You mean the midweek game away to Galatasaray where the only problem in our midfield was Darren Fletcher?
Fergie's obsession with picking old players in midfield
- Thread starter noodlehair
- Start date
It's just a little dirty, it's still good, it's still good.
You;re obviously not watching very well. I COUNTED them.
He just did it again too...he had the ball in loads of space in the area and stood still with it for about 5 seconds so he could pass it back out wide to Rafael.
Are we winning 3-0 in the version of the game you're watching?
It's just a little retired over a year ago, it's stil good, it's still good
No doubt Fergie will say he's happy with his squad come January.
The midfield that played beautiful freeflowing football all night long, created nothing of note and still got beat? That midfield that you declare is the answer to all our problems?
:d
It was away to a fired up and quite good Galatasaray with a second string attack and defence, in a game we had no reason to win or draw, and they lost 1-0 after performing well.
Are you just deliberately being a plank or does your brain remove the parts of the universe that don't fit your pointless sarcasm?
Have you noticed that since we brought a proper midfielder onto the pitch we've gone from being 1-0 down to 2-1 up?
Or will this fact remove itself from existence?
Or will this fact remove itself from existence?
Two set pieces turned it around for us. The only way we were going to score. Ugly.
A second string team in a hostile atmosphere. Average age of 24. No Rooney or RVP. Yeah that doesn't count for anything
It's just a little airborne, it's still good, it's still good.
So, what you're saying is, it's only ok to have a go at players who don't fit your agenda?
I like both Anderson and Cleverley, i'm just interested to see how poorly they have to play before you slate them in the same manner you've slated Carrick and Scholes so far this season. Anderson was a bit shit midweek, yet those who see him and Clev as our salvation would tell you he was good. Strange that.
Maybe Scholes and Fletcher softened them up with their extreme pointlessness
Did you see what he just did there? Did that not happen?
Even in being "shit" in midweek, he still did infinitely more than Scholes or Fletcher did between them today, prior to him coming on. We got worse when we took him off.
Surprise also...Fletcher immediately looks much better now he suddenly has a midfield partner who can run
I hope we pursue with Anderson. He's done enough to be in with a chance
Yeah, I saw it, and I've always rated him. I've been one of those both here and in the newbies who was most vocal in my support of Anderson, and have gotten plenty of shit for it too.
I simply pointed out that more than Carrick and Scholes have had poor performances for us this season, but they appear to be the only ones who get your ire. Clev has had his share of pointless games, as has Ando, but you never mention them, unless they've done something good. You're the opposite with Scholes and Carrick though, you ignore their good and point out where they've done things wrong. I'd rather you were fairer with your criticisms, that's all.
Well maybe now the penny will drop for Fergie
Carrick gets my "ire" (I don't know what this means), because he has only had poor performances this season. He is yet to play well, or even adequately. He's taken the zombie description literally. Anderson and Cleverley have both mostly played well.
Scholes gets my ire more because of the stupid way in which we insist on using him, which involves partnering him in a two man midfield alongside whoever out of our other midfielders is performing the poorest, and then just having him funnel the ball feebly out wide all the time and struggle to get back or close down space when we lose it.
You must see this happening the same as me and plenty of other people do, but for some reason choose to ignore it happening, or get angry with people for daring to point it out?
A better option for the team would be to simply not put Scholes in it, so we can have a midfield that does it's job. We have just watched a game that was the absolute perfect example of this, and you can bet people in redcafe land will still try to claim the opposite or go sit back in their denial chairs...Zarlack already has.
Scholes and Giggs shouldnt start but come one when needed or when it's the right time. It's just not working, never has this season
Very true, the agendas on here really ruin the atmosphere.
Not sure if Fergie's sometimes a bit blind when it comes to picking old, long time players. Not the first time we had that problem
Hopefully Fergie will now realise playing Scholes from the start does not work, it is simply so slow and one paced, our midfield should be Anderson and cleverly no ifs or buts.
Every other club I can think of have a 3rd man either as part of the midfield or who plays of the striker that does the main creating from central areas, City have whoever plays there usually Silva, tevez or Toure, Chelsea has oscar, Real modric/ozil, Barca iniesta/fabregas, nobody at the top level plays with 2 out and out strikers and ours atm aren't taking enough responsibility in open play to create.
Stay classy noodle.
I think you need to chill. It wasn't Barcelona we were playing today noodle it was QPR. The worst team in the league. SAF thought we had enough quality to see them off, he put players on the bench, it didn't work, he brought them on, we won. Job done, 3 points, SAF is doing his job. End of story.
Had we not won the game, then you could question him. Why he didn't react. But he rested players in a game that on paper, you can rest players in and it didn't work out. He changed it round with plenty of time left, and we turned the result around. Something it might not have even come to in the first place. Simples.
Yes he could have played the players from the start, but we didn't need to. We just showed that we didn't need to. We are more than capable of picking up the win without doing so. That's what subs are for.
To be fair, the movement of RVP and Rooney was atrocious in the first half. They didn't made any runs at all. Still it's not a co-incidence that our best displays has come without old players in the midfield.
It will be Giggs - Carrick again mid week.
And how atrocious we looked in the first half?
Stay classy noodle.
I think you need to chill. It wasn't Barcelona we were playing today noodle it was QPR. The worst team in the league. SAF thought we had enough quality to see them off, he put players on the bench, it didn't work, he brought them on, we won. Job done, 3 points, SAF is doing his job. End of story.
Had we not won the game, then you could question him. Why he didn't react. But he rested players in a game that on paper, you can rest players in and it didn't work out. He changed it round with plenty of time left, and we turned the result around. Something it might not have even come to in the first place. Simples.
