as he can but the style of play was more attacking and dominating with Zlatan up front. Arguing the opposite by bringing 2 games only is really not convincing.

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Taking only 2 games as an example for us better without him and neglecting all other dogshite matches is really weak argument. We can bring any good game we played with him and kill this argument before it starts. He was fundamental in our 6 wins run in December and was scoring and assisting all our goals.

The undeniable fact is we were creating more chances with him more than without him, and the style overall was better with him than without him. Only 2 good games without him won't deny this.

His ability to drop deep to hold the ball and link the play was a key part in our attacking build up and all the chances we created for him was because of his excellent positioning in the box at most balls to find the ball at his feet. Really hard to find a striker that drops deep to help in the build up then move forward to take the dangerous position in the box to wait for his chance, especially at age of 35 years old. All chances created for him proves that we were so fluent in the attack to create as many chances as well, denying and contradicting your point of us playing better without him.

Accept it or not : Zlatan's style of play was making us dominating the opposite teams and playing fluent attacking football against most teams, while after his injury and presence of Rashford up front we reverted to highly defensive approach and trying to do counters with that pace upfront , and we are shite at these counters leading the terrible performance we're playing right now. With Zlatan we never played on the counter for obvious reasons so we were playing attacking and dominating football that his style of play suits it and the performance was much better.

This is not against Rashford as he's doing a good job as possible as he can but the style of play was more attacking and dominating with Zlatan up front. Arguing the opposite by bringing 2 games only is really not convincing.

That's a good point.

True, to make use of Rashford's pace, like it or not, Jose have to play defensive to go with the counter. If we go with attacking from the start, there won't be much use since our attackers especially Rashford are bad in congested space. At least with more space going with the counter, Rashford would have better chances in scoring. Of course, with Rashford upfront, not all games we play counter-attack.

Having both Zlatan and Rashford is especially useful, since Mourinho can then varied the tactics and formation depending who we're up against. Against strong-form top teams like Chelsea, it would be lethal to play more defensive with Rashford, and in many other games, when we're attacking, Zlatan is the ideal one. Up to the Chelsea games, that seem to be Jose's plan, and then the injury happens. A world class striker like Zlatan who can contribute more than mere goals, are missed and will be missed.

 

[Ixion]

Nevertheless, he struggled to outscore Alli, not to mention fecking Defoe.

Congratulations on the most stupid post of the week. It's not like those two have had great seasons or anything.

 

[GM K]

Taking only 2 games as an example for us better without him and neglecting all other dogshite matches is really weak argument. We can bring any good game we played with him and kill this argument before it starts. He was fundamental in our 6 wins run in December and was scoring and assisting all our goals.

The undeniable fact is we were creating more chances with him more than without him, and the style overall was better with him than without him. Only 2 good games without him won't deny this.

His ability to drop deep to hold the ball and link the play was a key part in our attacking build up and all the chances we created for him was because of his excellent positioning in the box at most balls to find the ball at his feet. Really hard to find a striker that drops deep to help in the build up then move forward to take the dangerous position in the box to wait for his chance, especially at age of 35 years old. All chances created for him proves that we were so fluent in the attack to create as many chances as well, denying and contradicting your point of us playing better without him.

Accept it or not : Zlatan's style of play was making us dominating the opposite teams and playing fluent attacking football against most teams, while after his injury and presence of Rashford up front we reverted to highly defensive approach and trying to do counters with that pace upfront , and we are shite at these counters leading the terrible performance we're playing right now. With Zlatan we never played on the counter for obvious reasons so we were playing attacking and dominating football that his style of play suits it and the performance was much better.

This is not against Rashford as he's doing a good job as possible as he can but the style of play was more attacking and dominating with Zlatan up front. Arguing the opposite by bringing 2 games only is really not convincing.

Brilliant response and analysis. Nothing more to add. The attempts by some to play down Zlatan's immense contributions to this team is absolutely strange.

 

[Treble]

Congratulations on the most stupid post of the week. It's not like those two have had great seasons or anything.

Defoe is a good striker but nothing special really. He's had a great season relatively to his normal seasons, not relatively to the best strikers around. And Zlatan was supposed to be one of them. As regards Alli, he isn't supposed to be anywhere near the superstar Zlatan in terms of goalscoring. So, no, the comparison wasn't stupid at all. Your reply was though. Congrats.

