[RoyoftheRavers]

Why is Fellaini picked out as the player that's most unable to do that though? we've far worse players on the ball than him.

Because I disagree with the part in bold. Which midfielders do we have who are less comfortable on the ball than Fellaini?

 

[Shark]

Because I disagree with the part in bold. Which midfielders do we have who are less comfortable on the ball than Fellaini?

I suppose to put it better, we've players that are prone to brain farts on the ball. Including Rooney when played in midfield. Fellaini was fine for the most part on the ball last night and has been for most of this season.

 

[RoyoftheRavers]

I suppose to put it better, we've players that are prone to brain farts on the ball. Including Rooney when played in midfield. Fellaini was fine for the most part on the ball last night and for most of this season.

Well that's a slightly different argument because I wouldn't have Rooney in midfield in the first place.

But if you look at the actual midfielders: Blind, Carrick, Herrera, Mata etc. All of these players are far more comfortable on the ball than Fellaini in my opinion.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

So he got the tactics wrong in the first game?

Personally I thought the first game was not won due to us being away from familiar surroundings, high winds, and a bad pitch. This was at Old Trafford on a beautiful evening. We should be able to win most games against such opposition. I personally don't think it was due to a different approach but simply having superior players.

I thought the tactics in the first game were fine and I agree with your take on why we didn't win. I also don't think we won because of the different approach, I'm just explaining why I think he decided to try a slightly different tack.

To be honest, he could have sent probably have sent out 10 men in a 2-2-5 formation and we'd still have won but I don't really think the team he did select is worth getting worked up about. The Rooney in midfield thing has been going on all season and most of us hate it. It's obviously here to stay for this season, though. Whether that's because he really doesn't rate Rooney as a striker or thinks he brings something to midfield that the alternatives lack we might never know. But it's clearly a response to a squad of players that isn't where he wants it to be. So it seems reasonable to stop crucifying him for it unless it continues after this summer.

The other decisions in formation and tactics last night were really no big deal. A bit of squad rotation (which is essential to give game time to fringe players - in a season when we're playing so few games) and using Fellaini in an advanced midfield role to unsettle a defence and keeper that dealt very comfortably with the high ball the last time we played them.

I just think you're inclined to be very negative about Van Gaal so are looking for reasons to complain. I sympathise with your stance, as I've had my own reservations all season. You have to remember that we've endured weird team selection, tactics and formations with Fergie plenty of times before though. Usually during transitional seasons (remember when the fans used to chant "attack! attack! attack!" or the Alan Smith and Rio Ferdinand as CM experiments?) We've also endured some really dull football, in the very recent past under Fergie. So I do think you're exaggerating about this season being the worst football you've watched in 40 years. We've had plenty of ups and downs but the downs were always ignored (by you and me anyway) because we had 100% faith in the manager to turn things round. It seems unfair to be constantly on Van Gaal's case, when he's probably just going through the same difficult period Fergie often went through when he had a squad that was missing the last few pieces in his jigsaw. I think we have to be patient and forgive the occasional eccentricity. Last night was an utterly dominant performance that got us the result we needed. Seems churlish to use it as yet another excuse to criticise IMO.

 

[Shark]

Well that's a slightly different argument because I wouldn't have Rooney in midfield in the first place.

But if you look at the actual midfielders: Blind, Carrick, Herrera, Mata etc. All of these players are far more comfortable on the ball than Fellaini in my opinion.

It doesn't matter if you wouldn't have Rooney in midfield and it doesn't change the argument because LVG has played him there many times now. I agree that the players you've listed are better on the ball, but I don't think that Fellaini is doing anything bad enough to merit the 'can't play free flowing football' tag. His passing and ball control is relatively good.

 

[Sultan]

I thought the tactics in the first game were fine and I agree with your take on why we didn't win. I also don't think we won because of the different approach, I'm just explaining why I think he decided to try a slightly different tack.

To be honest, he could have sent probably have sent out 10 men in a 2-2-5 formation and we'd still have won but I don't really think the team he did select is worth getting worked up about. The Rooney in midfield thing has been going on all season and most of us hate it. It's obviously here to stay for this season, though. Whether that's because he really doesn't rate Rooney as a striker or thinks he brings something to midfield that the alternatives lack we might never know. But it's clearly a response to a squad of players that isn't where he wants it to be. So it seems reasonable to stop crucifying him for it unless it continues after this summer.