Yes he could have played the players from the start, but we didn't need to. We just showed that we didn't need to. We are more than capable of picking up the win without doing so. That's what subs are for.
There was Anderson and Cleverley in the bench last week as well, but Ando came on in the 83rd minute.
we thought that after spurs
Shit happens. On another day, we might not have looked so atrocious in the first half.
The point is girish, there are 90 minutes in a football game and not 45. You've got 90 minutes plus subs to win a game. Which we did. That's not up for debate.
It seems the debate is whether SAF should play his best team for 90 minutes against the shittest team in the league which to me is utterly pointless, and risk unecessary injuries, or whether he can afford to as noodle puts it, take a few risks against a team that have taken 4 points from a possible 36 and save his best players that on paper he doesn't need, and bring them on when he does need them and win the game which he did.
I don't disagree, but why do you think the forwards are doing this? Is it because they are both rubbish at football, or is it because it's what they're being told to do? Which would seem the more likely?
I also don't see how for example, Rooney dropping back, suddenly makes Scholes (or a half dead Carrick) effective in a midfield two? You have to stick an actual third midfielder in there to do that...and then you might as well just stick them in there in place of Scholes and keep Rooney in the team.
To be fair, I wouldn't waste my energy making runs either if I knew the ball was going out wide every single time regardless...and I suspect they were both told to stay right up front, because both usually like having the ball played into their feet.
Well I dunno what they've been told to do but as a general observation when one of them does play deeper, creatively I don't think they've been doing enough. Either way we need them to do it.
Dropping one of them deeper helps the midfield 2 by first drawing one of the other midfielders back a bit and makes it a bit more even in the middle. If the strikers play too high than the opposition midfielders can push up on the midfielders a bit more. Likewise attackingly it gives someone for the midfielders to play off. Before we changed things up Scholes and Fletcher were both having to push up really high and so once the move broke down, both were way out of position.
Good thing he didn't risk Robin van Persie and Wayne Rooney for 90 minutes then. Obviously he doesn't consider them part of his best team while Anderson and Cleverley are crucial - hence they got to play in the vitally important, season-changing Champions League game at Galatasaray.
To be fair, Fergie does seem to suffer from myopia in regards to our midfield.. I don't think the answer is currently at Old Trafford though, and January's probably out of the question and all.
Again I agree with that mostly, but it stil boils down to asking the likes of Scholes and Fletcher/Carrick to do a job they aren't capable of doing.
At the moment we play with space in behind and in front of our midfield every week. This is just so unbelievably fecking daft, it's not even worth trying to be amusing about. It's a completely basic tactical error.
and the funny thing is, when we actualy have some life in our midfield, Rooney and Van Persie, or even Welbeck, DO tend to drop back and create...because they know they'll be given the ball into their feet quickly enough to be able to turn with it. I can't remember the last time Scholes played a ball that allowed one of our forwards to do this...he takes a touch, moves back, funnels it out wide...repeat over. there's not much point trying to drop back or pick the ball off him into your feet, since he's not going to give you it quickly enough or commit players to leave you with any space in the first place. Same goes for Carrick and an unfit Fletcher.
The point is that shit continues to happen and us, mere football watchers could almost predict it was going to happen. This is a sort of inevitability when starting a game with Scholes or Giggs, combined with an out of form Carrick these days, We used to get away with it atleast at OT, but we've seen how bad that we look. The team looked disjointed, and the front line didn't get much of a support at all.
Cleverley is a midfielder who keeps things clean and alive, while Ando is usually the one running at defenders (Attacking the Space. A drop of tear for Boss here.) It's almost completely opposite for what our other midfield choices provide. And introduction of one of them showed showed how effective it can be. The tiring QPR team would've helped it too though.
I mean, Look at Last week. We could've started the game with these two, and save instead of playing both of them in a pointless CL group game. I admit that, against Norwich, our starting line up was more than enough to see off the game, but the terrible form our wingers been in, We could've started a our Younger midfield duo, for a better midfield performance.
Two players with illustrious careers, who should be luxuary for any team at this point of their careers, should be used sparingly, just so that us fans can still watch them play. Instead they are being used week in week out, with a responsibility to win games, and they're not doing a good job of it, at all.
And for some reason, we have posters who cant accept this.
I can't believe anyone would still argue against this thread. You either have red tinted specs of unprecedented proportions or are just a braindead gimp when it comes to football.
I could live with posters not accepting it but Fergie seemingly can't imagine the team without Giggs or Scholes.
His answer to beating Newcastle and Arsenal convincingly without them seems to be sticking one of them into the team for every league game now. Weird. He probably got scared after seeing a United XI play well without either of them, it threatened to destroy his world.
They'll both be there at the Etihad, I bet. In the starting line-up. And Zarlak will tell us it's okay to rest players for the more important games.
I think the midfield could do more and agree Ando/Clev give them more to work with but don't agree that carrick.scholes/fletch give them little, there's plenty of times Rooney will get the ball and instead of turning he'll shift it and spread it wide instead of carrying it. RVP has shown much more willingness to do that. Regardless though, even if it were true that the ball they get doesn't make it easy for them to turn they should still go there because otherwise that areas which is always occupied by most clubs most creative player, is for us just devoid of anyone, and with the wingers playing so poor we need someone there more then usual.
If a team is more than good enough to see off a opposing team then adding more, better players into the equation is pointless when the team should be doing fine without them anyway. That's when you can afford to bench the better players in case of an emergency. Like today.