 

[Treble]

Taking only 2 games as an example for us better without him and neglecting all other dogshite matches is really weak argument. We can bring any good game we played with him and kill this argument before it starts. He was fundamental in our 6 wins run in December and was scoring and assisting all our goals.

The undeniable fact is we were creating more chances with him more than without him, and the style overall was better with him than without him. Only 2 good games without him won't deny this.

His ability to drop deep to hold the ball and link the play was a key part in our attacking build up and all the chances we created for him was because of his excellent positioning in the box at most balls to find the ball at his feet. Really hard to find a striker that drops deep to help in the build up then move forward to take the dangerous position in the box to wait for his chance, especially at age of 35 years old. All chances created for him proves that we were so fluent in the attack to create as many chances as well, denying and contradicting your point of us playing better without him.

Accept it or not : Zlatan's style of play was making us dominating the opposite teams and playing fluent attacking football against most teams, while after his injury and presence of Rashford up front we reverted to highly defensive approach and trying to do counters with that pace upfront , and we are shite at these counters leading the terrible performance we're playing right now. With Zlatan we never played on the counter for obvious reasons so we were playing attacking and dominating football that his style of play suits it and the performance was much better.

This is not against Rashford as he's doing a good job as possible as he can but the style of play was more attacking and dominating with Zlatan up front. Arguing the opposite by bringing 2 games only is really not convincing.

2 games are a small sample if you take all games into account. But we are talking here about our best games. Chelsea home and Celta away were our best games all season.

Zlatan's injury coincided with injuries to other players. The team was already tired and didn't have enough depth (due to injuries). So Jose decided to give up on the league. To use the games vs City, Arsenal and Spurs as a criterion whether we create more chances with or without Zlatan isn't the smartest thing one can do.

 

[Garethw]

Whatever happens in the future, nobody can take away the fact that a 35 year old Zlatan came to premier league and looked more at home than most strikers ten years his junior.

 

[KiD MoYeS]

He came, he saw, he conquered.

Proven himself in England, what a career the man has had. Freak of nature.

 

[Dante]

Jose's United has been built around Zlatan as the targetman. Since Rashford has come in, we've not really changed our tactics that much. We're still compact from defence to midfield and expect the centreforward to be our main outlet for bringing the rest of the team forward. It doesn't suit Rashford (or Martial for that matter).

I think it's harsh to judge our other strikers by how they've performed as Ibrahimovic surrogates. The buck has to stop with Mourinho for lacking the courage to revamp his system (though it is understandable given how late in the season we are).

Next season, I hope we set up completely differently. Without a big man up front, we'll be forced to play with more movement and I think that'll be the key to unlocking the potential of several of our young forwards. The rigid structure that we're playing with at the moment isn't what they're about. For one thing, we lack anyone who's any good at wingplay. And yet Mournho's persisted with square pegs in round holes.

 

[Ixion]

Our best game of the season was beating Chelsea at home proving we're better without Zlatan.

Ignore the best run of the season was winning 11 in a row which he started 9 and going 17 unbeaten in all competitions which he started 14. No, a one game sample size is what you should judge things on.

And our best performance of the season was probably the 4-1 against Leicester back in September.

 

[Jaxdan]

Our best game of the season was beating Chelsea at home proving we're better without Zlatan.

Ignore the best run of the season was winning 11 in a row which he started 9 and going 17 unbeaten in all competitions which he started 14. No, a one game sample size is what you should judge things on.

And our best performance of the season was probably the 4-1 against Leicester back in September.

One game proves that? You somehow know we wouldn't have done same with him on the pitch? We beat Chelsea because the whole side went on the front foot from the opening kick and took it to the opposite side for a change. That and Herrera's excellent man marking of Hazard.

You can think we are better off without him, that's fine. But one game "proves" nothing.

 

[Ixion]

One game proves that? You somehow know we wouldn't have done same with him on the pitch? We beat Chelsea because the whole side went on the front foot from the opening kick and took it to the opposite side for a change. That and Herrera's excellent man marking of Hazard.

You can think we are better off without him, that's fine. But one game "proves" nothing.

I feel like perhaps you didn't read beyond my first sentence.

 

[Jaxdan]

I feel like perhaps you didn't read beyond my first sentence.

