He's our no 10/false winger, if his task isnt too create, what is he doing over there? We need people who create chances in that position, no striker.
8
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 35
- Goals
- 10
- Assists
- 4
- Yellow cards
- 2
- Status
He probably is but he hasn't got the pace or physical presence to play as a striker so the only way he can justify his place in the team is as a creator and he often struggles to create. He's a great wee player but bloody hard to use properly. You can see why Mourinho had his doubts.
He's a bit of both. Create and score. Jack of both trades. He tried to release RVP thrice yesterday that i can think off. It just didn't come off. RVP missed it by an inch on the right, bit too long. And then there was the ariel ball again down the middle missed by a whisker and then another that was cut off very well by their defender. Apart from that most of his forward passes were to release Valencia down the right.
edit: I also noticed he constantly made runs into the box from the right which were mostly ignored and also cut off atleast twice. Overall he kept possession very well but didn't offer much threat.
Last edited:
I don't think he's a jack of all trades at all. He's a slow, technically gifted floating attacker who is best picking up pockets and funnelling space to create goals. He must surely be a short term option at RW because it has not been working well for the last month.
Not sure how my comment elicited that poor, sarcastic response. I don't see things in as black and white as you, clearly.
"All that matters" and "define the player" probably suggest your own viewpoint more than mine, bearing in mind they were terms you wrote, and not me.
For the record: Three points are three points in the Premier League. You don't get more from Anfield. I'm sure Hazard would testify to the importance of every game, when making an impression.
This says it all really. Three (four?) years in this league, and we still actually don't (and it's not just these two posters) know how much Mata should be tasked with creating in a team. Is he even a 'number 10'?
He's a luxury player. Unless he's played as a striker, and used for his best asset (finishing) he'll be inconsistent and anonymous throughout large parts of the season.
That wouldn't be such an issue if he weren't a supposed top class 'number 10'.
Last edited:
Dunno, he was assisting for fun pre-Mourinho. In that 2012/13 season where Chelsea had a shed ton of games he racked up something like 35 assists. I think his own attitude has changed though to emphasize scoring unfortunately.
Wasn't so much creativity in those assists though. I'm not saying he can't be a creative passer, but the majority of his assists at Chelsea were from set pieces/ playing the final pass in a counter attack (see Theo Walcott getting 20 assists in his best two seasons at Arsenal).
Said it before. Glad to here it straight from a Chelsea fan.
wtf
Despite your name, I could have sworn you supported Chelsea.
A good chunk were set-pieces but hardly 'most'. I doubt even half were, and if they were - that's still 17 assists.
Plus, how is 'playing the final ball' not creative? You say that dismissively like it's something that won't work here. I figure that we won't counter quite as often due to the style, but that shows he had an eye for a pass and the ability to execute it well - that's the sort of creativity we need to open up locked defenses.
His starting position is far too wide for him to have those opportunities though against teams who will park the bus. We end up being completely camped outside their box, and our midfielders are already occupying those inside spaces that he'd want to come into. There's just no space for him to exploit, no interchanging to be had that doesn't result in him at the byline mostly.
Plus, how is 'playing the final ball' not creative? You say that dismissively like it's something that won't work here. I figure that we won't counter quite as often due to the style, but that shows he had an eye for a pass and the ability to execute it well - that's the sort of creativity we need to open up locked defenses.
His starting position is far too wide for him to have those opportunities though against teams who will park the bus. We end up being completely camped outside their box, and our midfielders are already occupying those inside spaces that he'd want to come into. There's just no space for him to exploit, no interchanging to be had that doesn't result in him at the byline mostly.
Nope! There's a Chelsea fan called @antihenry - I'd assume you've mixed us up. In future, please don't.
Fwiw I completely agree with you on Mata here:
Ahh, yes.. that makes sense. Apologies.Nope! There's a Chelsea fan called @antihenry - I'd assume you've mixed us up. In future, please don't.
Fwiw I completely agree with you on Mata here:
People always refer to his time at Chelsea, but (a) as you said - a lot of set-pieces, and Chelsea have been great at them for a decade.
(b) when you break down how he played, and the type of assists he made at Chelsea, as well as the type of football they played - it doesn't translate to the skills needed to play as effectively in this system.
He's in the top three finishers at the club, and can lay on chances from forward positions, so he's worth having as a goal-scoring impact sub and versatile option. But nothing more, in my opinion.
He was tidy and decent, but didn't look like creating. Not sure whether that is down to him though or more down to LvG's tactics.
That applies to every player of his type, including Silva and Ozil. That's the nature of the type of player he is.Nope! There's a Chelsea fan called @antihenry - I'd assume you've mixed us up. In future, please don't.
Fwiw I completely agree with you on Mata here:
Silva, in particular, isn't a player of his type though.
He is missing Herrera badly. The link up play with Herrera when he was still playing higher up the field was a big part of why he looked so dangerous in the weeks before Carrick's injury. The problem is that neither Rooney nor Valencia have any chemistry or understanding with Mata which he could thrive on.
He looks to hold up play and control possession more, but he's still at heart a creative player who looks to interplay and exploit space. You stick him on the wing against a team who sits back and you'll see him struggle too - it's happened for them plenty of times. It's why we were so often lauding Toure for powering through and saving them last season.
