Scott McTominay

Rozay said:

Tbh, if it were that simple, you draw any name out of a hat of hundreds probably.

Regardless of what your central midfield function is, you need to be comfortable on the ball. You often get it off the defence and start attacks, and just ‘re-cycling the ball’ isn’t as simple in a PL midfield where you are closed down and under pressure. You need the right first touch to ensure you can either pass first time or make a passing option with your second touch, all at speed to avoid the press. You need to be able to get yourself out of a jam when pressed too if you don’t have an immediate passing option. That may be dropping a shoulder, doing a shuffle etc to beat a man or two. And then you could also dare to do more than recycle - perhaps pass more expansively which adds another dimension to your team. Otherwise opponents just let you have it and stand on Pogba because if you can’t get it to him, you can’t get the ball into the forwards.

Click to expand...

haram said:

Scott can do those things.

Click to expand...

haram said:

Im sorry but you cannot come out of the academy and play in CM like he has if your understanding is poor. That’s bollocks.

Click to expand...

Mcking said:

Lingard and Pereira played in attacking midfield.

Click to expand...

Roboc7 said:

Not bollocks at all, he’s not great positionally and doesn’t read the game well. That takes time with lost midfielders and is why they get better as they get older. His strengths are physicality and work rate, others have technical ability. It’s just common knowledge rather than bollocks.

Click to expand...

Rozay said:

He really isn’t.

Click to expand...

haram said:

He has a good understanding. You cannot drop into Premier League football at central midfield without it. You will not find many cases of players coming out of academies and straight into CM because it is difficult and most players are not mature enough.

Click to expand...

Roboc7 said:

He doesn’t it’s why he is often out of position and sometimes struggles to get involved. He’s also 22 not a 17 year old, his strengths are physicality, work rate, commitment. Hyping up his reading of the game or passing range as too many are doing sets him up for a fall. Better to just recognise what he is at this time and that he has potential to improve.

Click to expand...

haram said:

He has a good understanding. You cannot drop into Premier League football at central midfield without it. You will not find many cases of players coming out of academies and straight into CM because it is difficult and most players are not mature enough.

Click to expand...

romufc said:

I think Scott can do that role though. he plays some decent balls, and can switch the play. Watching a midfielder in a struggling team is always difficult. Nothing wrong with what McT does.

Click to expand...

haram said:

My point is still the same. He has a good understanding of the game.

Click to expand...

Rozay said:

I agree here. My criticism isn’t so much that he does anything wrong. As I’ve said, there is a lot in between Busquets and Bebe. I don’t think Scott is useless. He’s just not that good. Players who got this description will often do things right. Otherwise their description would be ‘terrible’. He does some basics well enough. He’s not a special talent though. James Garner looks to be one, for example. He has always been one. Since I knew of him at 16, he was captaining the U18s for club and country. He has an elegance on the ball that you can spot in seconds. A passing range you can spot in seconds, a touch, dribble etc. He’s always been a bigger talent than Scott, and as a result, has always shown qualities that has made people say he’s a future first team player at United. We can’t just subtract a bunch of those attributes from Scott and then act like it doesn’t mean anything. The fact that some of them are missing is why we are after a better player than him, and why he’s a decent player, but ‘not THAT good’.

I’m unsure if you saw Neville’s comments about Herrera the other day, when he was asked about the ‘loss’ of him? He said that Herrera was a ‘good’ player, but there’s ‘loads of Ander Herrera’s about’. He also said ‘you could easily find someone else to do what he does. You could play Scott McTominay for 30 games a season instead and not lose anything. He’s (Herrera) not a loss, you need to worry when you lose the real top players.’ He then went on to say ‘every team/squad has a few like him (Herrera). I (Gary Neville) was one, my brother, Darren Fletcher, Nicky Butt etc. We give our all and help the better players play’.

This is an ex-pro, an ex-United one at that. He put Scott in the same category I have been putting him in, and described it perfectly. He’s an okay player. However, I listed just about every attribute a toon DM needs in my previous post and your response was that McTominay does it all. He doesn’t, at least not well enough. Otherwise he’d be a Busquets in the team, instead of a Sergi Roberto, to continue with Neville’s analogy. A Roberto is fine, but a top team will always look for a Busquets. Just because Roberto obviously isn’t that good. Neither is Scott McTominay. Otherwise he wouldn’t be a target for West Ham if he were to leave us tomorrow. If Greenwood walks out tomorrow he signs for Juventus or Bayern Munich.