The other decisions in formation and tactics last night were really no big deal. A bit of squad rotation (which is essential to give game time to fringe players - in a season when we're playing so few games) and using Fellaini in an advanced midfield role to unsettle a defence and keeper that dealt very comfortably with the high ball the last time we played them.

I just think you're inclined to be very negative about Van Gaal so are looking for reasons to complain. I sympathise with your stance, as I've had my own reservations all season. You have to remember that we've endured weird team selection, tactics and formations with Fergie plenty of times before though. Usually during transitional seasons (remember when the fans used to chant "attack! attack! attack!" or the Alan Smith and Rio Ferdinand as CM experiments?) We've also endured some really dull football, in the very recent past under Fergie. So I do think you're exaggerating about this season being the worst football you've watched in 40 years. We've had plenty of ups and downs but the downs were always ignored (by you and me anyway) because we had 100% faith in the manager to turn things round. It seems unfair to be constantly on Van Gaal's case, when he's probably just going through the same difficult period Fergie often went through when he had a squad that was missing the last few pieces in his jigsaw. I think we have to be patient and forgive the occasional eccentricity. Last night was an utterly dominant performance that got us the result we needed. Seems churlish to use it as yet another excuse to criticise IMO.

Good post!

It's true LvG is starting to get on my nerves with his selections and the quality of football on offer despite having really outstanding talents at his disposal.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Good post!

It's true LvG is starting to get on my nerves with his selections and the quality of football on offer despite having really outstanding talents at his disposal.

Starting to? He's been on my nerves all fecking season!

Still, I'm trying to be philosophical. I always thought Fergie's successor faced a hell of a job and I was determined to be patient. I'm kind of annoyed with myself for being so quick to criticise. From here on in, I'm going to be a bit less judgemental and look for signs of improvement, rather than the other way round.

 

[RoyoftheRavers]

It doesn't matter if you wouldn't have Rooney in midfield and it doesn't change the argument because LVG has played him there many times now. I agree that the players you've listed are better on the ball, but I don't think that Fellaini is doing anything bad enough to merit the 'can't play free flowing football' tag. His passing and ball control is relatively good.

Yes but what I'm saying is Rooney isn't a midfielder to begin with - it's essentially an experiment that most of us would probably like to see come to an end. I'm comparing designated midfielders with midfielders. Even if Fellaini is a better option than Rooney in midfield, and it is an if, it doesn't change the list of other alternatives available.

We'll probably have to agree to disagree on the last point. I think playing Fellaini in midfield would hinder our chances of playing free-flowing football over a sustained period of time - simply because we have better, more capable, options who suit that particular style better.

 

[Shark]

Yes but what I'm saying is Rooney isn't a midfielder to begin with - it's essentially an experiment that most of us would probably like to see come to an end. I'm comparing designated midfielders with midfielders. Even if Fellaini is a better option than Rooney in midfield, and it is an if, it doesn't change the list of other alternatives available.

We'll probably have to agree to disagree on the last point. I think playing Fellaini in midfield would hinder our chances of playing free-flowing football over a sustained period of time - simply because we have better, more capable, options who suit that particular style better.

There's a lot of things that are hindering our chances of playing free flowing football, I suppose that's my main point. I think it's unfair that Fellaini is the main culprit. Yeah, we'll agree to disagree though.

 

[m1y2]

One question, would you like to play someone like Crouch up front for us? That is pretty much how it looks like we can use him there and he will offer some aerial threat but it is not the way we should play.

I think his best position is as 10 but we have got many good 10s, if he is shifted to the right side of midfield he rather crosses than is the target man at the end of crosses if he is up front but then it seems almost our main tactic to go wide and put some crosses in. If he played as 10 he could arrive in the box late and could help little bit at the top of the midfield to gain some strength and he is good at combining there, giving one twos and instinctive shooting, volleys etc. Just like he played for toffies against us and in his best season there.

But again we have got different and better options. Rooney is better option in this system, he had his best games there this year.

Good option coming from bench to change the tactics imo, Herrera should start any day ahead of him regarless his "leightweight" stature

 

[shamans]

I didn't use a Stoke analogy initially but, now that you mention it, I'd certainly say he's more of a Jonathan Walters or an Andy Carroll than a Cazorla or Fabregas. He is probably better technically than the two former but there is no doubting that physicality is his main asset.