Not really. Silva and Ozil are fairly similar players, Mata isn't, even if they're all preferred 'No 10s'.
At Chelsea he wouldn't run games like the other two do, though you could argue that's because of their tactics. But since he's been to United he's played all over the place, and I'm sure you'd agree that his strengths are his technique, his finishing, and his attitude, but not his creativity, passing and play-making abilities. He has more of the skillset of a forward than Ozil and Silva, but without the physical attributes to shine there against every team in the Premiership. That's why he hasn't been able to make it as a '10' at United, and why he could still be a success for you, but it would have to be (IMO) as an end-product player, instead of a creator.
Id say Silva and Ozil aren't all that similar. Silva controls games and can play deeper, Ozil doesn't. Ozil is a player for the final third, much like Mata. But Ozil is a better creator and Mata is a better finisher.
The bit in bold could be said of Sterling, and we'd never claim he was similar.
It's one of those cases where in theory they should be similar, and it's easy to just say they're similar.. but they actually aren't.
Silva's positioning is completely different, because he's much better at shielding the ball, and at skipping past a man from standstill. He's more patient by nature. He's more likely to exchange a few deep passes before assisting the assister, whereas Mata is more likely to directly assist the goal. Mata is a much better finisher, and gravitates towards goal a lot more. Though he has tidy technique, he's essentially more of an instinctive player in a similar way to Rooney, which couldn't be said of Silva.
When you break down the limitations and weaknesses between the two, Silva is significantly less likely to be made quiet than Mata, thus going back to your original point, the situation doesn't apply to them both.
People probably get bored with comparing the two, but you always have people claiming it's not down to Mata's specific limitations, and that it would happen to Silva too.. which I think believe is completely false.
Last edited:
Not sure about that, but I agree with the Mata-Silva comparisons.
Some brilliant assists in this video. Would like to see more of this.
2.05,
2.20 for 2 assists v tottenham;
3.25
These 4 were especially nice. Yes there was set pieces in there but that's not a surprise considering how good his crossing was for them.
2.05,
2.20 for 2 assists v tottenham;
3.25
These 4 were especially nice. Yes there was set pieces in there but that's not a surprise considering how good his crossing was for them.
The volley against us by Juan was one of the best goals I have ever seen. Such a underrated goal.
His lofted pass for Demba Ba's volley was also sexy. God knows, he doesn't look half as creative in most games for us. Some nice touches, some nice turns but his inswinging crosses are not effective at all.
Been saying it since the start of the season when people pretended the main reason he wasn't in the team was because he didn't work hard enough (which apparently is not even true). He's quite simply not creative enough and doesn't bring much to the table aside from goals. A glorified striker basically. Of course, goals aren't bad but we have plenty of players who can score provided they get chances, which they don't because Mata and Young create feck all.
And people are exaggerating the link up play that he partakes in. The whole Herrera/Mata/Valencia triangle (which lasted for about 2 games and was significantly less effective than the Blind-Fellaini-Young axis on the left) was mostly Herrera's quality shining through and was apparent even early on in the season when he played together with Rafael.
And people are exaggerating the link up play that he partakes in. The whole Herrera/Mata/Valencia triangle (which lasted for about 2 games and was significantly less effective than the Blind-Fellaini-Young axis on the left) was mostly Herrera's quality shining through and was apparent even early on in the season when he played together with Rafael.
Static attacking play limits Mata's abilities. He will not dribble past a couple of opponents, he will use his touch and vision for inter-play and a killer-pass. Taking into account the mobility of our strikers and quality of our fullbacks' overlaps, Mata basically has Herrera to play with. Juan is no Hazard or Silva in this regard.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't really like him wide right, but in the current formation (lvg's favorite) it's probably the only position he will realistically ever get a chance to play.
Totally agreed. Not a bad thing, but I'd say his role should be as an impact sub in an ideal world.
Without Herrera there to link up then his (lack of) speed becomes a factor. it's like Barcelona playing without Iniesta or Xavi but trying to control possession... if we play mata ont he wing then we need Herrera (or someone of that ilk) in close proximity.
Pretty much. Even the thread regarding how much of a miss Carrick is doesn't take into consideration that missing Carrick has a knock on effect to other positions; it means Herrera has to drop back and Rooney has had to drop back.
A key part of Mata's game was the triangle between him, Herrera and Valencia. You drop Herrera deeper and that triangle is destroyed, no-one else in our midfield can play the quick, one touch play that brought the best out of both of them.
Looking at the table now, thank god for his two goals against Liverpool. Potentially season saving.
If he isn't going to be played as a #10, he shouldn't be here. He's top class in that position, but out wide his complete lack of pace lets him down and makes us predictable.
Pretty much spot on.
Basically this.
He needs movement and pace around him (of which we have very little) for him to be effective. Otherwise, he's basically pointless.
Crystal Palace 1:2 Man Utd
What a weird performance. He looked great at times and very positive with the ball, moving it through their midfield playing one twos and actually being very creative and dangerous, and at times you wouldn't notice he was playing. That ball for Jones was also very stupid. And the penalty incident. But good penalty though.
Wasn't too confident of him scoring after seeing that graphic of his previous penalties. Anyone think he's going to take penalties for the long haul? Or will it be a fad?
Good pen but not much else. Should take a good long hard look at Ashley Young.
Thought he was better the more he drifted in and negated the right side.
- Status