Hargreaves' reputation is written in stone and is iron clad!
You're a maniac.
In a nice way of course.
Hargreaves' reputation is written in stone and is iron clad!
Those mean feck all when they play for United, what matters is how they perform for us!
How they play for us doesn't matter, because they played for a successful team before?That's utter bullshit and you know it.
Thing is I've never claimed to be a footall expert. Ever. People like you however often do.Well if that isn't patronising I don't know what is.
For someone who claims to be such a football expert, you make an awful lot of mistakes (e.g. Zidane winning the UEFA at Bordeaux)
I don't do that either. They are many people who dont agree with me. I dont call them fool. I only call fools, fools.For someone who claims everyone who disagrees with you is a fool you manage to continually contradict yourself.
this is really a joke That's the dumbest things you've ever posted. No one expected Bayern to get through. Yet they gave Milan hell with a decimated squad and a fresh from long term injury Hargreaves. More hell than a far superior United side, not missing a many players, with a fully fit Carrick ever did. This is a matter of fact. Not opinion. Which emphasizes my highlighting Hargreaves role this all the more. Only a mad man can call that a contradiction.About 10 pages up from here you are banging on about how Bayern weren't in Milan's league and no-one expected you to get through (hence enabling you to defend Hargreaves's performance). You can't have it both ways.
You really are mad. I have only one user name. I've never had another in the past, neither will I have another in the future.Finally, for someone who claims to be mature, you appear to have an awful lot of usernames and spend a lot of time logging in and out to agree yourself on an internet messageboard with people you will probably never even meet.
Only a person like you can behave with such stupidity. I have never ever favoured or been against a player due to personal feelings like my support for a club or what I think of the player as a person. Never have, never will.I have no idea how many times you have posted on this subject (as either the Chief or someone else) but when you admitted that you were a Bayern fan (whether United are your joint first team or your "second" team) things became clear. The fact is that you watched Hargreaves at Bayern and in the Bundesliga he was impressive by all accounts. You were giddy with excitement when you saw he was being transfered to your other favourite team and desperately wanted him to do well. But can't you see you're judging him not on his performances for United - which have been very mediocre - but on his performances for Bayern (in a much slower and weaker league)?
Good. The world is thankfull not filled with Hargreaves haters like you and your comrades.Most people aren't Hargreaves 'haters'. Most people aren't claiming Hargreaves is 'shit'.
If that is what people were saying only. This thread wouldn't be this long.But what appears to be the general consensus in both the stands and on the messageboards is that Hargreaves has been disappointing so far and on current form should not be starting ahead of Anderson, Carrick, Scholes and Fletcher. Now there may be good reasons for this - fitness, lack of a consistent midfield partner etc., or he may just be needing to get up to the pace of the PL (as happened with Vidic and Evra).
Which is bollocks. You can not have watched him against Arsenal away, Man City Away, Liverpool away and Blackburn at home and say he hasn't been United quality this season. A season in which he is still adjusting to English football, which unlike one Carrick, who just moved from London , he has never ever played in. Unless of course you hate him for no valid reason under the sun....... But claiming that black is white - and so vociferously - is just watering down your other arguments about what you think he will bring to the team in the future. Because everyone (both those who watch him live - which you never have - and those who just watch on TV) can see with their own eyes that this season he has not been of Manchester United quality.
Nail on the Head.
If Hargreaves was in the dictionary, it would simply say...
Hargreaves (proper noun) : Reactive defending, rather than pro-active defending.
It matters when people come out with pronouncements like he is shit and Carrick is better than him. Based on the entire season Carrick had last year, and Hargreaves' first season here so far. When unlike Carrick, he never just shifted towns, but came from an entirely different culture and footballing philosophy to arrive at United. On top his first season not even being over yet.I like Hargreaves, I think he's a good player.
But what he did Bayern doesn't really matter does it?
He does. But that is always swept under the rug. When ever a performance goes wrong he is the first to blame. Even when it was never his fault and he was actually good.Bayern and Man Utd are two different teams, he has to play well for us, now.
Which isn't the issue. Earlier this season when Carrick was in shit form, the same people were still insisting Carrick should always start ahead of Hargreaves, regardless of form, even after performance like the one at Anfield because "he is shit and Carrick is superior".Carrick provided stability for us last year and most people accept he was a contributing factor to the way we played and the progress we made in each of the competitions. Therefore, with Hargreaves lack of form at the moment and Carrick pretty much in form and his contribution last year most people would prefer Carrick to start ahead of him.
Which isn't a valid reason. Because form is temporary but class is permanent. Hargreaves has proven his class in the past Time and again.Which is why alot of people prefer Carrick to Hargreaves and think he's the better player.
He most certainly will. I just don't want his haters to then go around pretending they wished him success all along.Its up to Hargreaves to prove those people wrong and show his true value to the team - which I'm sure he will.
You really need help. What a player has done in his career prior to arriving at a club must always matter. Because unless he is a youngster, that is the reason he was bought! To judge him on anything else, in his first season, as a new signing, is beyond stupid.How they play for us doesn't matter, because they played for a successful team before?
The Rubberman strikes again
Excellent. Watch him cook up a flimsy excuse to discredit that........