Although they've had a disappointing first half to the season, Everton are a much more footballing side under Martinez than they were under Moyes. They use McCarthy and Barry to keep the ball with Barkley in a more advanced, attacking role - their attacks stem from possesion-based football. Under Moyes they were about getting it into the box and winning second balls (in the air or otherwise). Fellaini was the main physical threat for Everton using the approach.

I'm not having a go at Fellaini himself - he provides a useful alternative for United and, in the Premier League, you have to win ugly occasionally to challenge for titles. But I don't think he'll help the team to play the type of free-flowing football that is consistently needed over a season to win the league.

That comparison is not quite fair. You're comparing two players who are of really poor quality to two players who are considered one of the best at what they do. I know you're trying to compare their roles but it doesn't give the full picture. Saying he's more of an Andy Caroll to me is as absurd as saying he's like Fabregas. Personally, I think he's really unique and a lot of his technical play goes over-looked. So yeah physicality is his main asset but it would be pretty useless without his technical ability (and yes I count his first touch on his chest part of that ability)

My definition of a "footballing side" might be different. I'm not of the school of thought that Arsenal = total football. The best teams almost always have a balance to them. I found Everton's Moyes side really good at establishing that balance and organization. Again I know you haven't said this but many here compare Moyes' Evertone to something like Stoke which is totally wrong. They played some good attacking football at times but always had a solid base.

It's also not about how Fellaini can help our "free-flowing football" (though I can debate that he does help in that aspect as well. Just because a player is physical doesn't mean he holds up the ball too often. If you notice he likes to pass/play forward). You say this but I'll emphasize on it: he's a very useless player to have in the squad that can easily slot in the first team if either plan A fails, we face a different type of team or go for a different set up. He gives us plenty of options and top teams always have such options under their sleeve.

 

[RoyoftheRavers]

That comparison is not quite fair. You're comparing two players who are of really poor quality to two players who are considered one of the best at what they do. I know you're trying to compare their roles but it doesn't give the full picture. Saying he's more of an Andy Caroll to me is as absurd as saying he's like Fabregas. Personally, I think he's really unique and a lot of his technical play goes over-looked. So yeah physicality is his main asset but it would be pretty useless without his technical ability (and yes I count his first touch on his chest part of that ability)

My definition of a "footballing side" might be different. I'm not of the school of thought that Arsenal = total football. The best teams almost always have a balance to them. I found Everton's Moyes side really good at establishing that balance and organization. Again I know you haven't said this but many here compare Moyes' Everton to something like Stoke which is totally wrong. They played some good attacking football at times but always had a solid base.

It's also not about how Fellaini can help our "free-flowing football" (though I can debate that he does help in that aspect as well. Just because a player is physical doesn't mean he holds up the ball too often. If you notice he likes to pass/play forward). You say this but I'll emphasize on it: he's a very useless player to have in the squad that can easily slot in the first team if either plan A fails, we face a different type of team or go for a different set up. He gives us plenty of options and top teams always have such options under their sleeve.

I wouldn't say it's an unfair comparison. Walters scored a hat-trick at the weekend and Carroll has scored a few in the last few months so they're not exactly of "really poor quality". They have strengths that are more similar to Fellaini's strengths than the strengths of Cazorla or Fabregas. The latter two players were just two players I picked of a certain style - but the point is in Mata, Carrick, Herrera and Blind we have four players who are superior ball players to Fellaini. So why use Fellaini if we're playing it on the deck?

I haven't got the stats to hand but I'd imagine Martinez's Everton are on the ball a lot more than Moyes' Everton were. I would see such a statistic as an indicator of being a more footballing side.

Well it is about how Fellaini can contribute to a certain style, if that's the style we're looking to play. That's what he needs to be measured on and, ultimately, there are better technical players at our disposal. I presume you haven't meant to say I called him useless because I clearly said he "provides a useful alternative". But the key word here is alternative.

 

[Roboc7]

I don't see what is wrong with playing him in that role, he is at his best when the ball is in the air, it's as simple as that, you don't play fellaini for his passing or movement, you play him because of his physicality and aerial ability. I thought he did ok yesterday and will be important against west ham, I think LVG will use him in certain games to do a job and that will be his role for however long he remains at the club.

If the manger gets in the players he wants in the summer and can get the team playing how he wants I think fellaini will be one of the biggest losers in terms of game time but that is a problem for next season.

