Hojlund, Bruno, garnacho and Anthony tend to track back far more then rashy does. Also note that there's a limit to how many players eth can burn bridges with especially in time of an injury crisis. Quite frankly I can't see eth surviving a clash with rashy/bruno
Marcus Rashford (Out)
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
That should probably hint to you that in a more free flowing attacking system, he’d provide a tonne.
Strange it doesn’t to be honest.
Again that's an outlier. A 300k a week player can't jog on the pitch for most of the game
Messi rarely tracked back at Barca. Mbappé can also seem lazy on the pitch when PSG is defending a transition / in their own half. Obviously Rashford is not as good as them (although he had the potential to become an Mbappé level winger, his development just kind of didn't go the way it could've), but the idea is the same.
From the players you listed, only Hojlund provides a similar level of transitional threat, because much like Rashford, he's also very physical, and yet very fast, and a good ball carrier as well, despite his poacher qualities. Both of them are able to go from the halfway line into the opposition box in the blink of an eye, whether they have the ball or they're making a run off the ball.
Bruno is a great transition player due to his creativity, final ball, and ball striking. He's the guy that starts transitions, or ends them, not the guy who will pick up the ball at the halfway line, and passes or takes a shot deep in the final third. Antony is just a ball retention player, who's strengths are more useful for a possession-based team. Garnacho has been great lately, but he's not the guy you leave upfront with the likes of Rashford and Bruno defending deep instead.
Rashy is no mbappe, Messi or Ronaldo faaaar from it. A lesser player can't afford jogging on the pitch for a big chunk of the game
Yes, I literally said that he's obviously not on that level, but they aren't the only examples either.
Whether he can afford to be jogging high up the pitch when his team is defending is for the manager and coaching staff to decide.
As it stands, he's one of the most dangerous transition players in the league, and we as a team heavily rely on transitions in order to score goals. Obviously, Rashford isn't going to be defending in his own half for the whole game, when he's one of our biggest strengths going forward, and he would be knackered after 60 minutes if he was running up and down the pitch the whole game. It basically significantly reduces our chances of scoring, if our biggest transitional threat is given too much defensive duty in a heavily transition-based team.
The Liverpool game he put a shift in because he simply had to. He was sulking 2 years ago for Ralph walking round the pitch at Etihad. It's laughable people claim it's manager tactics he is incapable of putting a basic shift in every week
You could allow the lack of defensive tracking back from the very best players, most prolific players. Rashford is not that.
It's actually his pressing that I have bigger concerns with, there's no way EtH is telling Rashford not to press from the front and allow teams play through us with ease
It's actually his pressing that I have bigger concerns with, there's no way EtH is telling Rashford not to press from the front and allow teams play through us with ease
Honestly what a crazy narrative. When the opposition (was it Barkley?) just ran around him a few games back and Rashford couldn't be bothered, what manager would be happy with that?
I'm hearing Fergie would be able to motivate him, I wouldn't be so sure (with this squad). He didn't have a magic wand - Rashford has gone through LVG, Jose, Ole, RR, EtH and blown hot and cold throughout. The continuous pattern (apart from RR) being he appears to do better at the start.
Personally I don't mind Rashford, I think people try to make him out as a leader and a player to rely on, and he's not that. If we get better players playing (and competing) with him, he'll improve I feel and be more motivated as a result. He works a lot harder for England where he doesn't have a guaranteed place.
Arguments about whether he's more or less individually talented than other individuals past or present isn't relevant. Is he more capable of looking like a top class talent on his day vs Valencia? Yes. But Valencia wouldn't spend 60-70% of the season looking dreadful and a complete liability on the field in the majority of games.
Nani was a very frustrating player, but never suffered from main character syndrome like Rashford.
I would rather replace him with someone whose highs were a lot lower, if their lows were a lot higher.
Nani was a very frustrating player, but never suffered from main character syndrome like Rashford.
I would rather replace him with someone whose highs were a lot lower, if their lows were a lot higher.
He wouldn't make the squad, SAF would have sold him pretty quickly.
Rashford can be a very good footballer whose style is similar to Mbappe but has never been as good. We tend to overrate him when he is in form (eg last season) because he plays for us.
Messi, in his younger days, used to track back alot.
Last edited:
But he can't play free flowing attack, he's one of the reasons we don't now.
Very much doubt that. As it can't be proven either way silly statement to make.
The current best boss in the Premier league said this of Marcus - Pep said 'The only player that I would take from Manchester United is Rashford.'
So if he wants to work with him, I'm pretty sure Sir Alex could have gotten the best out of him.