Click to expand...

westmeath said:

So who is better than him? Hendo? Chamberlain? Wijnaldum? Don’t think so. He’s no world beater but neither is any of them.

Click to expand...

Rozay said:

I agree here. My criticism isn’t so much that he does anything wrong. As I’ve said, there is a lot in between Busquets and Bebe. I don’t think Scott is useless. He’s just not that good. Players who got this description will often do things right. Otherwise their description would be ‘terrible’. He does some basics well enough. He’s not a special talent though. James Garner looks to be one, for example. He has always been one. Since I knew of him at 16, he was captaining the U18s for club and country. He has an elegance on the ball that you can spot in seconds. A passing range you can spot in seconds, a touch, dribble etc. He’s always been a bigger talent than Scott, and as a result, has always shown qualities that has made people say he’s a future first team player at United. We can’t just subtract a bunch of those attributes from Scott and then act like it doesn’t mean anything. The fact that some of them are missing is why we are after a better player than him, and why he’s a decent player, but ‘not THAT good’.

I’m unsure if you saw Neville’s comments about Herrera the other day, when he was asked about the ‘loss’ of him? He said that Herrera was a ‘good’ player, but there’s ‘loads of Ander Herrera’s about’. He also said ‘you could easily find someone else to do what he does. You could play Scott McTominay for 30 games a season instead and not lose anything. He’s (Herrera) not a loss, you need to worry when you lose the real top players.’ He then went on to say ‘every team/squad has a few like him (Herrera). I (Gary Neville) was one, my brother, Darren Fletcher, Nicky Butt etc. We give our all and help the better players play’.

This is an ex-pro, an ex-United one at that. He put Scott in the same category I have been putting him in, and described it perfectly. He’s an okay player. However, I listed just about every attribute a toon DM needs in my previous post and your response was that McTominay does it all. He doesn’t, at least not well enough. Otherwise he’d be a Busquets in the team, instead of a Sergi Roberto, to continue with Neville’s analogy. A Roberto is fine, but a top team will always look for a Busquets. Just because Roberto obviously isn’t that good. Neither is Scott McTominay. Otherwise he wouldn’t be a target for West Ham if he were to leave us tomorrow. If Greenwood walks out tomorrow he signs for Juventus or Bayern Munich.

Click to expand...

haram said:

You keep bringing up these comparisons but no one said he was as good as Busquets.

Click to expand...

westmeath said:

Scott is easily as good as anything in the Liverpool midfield. Liverpool get away with it because their game plan involves getting the ball to the front three quickly. This appears to be what we are also trying to do. So Scott is perfectly fine as a solid defensive midfielder in a team with this approach.

Click to expand...

romufc said:

I totally agree, but in a position where we find ourselves with No other CM signed and add that with No champions league. I think we should get away with him there and a talented Pogba to compensate where he lacks.

McT is a good squad player when needed, but obviously we need someone who is reliable. I dont even know who else we could have signed? I hope we groom Garner and he comes through.

I watched the Newcastle game as well, Longstaff was taken of by the 70th minute, so I would say we done ok not to spend £40/50m on him to be a McT player.

Click to expand...

Rozay said:

Yea, I agree with this, although not sure yet whether Longstaff will become a level above or not yet.

Just to re-iterate, I was happy to see him start yesterday, and want him to start going forward. I prefer his energy to Matic. I think we ultimately need to do better than him though, that’s all, but that won’t happen this season.

Click to expand...

Rozay said:

Which is why I was making a point, using an example, rather than writing ‘no, he isn’t as good as Busquets’. I keep making comparisons to really talented players, and you keep saying ‘nobody is saying he’s that good’. Which is my point, he’s not that good. He’s okay.

The reason I have used some of these players is because of some of the descriptions I’ve seen used for Scott. Perhaps we are talking semantics, but I gave examples of players that these things are often said about, to make the point that people don’t say what you’re saying about Scott McTominay, about Scott McTominay.