 

[Isotope]

I wouldn't say it's an unfair comparison. Walters scored a hat-trick at the weekend and Carroll has scored a few in the last few months so they're not exactly of "really poor quality". They have strenths that are more similar to Fellaini's strengths than the strengths of Cazorla or Fabregas. The latter two players were just two players I picked of a certain style - but the point is in Mata, Carrick, Herrera and Blind we have four players who are superior ball players to Fellaini. So why use Fellaini if playing we're playing on the deck?

I haven't got the stats to hand but I'd imagine Martinez's Everton are on the ball a lot more than Moyes' Everton were. I would see such a statistic as an indicator of being a more footballing side.

Well it is about how Fellaini can contribute to a certain style, if that's the style we're looking to play. That's what he needs to be measured on and, ultimately, there are better technical players at our disposal. I presume you haven't meant to say I called him useless because I clearly said he "provides a useful alternative". But the key word here is alternative.

Is Fellaini the problem of our awful dire style of football? When he was out injured and we only won 1 in 5 games, did we play much better?

 

[RoyoftheRavers]

Is Fellaini the problem of our awful dire style of football? When he was out injured and we only won 1 in 5 games, did we play much better?

Is Fellaini the only problem with our style of football? No.

Did we play well in his absence this season? No.

Do either of those questions change any of my points above? No.

 

[RoyoftheRavers]

I don't see what is wrong with playing him in that role, he is at his best when the ball is in the air, it's as simple as that, you don't play fellaini for his passing or movement, you play him because of his physicality and aerial ability. I thought he did ok yesterday and will be important against west ham, I think LVG will use him in certain games to do a job and that will be his role for however long he remains at the club.

If the manger gets in the players he wants in the summer and can get the team playing how he wants I think fellaini will be one of the biggest losers in terms of game time but that is a problem for next season.

Well said.

 

[Snow]

I wouldn't say it's an unfair comparison. Walters scored a hat-trick at the weekend and Carroll has scored a few in the last few months so they're not exactly of "really poor quality". They have strengths that are more similar to Fellaini's strengths than the strengths of Cazorla or Fabregas. The latter two players were just two players I picked of a certain style - but the point is in Mata, Carrick, Herrera and Blind we have four players who are superior ball players to Fellaini. So why use Fellaini if we're playing it on the deck?

I haven't got the stats to hand but I'd imagine Martinez's Everton are on the ball a lot more than Moyes' Everton were. I would see such a statistic as an indicator of being a more footballing side.

Well it is about how Fellaini can contribute to a certain style, if that's the style we're looking to play. That's what he needs to be measured on and, ultimately, there are better technical players at our disposal. I presume you haven't meant to say I called him useless because I clearly said he "provides a useful alternative". But the key word here is alternative.

There's a time and a place where he should play there. Against Cambridge it was a decent pick as they couldn't handle him in the air at all. It does make the football worse. This was the first game in a long long time that we played with Mata and Di Maria in midfield and no scrubs in midfield. Play wasn't that great really. I thought, especially in the first half, Fellaini was getting in the way a lot of the times. He was going near Mata when Mata was trying to opening himself up and often he went far out left where Di Maria's space was. That's basically stifling the two most creative players. Not cool.

 

[jeff_goldblum]

I haven't got the stats to hand but I'd imagine Martinez's Everton are on the ball a lot more than Moyes' Everton were. I would see such a statistic as an indicator of being a more footballing side.

I've not delved properly but a quick google puts Moyes 2012-3 team on 52% possession compared to Martinez' 2013-4 team on 53%. Given that Everton have been woeful this season I can't imagine they're looking any more impressive in that department this season. The idea that Moyes' team played bad football is rejigging history to fit the narrative of Moyes' time at United, in his last season especially they actually played pretty good football. I remember thinking at the time that their reliance on goals coming from good team play rather than individual brilliance was in contrast to how we were scoring goals at the time.

Coming back to Fellaini, he's perfectly capable of playing football on the floor. He puts in a huge defensive shift whilst passing forward more than he gets credit for, keeping the ball moving and keeping possession well. What he doesn't have is the eye for a killer pass than Herrera does, but he's assisted/scored a fair few goals from set-pieces already this season so he clearly has worth in that department. His value to the team comes because he's completely different to our other midfield options whilst also being able to play the patient possession style LVG wants. The strengths of the likes of Rooney, Di Maria, Mata and Herrera all overlap whilst Fellaini offers us a different (and valuable) dimension.

