If Powell had come on for Carrick that would've been disastrous, never mind any other youngsters.
Fergie's obsession with picking old players in midfield
- Thread starter noodlehair
- Start date
If Powell had come on for Carrick that would've been disastrous, never mind any other youngsters.
Who would you have thrown on to replace Carrick?
I don't think Powell would have been as bad as Scholes was today.
Having said that I have no issue with Scholes and Giggs coming on as we had the game sown up by then. We also don't have much cover in midfield and we won't bring any more in till they leave.
Having said that I have no issue with Scholes and Giggs coming on as we had the game sown up by then. We also don't have much cover in midfield and we won't bring any more in till they leave.
Cleverley and Carsick were absolutely fantastic today.
Irony is not your strong suit, TN.
I knew what you were doing, that's why I played along.
I have absolutely no issue with Giggs coming on. It was the position he was expected to play that was baffling.
We could have played him off of the striker or even moved young to the right and brought Giggs on for Valencia. But having him and Scholes as a midfield two at a time in the game when Sunderland were really having a go was strange.
Against Barca, we could rely on the experience of Scholes and Giggs, like we did at City away last season.
Why?
That's not his position, and he doesn't have the experience to be playing there when he isn't used to it, especially with it being such a vital role.
This has to be a wind up, surely?
I thought Fletcher would have been a better option than both golden oldies in CM but whatever, it didn't make any difference.
It could have. On another day it would have as well.
Not overly fussed, but it should be noticed.
Fergie has always gambled and I guess he felt Sunderland had shot their bolt, however not using Fletch was still odd to me.
If Carrick was injured, we had no other option then bring Scholes on. Bringing Giggs wasn't good thing though, but we were 3-0(?) at that time.
Moving Jones or Rooney into midfield would both have been better decisions, as would bringing Fletch on.
Jones and Cleverley doesn't sound like promising midfield pairing, neither of them isn't good positionaly to play as a holding midfielder, and Fletcher has already proven he isn't ready yet to play competitive games. Moving Rooney into midfield could be only good option from those three.
When it works (or doesn't cost us) like today, it's really hard to criticise because it can be argued that SAF gambled on it because he didn't think it would be to our detriment even if he knew it would reduce the quality of our performance somewhat.
What it gives SAF is extra minutes for Scholes and Giggs and extra rest for Carrick (if he isn't injured) and Cleverley going into what the busy period where they are likely to be the core of our central midfield since Anderson is injured and Fletch/Scholes/Giggs are being used sparingly.
Not using them at all ever, means that should we come to need them at any point, they're lacking match fitness which makes them worse!
Most of us understand to a certain extent why SAF does it, the only baffling thing for me was the use of both of them together in a midfield too. Just Scholesy with Tom seemed ok, not great but satisfactory but when Tom came off it was at a time when Sunderland had got a goal back and were really starting to go for it. It was a huge contrast to the first half and because Giggs and Scholes are both naturally offensively minded it made the game quite nervy at the end.
As I said though its hard to criticise because it didn't do much damage.
What it gives SAF is extra minutes for Scholes and Giggs and extra rest for Carrick (if he isn't injured) and Cleverley going into what the busy period where they are likely to be the core of our central midfield since Anderson is injured and Fletch/Scholes/Giggs are being used sparingly.
Not using them at all ever, means that should we come to need them at any point, they're lacking match fitness which makes them worse!
Most of us understand to a certain extent why SAF does it, the only baffling thing for me was the use of both of them together in a midfield too. Just Scholesy with Tom seemed ok, not great but satisfactory but when Tom came off it was at a time when Sunderland had got a goal back and were really starting to go for it. It was a huge contrast to the first half and because Giggs and Scholes are both naturally offensively minded it made the game quite nervy at the end.
As I said though its hard to criticise because it didn't do much damage.
Scholes had to come if Carrick was injured.
Yeah he was poor today but he has been fantastic since coming out of retirement. Was certainly worth the gamble.
But then partnering him with Giggs (even though we were 3-0 ahead)...............
Yeah he was poor today but he has been fantastic since coming out of retirement. Was certainly worth the gamble.
But then partnering him with Giggs (even though we were 3-0 ahead)...............
It sounds like a much better midfield pairing than Scholes and Cleverley. When Scholes plays we effectively have 10 men on the pitch when we don't have the ball.
Except it doesn't. Jones played around ten games in last two seasons in midfield, and they all were alongside carrick who is far more defensively responsible then Cleverley.
