I cant believe this can be the case, having just breezed through a transfer window without appearing to so much as glance in the general direction of a midfielder. I dont know what SAF is thinking RE Cleverley and Anderson but I am sure they have not run out of chances yet.
Fergie's obsession with picking old players in midfield
- Thread starter noodlehair
- Start date
I think Mockney and Noodles has it spot on.
I can't remember the last time a midfield two of Carrick and Scholes did the business against a decent team playing with any kind of tempo. For large portions against Wigan fecking Athletic we looked poor, but got the lucky break when Nani's cross was parried out for Scholes. Before that, Wigan had little or no troubles defending against us. At Old Trafford.
In the matches against Liverpool and Spurs we've come up embarassingly short in midfield, even against a 10-man Liverpool-side we looked uncapable of creating somtehing or even dominating possession, when we in reality should have run them ragged and blitzed them on the attack.
I say give Carrick/Anderson the nod against tough opponents, and play Cleverley/Anderson when we think we can get away with it. If it goes tits up, then tough luck, it didn't work. But for Gods sake, what we're doing now isn't excactly working either, is it?
We need to involve Kagawa and RvP in our attacking game, at the moment we're not doing that at all. As soon as we get them, Rooney, Nani, Valencia etc on the ball in attacking positions, as well as having a midfield who can both support our attack(Anderson and Cleverley both can do this) and contribute defensively(which Scholes doesn't do even if he sits in the center circle, refusing to get up the field), we'll have a chance of playing some good attacking football without looking a complete shambles.
I can't remember the last time a midfield two of Carrick and Scholes did the business against a decent team playing with any kind of tempo. For large portions against Wigan fecking Athletic we looked poor, but got the lucky break when Nani's cross was parried out for Scholes. Before that, Wigan had little or no troubles defending against us. At Old Trafford.
In the matches against Liverpool and Spurs we've come up embarassingly short in midfield, even against a 10-man Liverpool-side we looked uncapable of creating somtehing or even dominating possession, when we in reality should have run them ragged and blitzed them on the attack.
I say give Carrick/Anderson the nod against tough opponents, and play Cleverley/Anderson when we think we can get away with it. If it goes tits up, then tough luck, it didn't work. But for Gods sake, what we're doing now isn't excactly working either, is it?
We need to involve Kagawa and RvP in our attacking game, at the moment we're not doing that at all. As soon as we get them, Rooney, Nani, Valencia etc on the ball in attacking positions, as well as having a midfield who can both support our attack(Anderson and Cleverley both can do this) and contribute defensively(which Scholes doesn't do even if he sits in the center circle, refusing to get up the field), we'll have a chance of playing some good attacking football without looking a complete shambles.
This is not directed at any one poster or post specifically. But I cant remember the last time I saw such overwhelming negativity about Scholes on here.
I think all that's spot on.
I do think Scholes (or - but not and - Giggs) can play a role in big games when we have three in midfield though.
With Carrick and one of Cleverley/Anderson to do the running for him, Scholes has a use as some sort of quarterback. Giggs could float around trying to create openings with Carrick/Ando in behind him, also.
It means we won't play Kagawa, who I presume was bought with the intention of conducting our attacking play in between opposition lines, though. In fact, I though the purchase of him was particularly geared towards the big matches, where we perhaps are a bit wary of playing two strikers.
I think part of the bang it out to the wings issue is that after going 2 up Spurs set up to play on the counter and only left Defoe up top. When you get that many players packed into a tight area then it's difficult to find a centrally penetrative pass, which Scholes by the way is still more than capable of (off the top of my head, the ball he played through to RVP immediately after coming off the bench against Southampton) (or the dink to Rafael which ended with the post being hit against QPR at the end of last season) (or similar).
It's not the game against Spurs, it's all the other games we've played this season.
http://www1.skysports.com/football/...United-must-be-at-their-best-against-CFR-Cluj
Oh boy, here we go again.
Posted already.
As I said, it's probably more so referring to using members of the senior squad and not the youngsters who played in the Carling Cup.
As I said, it's probably more so referring to using members of the senior squad and not the youngsters who played in the Carling Cup.
So expect to see Carrick, Scholes and Giggs again rather than Cleverley and Anderson.
Not ncessarily, I'd say it's more of a case of not seeing Powell, Buttner, Januzzj (spelling?) etc.
I'm fully sure Giggs won't start. Probably Kagawa on the left with RVP and Rooney both starting.
But yes, likely Carrick and Scholes in midfield.
I'm fully sure Giggs won't start. Probably Kagawa on the left with RVP and Rooney both starting.
But yes, likely Carrick and Scholes in midfield.
As I said earlier, those quotes were given to the Sunday papers on FRIDAY. So don't look at them in the context of the Spurs game. All he's saying is he's going to take it seriously after last season and not mess about.