 

[Blue always red]

I've not delved properly but a quick google puts Moyes 2012-3 team on 52% possession compared to Martinez' 2013-4 team on 53%. Given that Everton have been woeful this season I can't imagine they're looking any more impressive in that department this season. The idea that Moyes' team played bad football is rejigging history to fit the narrative of Moyes' time at United, in his last season especially they actually played pretty good football. I remember thinking at the time that their reliance on goals coming from good team play rather than individual brilliance was in contrast to how we were scoring goals at the time.

Coming back to Fellaini, he's perfectly capable of playing football on the floor. He puts in a huge defensive shift whilst passing forward more than he gets credit for, keeping the ball moving and keeping possession well. What he doesn't have is the eye for a killer pass than Herrera does, but he's assisted/scored a fair few goals from set-pieces already this season so he clearly has worth in that department. His value to the team comes because he's completely different to our other midfield options whilst also being able to play the patient possession style LVG wants. The strengths of the likes of Rooney, Di Maria, Mata and Herrera all overlap whilst Fellaini offers us a different (and valuable) dimension.

Agreed. Baines and Mirallas played some great stuff in Moyes last season at Everton. Agree with the entire post tbh.

 

[Bwuk]

He's a #10.

To be honest, he shouldn't fit into our strongest 11, but he's a good option to have to bring on if we need a goal, or for rotation.

 

[Devil may care]

I can't believe I'm going to say this but get him on up top, at least the ball will stick when it gets up there, it couldn't stick to RvP or Falcao is they were covered in glue.

 

[Nighteyes]

I can't believe I'm going to say this but get him on up top, at least the ball will stick when it gets up there, it couldn't stick to RvP or Falcao is they were covered in glue.

It's the sensible option. If we're going to play hoof ball then Fellaini is a must.

 

[limerickcitykid]

I can't believe I'm going to say this but get him on up top, at least the ball will stick when it gets up there, it couldn't stick to RvP or Falcao is they were covered in glue.

Couldn't agree more, countless balls up top and Falcao just stands there without a chance of actually getting it. Throw Fellaini in and at least he'll have a chance of getting on it.

 

[Cheesy]

Or we could, you know, try and play football which suits Falcao since he's a far better footballer than Fellaini.

 

[Nighteyes]

Or we could, you know, try and play football which suits Falcao since he's a far better footballer than Fellaini.

Or maybe we should start tailoring our game plans around players who aren't past it and shit like Falcao. Fellaini has been much better season and needs to be on at HT.

 

[acnumber9]

He'll be the go to substitution now. He'll be on within the hour I think.

 

[Cheesy]

Or maybe we should start tailoring our game plans around players who aren't past it and shit like Falcao. Fellaini has been much better season and needs to be on at HT.

So it's not at all possible that Falcao could be having a bad season? He's automatically just gone to complete shit and is past it? As poor as he's been, I think it's a bit premature to completely write him off as a footballer.

 

[Roboc7]

He couldn't do any worse than falcao so why not just throw him on while there is plenty of time left.

 

[Isotope]

Can't emphasize more, we need him in midfield, more than any current player. Not even Blind.

 

[Walrus]

Or we could, you know, try and play football which suits Falcao since he's a far better footballer than Fellaini.

Based on this season that is debatable.

 

[.Rossi]

Big Fellers enters the arena and United nick another result

 

[Boycott]

Why the feck is he always at the far end of the box whenever we get a set piece? Our deliveries rarely beat the first man let alone get to the far post.

 

[Nighteyes]

Based on this season that is debatable.

It's not.

Fellaini has been miles better.

The man needs to be starting games. We look far better with him in the team.

 

[charleysurf]

Weird not to start him today. Did Giggs not advise LVG on how Big Sam's teams operate?

 

[Hed Zitin]

Lucky Moyes bought him. Changes games for us hoofing it to him. Defenders hate playing against him.

Massive player for us whether you like it or not. Good on him.

 

[Walrus]

Big Fellers enters the arena and United nick another result

I didnt think he played particularly well when he came on, but his record this season of us winning games with him starting/nicking results when he comes on and that sort of thing is quite astounding.

 

[Ekeke]

Should have scored his header. Thats what he's on there for

 

[YouOnlyLiveTwice]

Maybe after all hoofing it to him is our answer to top 4, it is maybe not pretty but it surely has shown it can be effective.

 

[charleysurf]

Should have scored his header. Thats what he's on there for

The hate, the hate...

 

[Roman Bellic]

Should have scored his header. Thats what he's on there for

Falcao should have scored his 1 on 1 chance, Fellaini did well in the set-pieces today