Got ya. My bad. We are in agreement here then I see. I've seen others actually use that argument though. Sorry mate.

 

[breakout67]

Jose's United has been built around Zlatan as the targetman. Since Rashford has come in, we've not really changed our tactics that much. We're still compact from defence to midfield and expect the centreforward to be our main outlet for bringing the rest of the team forward. It doesn't suit Rashford (or Martial for that matter).

I think it's harsh to judge our other strikers by how they've performed as Ibrahimovic surrogates. The buck has to stop with Mourinho for lacking the courage to revamp his system (though it is understandable given how late in the season we are).

Next season, I hope we set up completely differently. Without a big man up front, we'll be forced to play with more movement and I think that'll be the key to unlocking the potential of several of our young forwards. The rigid structure that we're playing with at the moment isn't what they're about. For one thing, we lack anyone who's any good at wingplay. And yet Mournho's persisted with square pegs in round holes.

All the best strikers in the league are in the mould of Zlatan. Kane, Costa, Lukaku are Physical, hold the ball up, make intelligent runs, have a goalscoring instinct. Zlatan isnt a targetman, he is a no.9 with some playmaking in him Go outside of the league and all the best teams in the world have a dedicated no.9, Higuain, Suarez, Lewandoski, Ronaldo.

Zlatan has better movement than Martial and Rashford; this isnt football manager where pace means good movement. Good movement requires intelligence first and foremost, then pace is a bonus.

If they cannot perform as a striker in Mourinho's system then they are not strikers period, they are wide forwards that support the striker aka Neymar, Robben, Hazard, Bale, Dybala etc.

If you think we are going to play 2 dedicated strikers in a 4-4-2 then you are mental. Playing a 4-4-2 requires a no.10/second striker hybrid to play with the striker ie Griezmann and Rooney, or else you cannot link the midfield to the attack.

 

[Dante]

All the best strikers in the league are in the mould of Zlatan. Kane, Costa, Lukaku are Physical, hold the ball up, make intelligent runs, have a goalscoring instinct. Zlatan isnt a targetman, he is a no.9 with some playmaking in him Go outside of the league and all the best teams in the world have a dedicated no.9, Higuain, Suarez, Lewandoski, Ronaldo.

Zlatan has better movement than Martial and Rashford; this isnt football manager where pace means good movement. Good movement requires intelligence first and foremost, then pace is a bonus.

If they cannot perform as a striker in Mourinho's system then they are not strikers period, they are wide forwards that support the striker aka Neymar, Robben, Hazard, Bale, Dybala etc.

If you think we are going to play 2 dedicated strikers in a 4-4-2 then you are mental. Playing a 4-4-2 requires a no.10/second striker hybrid to play with the striker ie Griezmann and Rooney, or else you cannot link the midfield to the attack.

He very much is.

You've really gone off on one there.

Having a mobile and interchanging frontline makes the most of the skillset that our current forwards have. Regardless of what other clubs do, our side has some very good players that are playing within themselves because of the system they're deployed in.

 

[el3mel]

2 games are a small sample if you take all games into account. But we are talking here about our best games. Chelsea home and Celta away were our best games all season.

Zlatan's injury coincided with injuries to other players. The team was already tired and didn't have enough depth (due to injuries). So Jose decided to give up on the league. To use the games vs City, Arsenal and Spurs as a criterion whether we create more chances with or without Zlatan isn't the smartest thing one can do.

So if Barca made some great game without Messi does that mean he really is of little importance and Neymar and Suarez are enough ? Football doesn't work by that. That's why I told you this is a weak argument. Talk about the general play style with and without him.

Most of our other injuries were in the defense, they have nothing to do with us changing the style of play after his injury.

 

[Treble]

So if Barca made some great game without Messi does that mean he really is of little importance and Neymar and Suarez are enough ? Football doesn't work by that. That's why I told you this is a weak argument. Talk about the general play style with and without him.

Most of our other injuries were in the defense, they have nothing to do with us changing the style of play after his injury.

On how many games are you basing your conclusion that we play better football with Zlatan? On the games in which we had already given up on the PL? Right? Games in which we played other contenders for the top 4 at their ground? Great sample of games that.

 

[el3mel]

On how many games are you basing your conclusion that we play better football with Zlatan? On the games in which we had already given up on the PL? Right? Games in which we played other contenders for the top 4 at their ground? Great sample of games that.