I bet Fergie makes more than a few changes for this game..
I am willing to bet a 1000 bucks that Scholes and Rio won't be in the starting line-up.
If Fergie sent De Gea to the bench for his performance vs Fulham, then Rio should be sold and Scholes re-retired for that first half vs Spurs.
We were fecking awful but Scholes was probably our best player going Forward in that half. Everyone else was useless defensively and offensively.
Right and we'll play Wootton CB even though SAF said we'll go with experience against Cluj.
I don't know how old you are but do your parents still ground you for making mistakes as they did when you were 12?
Now if you are 12 then please ignore the post as I can totally understand where you are coming from.
With the Newcastle game in mind and the injuries to defense I see no way we are going to start with Rio. Now if there is a semblance of a chance that Evans is not fit (he is training though) then might be, but I doubt it.
I think what we will do is shore up the middle with Ando, Fletcher and Cleverley like the Newcastle game.
You miss my point.
De Gea should obviously not have been benched after the Fulham-game, as he had quite a good match and Vidic was partly at fault for the goal as well. Going by SAF's logic from earlier this season, though, I'd say neither Rio nor Scholes will play.
No Scholes, Carrick or Giggs for Cluj.
Did someone take my 1000 bucks bet? If yes, then please PM me so that I can send you the details of my paypal account. 
Could we make it pounds?
Man, DeGea was not benched because he made one mistake in the Fulham game. It is because he has had trouble dealing with set-pieces. He looks a little lost and unforgettable during crosses and hasn't yet come to terms with the physicality of the PL forwards.
Don't take every word Fergie says as gospel. I think they are working on the physical side of his game and on improving his ability to deal with crosses in training. He is the future number 1 at this club no doubt. Just needs a little time.
Mockney's just elaborated almost exactly and perfectly on what I was trying to say.
Giggs and Scholes will now be rested in midweek for our tough away trip to Newcastle, which neither should play in, but one or both almost certainly will. The penny has not yet dropped. It's not even precariously balancing over the edge.
I think Scholes is too good for his own good, if that makes sense. When he's in the team, he's our best player, but the team itself is worse. We're slower, more lethargic, more vulnerable to any kind of high energy or pacey football, and have zero penetration in behind the opposition midfield or defence. We're also ridiculously stretched the whole time, because him and Carrick don't push up.
I don't see any reason why Scholes couldn't play and be effective, but it needs a rethink on how we use him and which players are around him, because just bunging him next to Carrick and saying "off you go then" doesn't work against any team other than at home against relegation fodder, and since the reason it doesn't work is mainly the age of Paul Scholes, it's not very likely to suddenly start working either.
I think so too. I don't agree that either are past it...well, they both kind of are, but are that talented they can still be useful providing the system they're played in does the leg work for them.
Of course Giggs is going to look past it if you play him in a midfield two away at Anfield though, or sit him next to a guy who's practically the same age as him.
Watching the Wigan game from the stand was even more of an eye opener on this. Our defence was sat on the edge of our box, our midfield was in the centre circle, and our forwards were pushed right up on to Wigan's back line. It was like this for most of the game, because the midfield and defence wouldn't push up.
How on earth can this work? "here you go Scholesey, cover the entire length of the pitch repeatedly for the entire 90 minutes"
We only got away with it because Wigan are crap. I can't believe we tried to do the same thing against Spurs!
He took Giggs off because we were 2-0 and he needed a way to get Rooney on the pitch. The week before he left Giggs on and brought Scholes on with him.
Giggs and Scholes will now be rested in midweek for our tough away trip to Newcastle, which neither should play in, but one or both almost certainly will. The penny has not yet dropped. It's not even precariously balancing over the edge.
I'm not negative towards Scholes, just how we're using him in a role that doesn't suit the team.
I think Scholes is too good for his own good, if that makes sense. When he's in the team, he's our best player, but the team itself is worse. We're slower, more lethargic, more vulnerable to any kind of high energy or pacey football, and have zero penetration in behind the opposition midfield or defence. We're also ridiculously stretched the whole time, because him and Carrick don't push up.
I don't see any reason why Scholes couldn't play and be effective, but it needs a rethink on how we use him and which players are around him, because just bunging him next to Carrick and saying "off you go then" doesn't work against any team other than at home against relegation fodder, and since the reason it doesn't work is mainly the age of Paul Scholes, it's not very likely to suddenly start working either.
I think so too. I don't agree that either are past it...well, they both kind of are, but are that talented they can still be useful providing the system they're played in does the leg work for them.
Of course Giggs is going to look past it if you play him in a midfield two away at Anfield though, or sit him next to a guy who's practically the same age as him.