Hargreaves: 16 games, 1 goal, 1 assist, 4 shots on target, 56 tackles won, 28 interceptions, 17 crosses, 32 completed passes/game
Carrick: 23 games, 1 goal, 1 assist, 5 shots on target, 54 tackles won, 30 interceptions, 20 crosses, 38 completed passes/game
For someone who does pro-active defending, Carrick has less interceptions per game and has won less tackles overall though he has played 7 more games.
Birtles was brilliant for Forest. Therefore he must have been good for us tooGarry Birtles must be pleased.
I shall take that as a compliment then.
You're a maniac.
In a nice way of course.
how about incomplete passes per game?
Hargreaves: 16 games, 1 goal, 1 assist, 4 shots on target, 56 tackles won, 28 interceptions, 17 crosses, 32 completed passes/game
Carrick: 23 games, 1 goal, 1 assist, 5 shots on target, 54 tackles won, 30 interceptions, 20 crosses, 38 completed passes/game
For someone who does pro-active defending, Carrick has less interceptions per game and has won less tackles overall though he has played 7 more games.
Hargreaves - 5 incomplete passes per gamehow about incomplete passes per game?
Just wondering where are you getting these stats from?Hargreaves - 5 incomplete passes per game
Carrick - 8 incomplete passes per game
But this is the thing, you make these claims but everyone is watching the same games (in fact many of us are watching the same games live, i.e. when we can see the whole pitch rather than just what the TV cameras show us) and there's a clear consensus that Hargreaves has underperformed so far for United.You can not have watched him against Arsenal away, Man City Away, Liverpool away and Blackburn at home and say he hasn't been United quality this season.
OH always banged on about how his grandparents were English from like Bolton or summat and he felt that he would be more at home in England than at Bayern...It matters when people come out with pronouncements like he is shit and Carrick is better than him. Based on the entire season Carrick had last year, and Hargreaves' first season here so far. When unlike Carrick, he never just shifted towns, but came from an entirely different culture and footballing philosophy to arrive at United. On top his first season not even being over yet.
It's all about quality of passes, not quantity.Just wondering where are you getting these stats from?
Errrm, don't forget that Carrick's main job isn't to defend, it's to create. His defensive abilities are simply an added bonus.
Hargreaves: 16 games, 1 goal, 1 assist, 4 shots on target, 56 tackles won, 28 interceptions, 17 crosses, 32 completed passes/game
Carrick: 23 games, 1 goal, 1 assist, 5 shots on target, 54 tackles won, 30 interceptions, 20 crosses, 38 completed passes/game
For someone who does pro-active defending, Carrick has less interceptions per game and has won less tackles overall though he has played 7 more games.
That shocks me, considering the distance and risk factor involved with a Hargreaves pass , compared to a Carrick pass, I am shocked that Carrick only has 3 more uncompleted passes.Hargreaves - 5 incomplete passes per game
Carrick - 8 incomplete passes per game
Yep, let's have the link please, unsourced data is of no more use than no data whatsoever. Ta.Just wondering where are you getting these stats from?
Let's just accept he's basically had a bad season. The rest are excuses.OH always banged on about how his grandparents were English from like Bolton or summat and he felt that he would be more at home in England than at Bayern...
plus any culture he is accustomed to is also influenced by that of English speaking Canadians, who, by and large are well influenced by British culture.
just typing, like.
You're a loony.Unless of course you hate him for no valid reason under the sun.
the american culture is surely more influential on us than the british culture, no?OH always banged on about how his grandparents were English from like Bolton or summat and he felt that he would be more at home in England than at Bayern...
plus any culture he is accustomed to is also influenced by that of English speaking Canadians, who, by and large are well influenced by British culture.
just typing, like.
I'm basing my statement on our historic ties to England.the american culture is surely more influential on us than the british culture, no?
and I'm basing my statement on our current ties to the statesI'm basing my statement on our historic ties to England.
are you sure that's not based on your cable tv subscription?and I'm basing my statement on our current ties to the states
Trust me, I'm not clueless about football.
I'm not one of these kids that just supports the best team because they win, expects them to win 10-0 every match, and expects the players to play like they do on Fifa or PES. Believe me, I hate those kids, as they give the ones of us that do know what they are talking about, a bad name.
I know far more about football then most grown men, and have proved so on numerous occasions, and not just on the Cafe, but in real life also.
You may think that because I'm 15 you can patronise me and dismiss my views because I am young, but that's just foolish, as you know that I'm very wise when it comes to talking football. You may not openly admit this, but you know it to be true.
Rant Over.
probably, also culturally.are you sure that's not based on your cable tv subscription?
we have a Governor General who is the Queen of England's representitive in Canada.
Do you want her? I don't, you can have her.are you sure that's not based on your cable tv subscription?
we have a Governor General who is the Queen of England's representitive in Canada.
ok, let's not derail this thread any more than it already has been.probably, also culturally.
She's your head of state though. You lucky lucky people.probably, also culturally.
RedNome, I bet you Sams right...there are alot of adults who do not have a scooby...
Ah, the arrogance of youth.
You might as well carry on, this thread will, it actually defines the word infinity, there is no end.ok, let's not derail this thread any more than it already has been.
Elizabeth II? or Michelle Jean?Do you want her? I don't, you can have her.
Still fecking funnyRedNome, I bet you Sams right...there are alot of adults who do not have a scooby...
HeheStill fecking funny
You can have the Queen, I'll take your Governor-General.Elizabeth II? or Michelle Jean?
TBH I'd give one to our Governor General.