Click to expand...

Isotope said:

Exactly. They're not forwards but attacking midfielders. It's their duty to be more involved in bridging the gap between midfield and forwards.

Click to expand...

romufc said:

I totally agree, but in a position where we find ourselves with No other CM signed and add that with No champions league. I think we should get away with him there and a talented Pogba to compensate where he lacks.

McT is a good squad player when needed, but obviously we need someone who is reliable. I dont even know who else we could have signed? I hope we groom Garner and he comes through.

I watched the Newcastle game as well, Longstaff was taken of by the 70th minute, so I would say we done ok not to spend £40/50m on him to be a McT player.

Click to expand...

Rozay said:

I agree here. My criticism isn’t so much that he does anything wrong. As I’ve said, there is a lot in between Busquets and Bebe. I don’t think Scott is useless. He’s just not that good. Players who got this description will often do things right. Otherwise their description would be ‘terrible’. He does some basics well enough. He’s not a special talent though. James Garner looks to be one, for example. He has always been one. Since I knew of him at 16, he was captaining the U18s for club and country. He has an elegance on the ball that you can spot in seconds. A passing range you can spot in seconds, a touch, dribble etc. He’s always been a bigger talent than Scott, and as a result, has always shown qualities that has made people say he’s a future first team player at United. We can’t just subtract a bunch of those attributes from Scott and then act like it doesn’t mean anything. The fact that some of them are missing is why we are after a better player than him, and why he’s a decent player, but ‘not THAT good’.

I’m unsure if you saw Neville’s comments about Herrera the other day, when he was asked about the ‘loss’ of him? He said that Herrera was a ‘good’ player, but there’s ‘loads of Ander Herrera’s about’. He also said ‘you could easily find someone else to do what he does. You could play Scott McTominay for 30 games a season instead and not lose anything. He’s (Herrera) not a loss, you need to worry when you lose the real top players.’ He then went on to say ‘every team/squad has a few like him (Herrera). I (Gary Neville) was one, my brother, Darren Fletcher, Nicky Butt etc. We give our all and help the better players play’.

This is an ex-pro, an ex-United one at that. He put Scott in the same category I have been putting him in, and described it perfectly. He’s an okay player. However, I listed just about every attribute a toon DM needs in my previous post and your response was that McTominay does it all. He doesn’t, at least not well enough. Otherwise he’d be a Busquets in the team, instead of a Sergi Roberto, to continue with Neville’s analogy. A Roberto is fine, but a top team will always look for a Busquets. Just because Roberto obviously isn’t that good. Neither is Scott McTominay. Otherwise he wouldn’t be a target for West Ham if he were to leave us tomorrow. If Greenwood walks out tomorrow he signs for Juventus or Bayern Munich.

Click to expand...

Robbie Boy said:

He’s the exact opposite of a player with “obvious talent”. He’s a grafter who clearly works his bollox off. He certainly wouldn’t be a player I would describe as having “obvious talent” and I find it a very peculiar way to describe him.

Click to expand...

Icemav said:

I really dont understand where these opinions come from... not a world beater? He is 22 and developing into a fantastic young player. He can break up play and is starting to show he can control it too. If he keeps developing at the same pace we have another Carrick on our hands (though with more tenacity). So the whole "not a world beater but grafts" thing is just fecking bizaare.

Click to expand...

haram said:

I still don't get what point you are trying to make by saying he isn’t as good as players like Busquets. Everyone knows he isn’t. It’s like saying Tuanzebe isn’t as good as Van Dijk.

Click to expand...

Robbie Boy said:

He’s the exact opposite of a player with “obvious talent”. He’s a grafter who clearly works his bollox off. He certainly wouldn’t be a player I would describe as having “obvious talent” and I find it a very peculiar way to describe him.

Click to expand...

andersj said:

I agree with Neville and I, to some degree, agree with you in this post. That being said, I do think you underestimate Herrera slightly. He was more important in the build-up play than many understand. He was not a great passer, but he was a smart passer.

Nice to see you have changed your opinion a bit on McTominay. Or do you actually believe that a handfull of talents in the Championship, League One etc could turn in to regulars for a team like Man Utd if they were just given a chance?