Watching the Wigan game from the stand was even more of an eye opener on this. Our defence was sat on the edge of our box, our midfield was in the centre circle, and our forwards were pushed right up on to Wigan's back line. It was like this for most of the game, because the midfield and defence wouldn't push up.
How on earth can this work? "here you go Scholesey, cover the entire length of the pitch repeatedly for the entire 90 minutes"
We only got away with it because Wigan are crap. I can't believe we tried to do the same thing against Spurs!
Its why i keep saying scholes shouldnt be starting anymore. When the opposition are tired and the games opened up is the ideal time to unleash Scholes. But if he starts the game the opposition simply dominates the midfield and slaughters our fragile defense. Hes exceptional offensively, although i think he nullifies Carricks game, but defensively he's just not at the races. Pairing him up with Carrick only works when the opposition are sitting deep and defending.
It works when at home against Wigan - barely.
It doesn't and will never work against any side with ambitions of being in the game.
If we're going to play him, make it a midfield three and concede one of the attacking players in a trade-off for more possession and control.
Carrick-Scholes-Ando, for example.
Please, Clev, Anderson, do us (and yourselves) a favour, go hammer them. Or at least control the game. Make SAF pick you more often.
So some good team news for Cluj but that could mean Scholes and Giggs start against Newcastle.
I really hope the players that play well tomorrow are rewarded with a start against Newcastle. That's how it should work all the time.
If Anderson and Cleverley play well tomorrow and don't start Sunday then I am convinced the United staff just don't trust them enough to start against decent teams.
Tomorrow is actually a huge game.
I really hope the players that play well tomorrow are rewarded with a start against Newcastle. That's how it should work all the time.
If Anderson and Cleverley play well tomorrow and don't start Sunday then I am convinced the United staff just don't trust them enough to start against decent teams.
Tomorrow is actually a huge game.
We have every reason to worry. All of them have been rested for next weekend in the league
Sad but probably true.
My intelligence is too low to think more than one game ahead.
I don't think Giggs will start, but Valencia, Carrick, and Scholes will (which I'd be fine with). Probably Nani, Kagawa/Rooney and RvP too...
I think if either ando or clev impress in this game they should come in next to carrick for the next league game. Leaving then out of more league games really makes little sense. We know scholes will tire the more games he plays so why not spread his games out so that if the likes if clev or ando do get exposed we can bring him in rather then Traveller him out at the start of the season and then have no choice but to rely on clev and ando.
Scholes was brilliant in the second half against Spurs. Where does that fit in the rhetoric of this thread?
Scholes was excellent on the ball but its definitely debatable that his inability to provide much of the ball contributed to te goals we conceded an our lack of pressure in the first half, additionally you could also argue that once spurs set up camp in their box his need to play deep made our attack very one dimensional although you could put that down to a fault on fergies part for not trying to change that.
Either way we've struggled with scholes due to his lack of physical ability, he may have played well on the ball at times but his limitations have also put pressure on us. That's not to say the likes of clev don't have their faults but theirs are due to inexperience which they can only get by playing. We might have to put up with their faults but that will hopefully lead to then over coming those.
Also think in general most are referring to playing both giggs and scholes on the same games or over others who need the experience.
Either way we've struggled with scholes due to his lack of physical ability, he may have played well on the ball at times but his limitations have also put pressure on us. That's not to say the likes of clev don't have their faults but theirs are due to inexperience which they can only get by playing. We might have to put up with their faults but that will hopefully lead to then over coming those.
Also think in general most are referring to playing both giggs and scholes on the same games or over others who need the experience.
It's sad to see how people are talking about Scholes of late. Last season he was the reason why we were suddenly back in/still in the title race, and a player England should have been taking to an International tournament, now he's a busted flush whose limitations hurt us as a team. A summer is a long time in football.
We got more points (by one, to be precise) in the first half of the season than we did in the second half. The whole thing about Scholesy 'saving our season' is really rather tiresome. He played well, but he only needed to play at all because our other midfielders' legs all fell off. Now that those players are back and fit continuing to have him as first-choice is just ridiculous. It will cost us the title if Fergie doesn't wise up.
The rhetoric of this thread is basically that Scholes is brilliant, but his brilliance is coming at a cost for the rest of the team. A bit like how we changed for the better as a team after we'd got rid of our dependence on Eric in 97 & Ruud in 06. Despite them both still being brilliant fairly often, we developed a far more exciting and coherent style after they left. Both times we also won the CL within 2 years.
In fact Eric is a great example. No one wanted rid of him in 97, despite him dropping off a bit in fitness. But once he'd forced the issue, the younger players started deferring to each other more rather than to him, and Cole emerged from his shadow to help encourage a much pacier tempo. It took a season to get it truly working, but by 99, it's debatable Eric would've worked in that team. He certainly wouldn't have been as happy with the largely reserve role Teddy played.