He was injured in Anderlect game, after this we played : Burnely, City, Swansea, Celta, Arsenal, Celta, Spurs, South, Palace.

If we deleted the games we gave the league one, then here's: Burnely, City, Swansea and the 2 Celta games. 5 games, only one great performance against Celta away.

 

[Treble]

He was injured in Anderlect game, after this we played : Burnely, City, Swansea, Celta, Arsenal, Celta, Spurs, South, Palace.

If we deleted the games we gave the league one, then here's: Burnely, City, Swansea and the 2 Celta games. 5 games, only one great performance against Celta away.

Burnley was a pretty easy win vs a team strong at home (ask Liverpool and Chelsea). Against City we were without Pogba and Mata was still injured, as were some defenders. Pogba didn't play vs Swansea too and the team was very tired from the game vs City. All in all, your argument is crap mate. It's pointless to debate further.

 

[el3mel]

Burnley was a pretty easy win vs a team strong at home (ask Liverpool and Chelsea). Against City we were without Pogba and Mata was still injured, as were some defenders. Pogba didn't play vs Swansea too and the team was very tired from the game vs City. All in all, your argiment is crap mate. It's pointless to debate further.

Said by someone who brought 2 games to debate that we were better without Zlatan. Really funnny.

The only thing you're true about is that discussing anything further is pointless, so I won't replay any further, too.

 

[Man-United]

Burnley was a pretty easy win vs a team strong at home (ask Liverpool and Chelsea). Against City we were without Pogba and Mata was still injured, as were some defenders. Pogba didn't play vs Swansea too and the team was very tired from the game vs City. All in all, your argument is crap mate. It's pointless to debate further.

Too funny by you trying to defend every game we played bad in when Zlatan has been out by "resting players" and this gem "very tired from the game vs City".

and Celta best away game? We played just as good against Anderlech, the difference being that Pogba missed the sitter in the 83rd min. If Celta would have got 1-1 we would not be talking about that game as the best.

and Chelsea didn't go 100% and had injuries in defence as well as having Spurs the week after in the FA Cup. Using your defending that we had players out we can use the same for Chelsea?

Leicester home and away were just as good btw as well as West Brom away, tough ground (ask Tottenham and Arsenal). Spurs at home very good too.

 

[Man-United]

Said by someone who brought 2 games to debate that we were better without Zlatan. Really funnny.

The only thing you're true about is that discussing anything further is pointless, so I won't replay any further, too.

You should go on as you clearly won that argument easily.

 

[Ixion]

Burnley was a pretty easy win vs a team strong at home (ask Liverpool and Chelsea). Against City we were without Pogba and Mata was still injured, as were some defenders. Pogba didn't play vs Swansea too and the team was very tired from the game vs City. All in all, your argument is crap mate. It's pointless to debate further.

Like I said earlier we won 11 in a row and he started 9 and were unbeaten in 17 and he started 14. So you can either take your precious Chelsea game or those 17 games to figure out our best spell of the season.

 

[el3mel]

You should go on as you clearly won that argument easily.

I tried to see what he can say any further to justify his weak argument but it's hopeless.

 

[Rado_N]

"Stay and you can shag my wife"

 

[Giant Midget]

Surely he'll stay now?

We're in the Champions League, and if he can come back by Feb or so, the thought of finally winning that one missing medal will be a real motivation for him.

 

[The White Pele]

Can I change my MotM?

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Highlight of this trophy celebration!

 

[Man-United]

Zlatan's reaction on that banner

 

[BarstoolProphet]

 

[Ban]

Anyone has a gif?

 

[Scarecrow]

Hope he stays next year. Just to have him around the club is worth the millions. Absolute legend.

 

[ilovethisgameahahah]

Zlatan cracking up at the the banner that read 'ZLATAN STAY AND YOU CAN SHAG MY WIFE' Priceless

 

[Shark]

Legend of the game and he could still be a United legend.

He's just a legend.

 

[PepsiCola]

Would be the perfect player to come back in Jan/December months (hopefully sooner!).

Really hope we keep him for his all round attitude. With some exciting youngsters at the club at the moment, he'll be a perfect example for them.

 

[Stringer]

Going to miss him if he does leave this summer as I expect.

 

[K2K]

Charisma personified.