It is worth remembering that Andreas Pereira was one of the bigger talents at U18 and U23 but to this day he has yet to play better than McTominay on seniorlevel.

Click to expand...

Rozay said:

Tbh I still believe this. And I don’t necessarily think ‘regulars’ per se, but at least squad players. I appreciate my point here can easily be dismissed as me ‘not being a coach’ so I can’t really tell, but I’ve watched football my whole life, including a lot of youth football, and have seen enough to know that a load of circumstances aligning and timing play a massive part in where some footballers end up. To return to Gary Neville’s analogy, those players he listed all had good careers for Manchester United. Most of them could have just as easily been bottom PL players, or even lower league players, and nobody would have batted an eyelid. I still believe that Scott McTominay is extremely fortunate to be in the position he is in. Certain things, right place right time, right manager etc all came together as I maintain, if he was let go at 20, nobody would have said a thing. He’s an ordinary talent. Forget the bigger footballing world, even as far as Manchester United youngsters go, he’s an ordinary talent.

In my opinion, for players in that bracket Gary Neville spoke about, the one thing you can expect them to at least offer is effort. Run around. Show passion. Tackle people. These are the areas that McTominay excels in most. Does that mean he is totally incapable of passing to a teammate? No, of course he can. But he’s more effort than talent. It’s easy to look back now or just say ‘if x was as good as him, he would have been in the team instead’, but I don’t think it works like that. If I look at say, Ethan Hamilton, for example. Probably won’t make it here. Not less gifted than Scott for me, if you take both of them at 19. He won’t get 100 games to show his worth, and if he did, I suspect he’d be the topic of a similar conversation here. He’d at the minimum, work hard. He’ll probably work harder than more talented teammates of his, and as a result draw praise on here. People would defend his right to be in the squad etc. However, he’ll probably be at Derby County before long. There’s no clear and obvious reason from a talent perspective that he and Scott couldn’t switch, to me. Scott could have gone to Derby at 19, and nobody would say anything. Over the years I’ve seen a clamour for the likes of Ben Pearson to get a chance. If he got 100 games, I suspect he’d be seen as a decent squad player to have. I don’t recall many players from the academy who have had a chance that this forum has said they are not even good enough to be a squad player. Unless they are forward players, where you can’t hide behind hard work.

That said, I think it’s a very thin line between a career as a United squad player and a career in the lower leagues for a lot of players who come through the ranks. Tom Thorpe was another this forum was desperate to get a chance. Then he was sold to I think the Championship, then fell even lower I believe. 90% of them, if they are in our academy, and are not forward players, can pass to a basic standard, tackle a bit, score the odd long shot. Most of them don’t end up in the PL. Some do, but the difference between them at 19 isn’t really that clear.

Scott McTominay was always going to give it his best with his chance. It’s the least he can do. Nobody even looked to him for much more. People have different hope for the Garners and Axels of this world. Scott is a lucky boy, and if he passes Ben Pearson or Matty James in a shopping centre in 15 years time, I suspect they would look at him with a tinge of resentment and feel they could have had the career he had.

Click to expand...

Red Devil's Advocate said:

If your yardstick were the universal one, Michael Carrick would have been binned way back in 2008 and Fletcher, even before that.

Patience. He's a young player and unlike players in lower half or other leagues, he hasn't been playing day in and day out. That makes a world of difference to a player's development. This season will be a steep learning curve for him and I am sure he will gain a lot from it.

Click to expand...

Robbie Boy said:

Eh? Carrick was brilliant at Spurs and tbh Fletcher started out playing wide and looking promising.

I like Scott and think he can be a useful player for us. I just think a certain poster describing him as a player with “obvious talent” is the total wrong description. As @Alabaster Codify7 alluded to, if he were playing for another club no one on here would rate him. So if a player has “obvious talent” he would be fairly universally rated whereas Scott certainly isn’t. I appreciate his qualities and I like him, but he’s most definitely from the grafter variety.

Click to expand...

Stobzilla said:

United fans on here were quite vocal in their wanting rid of Carrick until around 2010. It was definitely a majority as well.