Yes because Pep has always been truthful and never manipulated United.
I think so too.
Depends. This Rashford would not be at the club under Ferguson, who wouldn't have bought "yes he doesn't track back, but he might have things on his mind, bless him" for a second.
How exactly did he manipulate us?
When he’s in the mood and in form he causes lots of problems to the opposition. His passing can be really good when he spots them overlaps down the left side. His work rate is the problem. He gives up to soon
He's basically gotten us to buy players like Ronaldo and Maguire.
I can't believe there are people who seriously think the football transfer world would be this childish. You think City and Pep are concerned with who we buy and they're plotting pranks on us so that we buy certain players?
Yeah. Sure.
Ronaldo to City would have been a huge PR-success for them. And for City, Ronaldos lack of pressing would not have been a issue. Would probably score lots too.
Regarding Maguire, our new CEO have even confirmed City had interest in him (but found him too expensive).
Had a look at Walcott v Rashford record wise.
Rashford at 26 has already scored more club goals than Walcott did in his whole career.
And Walcott only scored 10 or more league goals twice, whereas Rashy has done it 4 times and could be a 5th this season.
Get your "some ways" comment though, but undoubtedly Rashford has been a level above.
No, Pep and the City board are having meetings to discuss which players they should pressure us buying into
"This Maguire guy is soo shit, let's fake an interest in him and United will come in to outbid us!"
So if he was a 50K a week player it would be OK to jog around because that;s the implication here
If he was a 50k a week player then he'll be a squad player which means we only play him when he's on form and scoring goals. At 300k a week he's a senior player who has to play on an almost week in week out basis.
When I started following football it was almost the norm to have a player who wasn't exactly renowned for his work rate. Most were either goal scorers (ex RVN, Inzaghi etc) or creative players (ex Cantona or Totti) whom, considering what they did, were rated far higher then Rashford is. As football progressed these players became rare. The end of the two men forward line meant that the lone striker had to do a two man job while football shifted to a more of a total football role were everyone pretty much do everything.
Still there was a very small niche of players that survived mostly because they were outstanding in what they did. Messi and Ronaldo for example were a guarantee of goals and class. That's something Rashford can't do. Which mean that he'll have to play like 'common mortals' do ie by contributing more defensively. That's what most players do.
There are many question marks surrounding the team from fitness to attitude. The manager himself is under scrutiny. I am ETH in (lite) but even I struggle to understand his obsession with having two no 10s in CM especially considering that you need a beast of a DM to cover for that midfield However as rule of thumb this Rashford can't survive on doing what he's doing for long. He can either become more consistent by becoming a goal machine on a year in year out basis or else his overall game needs to improve. Ideally he does both.
Finally I think that Rashford is bigger then the manager ie he can't bench him for long let alone sell him. Thus any decision taken must come from the higher ups ie people who can take the decision without risking losing the job because of it. Quite frankly if we can really get an 80m-100m from him then I think we should sell. That's 80m-100m of pure profit on top of more then 68m spared in salary. That's worth it for an inconsistent player who'll be 27 in October
So if I understand you correctly it's not on because he's on 300K but if he was only on 50K it wouldn't matter because he would only be a squad player
No matter what a player earns, it shouldn't make any difference in application, effort or attitude
on paper you're right, in practice less so. A 50k a week can be benched up until his attitude and form improves. A 300k a week can't. Its the equivalence of judging between a paid intern and the CEO. The slack for the former is much bigger then that of the latter
Why not, Sancho was, albeit for different reasons but he's in the same area with salary
The same guy who bought Ronaldo & van Persie and instructed them not to track back. The same guy who gave Nani tonnes of matches?
Sure.
And let’s not make out he’s Ronaldo levels of not tracking back ffs.
Do you really think that Sancho deserve a 300k a week salary?
RvP not tracking back? Man saved our asses recovering the ball and making defensive plays almost as much as he scored goals.
None of them do, but Sancho being canned shows you can bench a highly paid player
Sancho was the result of bad management. Eventually he was loaned and hopefully he'll be sold. Any man and his dog agree that he was a mistake
Time to sell. 27 he is not improving and with PSG losing Mbappe this is the perfect time to get some money for him. Leave it any longer and its another Pogba/ Martial situation
How much of an idiot do you have to be at any level, coach, manager, director.. to plan to build up a squad in such a way that Rashford's is an essential cornerstone.
Expected him to show up after barely featuring for England and on the verge of getting dropped from the euros squad but he honestly looks more cooked than Varane or Casemiro.
Rashford (a LW) has struggled all season whilst we haven’t had a LB all season.