Realistically both Giggs and Scholes are gunna be used in big games over the next few weeks. It's important to keep them ticking over. It made perfect sence to give them both a run out.
Quit bitchin'.
Quit bitchin'.
And therein lies the problem on here. It was a risky gamble but we did enough to make sure we didn't concede more. It put unnecessary pressure on our backline.
For some people on here, it would have to take a loss for them to finally come out and say something. My question is why wait to notice a problem until the worst occurs (a loss)? It's clear it was a risky decision. Again, we're such a good team, and our attack is so potent, that it makes this "issue" seem trivial. If we do the same thing on a day when our attack isn't firing on all cylinders, we'll pay the price.
I don't mind seeing Giggs and Scholes play. It's when and how we're using them which bothers me. Every single time it seems to directly or indirectly affect our play. It's not their fault. It's how they're being used.
I'm not sure bringing on Fletcher would have made things any different.
However, I would have preferred Powell to come in. 3-0 up at home against a mid table team I think bringing in a youngster will make sure we have enough energy in the midfield not to be overrun by a team that is most likely to have a go. The pressure is also less for the youngsters.
1-1 drawing at home to similar team who are camped inside our own half then I'll bring in Scholes or/and Giggs.
However, I would have preferred Powell to come in. 3-0 up at home against a mid table team I think bringing in a youngster will make sure we have enough energy in the midfield not to be overrun by a team that is most likely to have a go. The pressure is also less for the youngsters.
1-1 drawing at home to similar team who are camped inside our own half then I'll bring in Scholes or/and Giggs.
Excellent post.
It was painful to see their lack of match fitness and tempo. I hope this game was a eye opener for Sir Alex.
That they need more minutes to retain their level?
SAF's post match comments were very weird. He was surprised at how our temp fell off in the last 20mins. I dont know what he expected with 2 CMs at a combined age of 75+.
In what way was Scholes bad? he did fine as far as I can see.
I'm sure he knows the real reason, he's never going to point it out in an interview.
Games such as todays have become a way for Fergie to try and give the squad as much as gametime as possible. I'd much prefer him doing what he did today than seeing Scholes and Giggs on the teamsheet vs Swansea.
If Scholes or Giggs start any matches over Christmas period we will drop points.Simple as that.Both are past it right now and don't deserve anywhere near the team.
Well, yeah, that's why they need minutes on the pitch.
At various points to come this season they will be needed. In the meantime hey need to be given minutes here and there so that, when needed, they will be able to do what's required of them.
He wasnt even asked about it, thats my point. He himself brought up the distinct lack of tempo in our game in the last 20mins and expressed his surprise.
Both Giggs and Scholes were on the pitch with 20+mins to go. 1 Sunderland goal there would have unnecessarily complicated things for us. If he wanted to rest Clev, Fletch should have come on.
He did also talk of having 6 CMs in the squad which is more than enough
Not for me, if playing in the right team/against the right opposition either could contribute and I expect them too. The worry is that they will be overused or used in positions/circumstances which ask to much of them.
I'm hoping Carrick came off as a precaution and then Cleverley because Fergie's realised at last that they're the only effective midfield combo he has available to him at the moment, and will be needed to start most of the games over the Christmas period.
I suspect though that it was as much to do with him somehow not understanding still that Scholes and Giggs are to old to play in our current midfield system, and we'll be seeing both start games unecessarily in the near future.
I suspect though that it was as much to do with him somehow not understanding still that Scholes and Giggs are to old to play in our current midfield system, and we'll be seeing both start games unecessarily in the near future.
There is no situation in any game where a midfield two of Paul Scholes and Ryan Giggs is the right thing to do.
He had Fletcher on the bench or could have dropped Rooney back like he did against Sunderland last year. Either would have been much better than playing 20 minutes literally without a midfield.
We're sort of reaching a stage where we actually don't have a choice but to play them anyway, especially when the figure lists get more and more congested. Worrying times ahead.
He wasnt even asked about it, thats my point. He himself brought up the distinct lack of tempo in our game in the last 20mins and expressed his surprise.
Both Giggs and Scholes were on the pitch with 20+mins to go. 1 Sunderland goal there would have unnecessarily complicated things for us. If he wanted to rest Clev, Fletch should have come on.
He did also talk of having 6 CMs in the squad which is more than enough
Yeah that worried me a bit when he said that. It was clear as day what happened in the second half.