Click to expand...

Based Adnan said:

Scott does have obvious talent, if you can't see it then that's on you. Note: There is more to talent than purely technical ability. If he played for another club and put in performances like he did vs Barca, PSG, Liverpool, Chelsea etc then I'd rate him. Scott isn't the first obvious talent that isn't universally rated nor will he be the last. Jordan Henderson is a prime example.

Click to expand...

Rozay said:

He’s not an obvious talent. Even for a DM, James Garner is more what you would call an ‘obvious talent’. Any youth player with obvious talent would have some sort of clamour for them to be given a chance. Scott didn’t. Perhaps because his talent wasn’t obvious to most of us.

Click to expand...

Based Adnan said:

He struggled with growth related injuries and played out of position. McTominay was also tiny for the majority of his time in the youth academy. The player pre and post growth spurt are completely different. What we saw post growth spurt wasn't much and included playing as a 9.

Do you only think players are obvious talents if they were highly rated as a youngster? What about those that develop later? I don't care how he was rated when he was younger. When I watch him play right now I can see obvious talent. You don't put in some of the performances he has, at such a young age, against big teams and in one of the hardest areas of the pitch without some. If you don't see it or only see it when the mass majority can see it then, again, that's on you.

Click to expand...

Rozay said:

Tbh I still believe this. And I don’t necessarily think ‘regulars’ per se, but at least squad players. I appreciate my point here can easily be dismissed as me ‘not being a coach’ so I can’t really tell, but I’ve watched football my whole life, including a lot of youth football, and have seen enough to know that a load of circumstances aligning and timing play a massive part in where some footballers end up. To return to Gary Neville’s analogy, those players he listed all had good careers for Manchester United. Most of them could have just as easily been bottom PL players, or even lower league players, and nobody would have batted an eyelid. I still believe that Scott McTominay is extremely fortunate to be in the position he is in. Certain things, right place right time, right manager etc all came together as I maintain, if he was let go at 20, nobody would have said a thing. He’s an ordinary talent. Forget the bigger footballing world, even as far as Manchester United youngsters go, he’s an ordinary talent.

In my opinion, for players in that bracket Gary Neville spoke about, the one thing you can expect them to at least offer is effort. Run around. Show passion. Tackle people. These are the areas that McTominay excels in most. Does that mean he is totally incapable of passing to a teammate? No, of course he can. But he’s more effort than talent. It’s easy to look back now or just say ‘if x was as good as him, he would have been in the team instead’, but I don’t think it works like that. If I look at say, Ethan Hamilton, for example. Probably won’t make it here. Not less gifted than Scott for me, if you take both of them at 19. He won’t get 100 games to show his worth, and if he did, I suspect he’d be the topic of a similar conversation here. He’d at the minimum, work hard. He’ll probably work harder than more talented teammates of his, and as a result draw praise on here. People would defend his right to be in the squad etc. However, he’ll probably be at Derby County before long. There’s no clear and obvious reason from a talent perspective that he and Scott couldn’t switch, to me. Scott could have gone to Derby at 19, and nobody would say anything. Over the years I’ve seen a clamour for the likes of Ben Pearson to get a chance. If he got 100 games, I suspect he’d be seen as a decent squad player to have. I don’t recall many players from the academy who have had a chance that this forum has said they are not even good enough to be a squad player. Unless they are forward players, where you can’t hide behind hard work.

That said, I think it’s a very thin line between a career as a United squad player and a career in the lower leagues for a lot of players who come through the ranks. Tom Thorpe was another this forum was desperate to get a chance. Then he was sold to I think the Championship, then fell even lower I believe. 90% of them, if they are in our academy, and are not forward players, can pass to a basic standard, tackle a bit, score the odd long shot. Most of them don’t end up in the PL. Some do, but the difference between them at 19 isn’t really that clear.

Scott McTominay was always going to give it his best with his chance. It’s the least he can do. Nobody even looked to him for much more. People have different hope for the Garners and Axels of this world. Scott is a lucky boy, and if he passes Ben Pearson or Matty James in a shopping centre in 15 years time, I suspect they would look at him with a tinge of resentment and feel they could have had the career he had.

Click to expand...