You'd thing with Carrick-Scholes England would have done better? I doubt it. Their international careers are unfortunate, though i have to say with all the possible ifs and buts Carrick just has not seized his chance. He always was much more timid and short on confidence in England's shirt. Truth to be told, some players just don't have it in them. Cantona was a great player, but a total let down for France. Even though he's got some caps, goals, even captains armband, it just never seemed to come off for him. Same with Carrick.
Michael Carrick | 2013/14 Performances
- Thread starter Lu Tze
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
- Status
Ferguson himself stated that Carricks reading of the game was one of his strongest attributes
Could they be any worse than those preferred?
Spot on and in Cantona's case it's even more of a heartbreak as he was such a charismatic player.
And what's the point? You should be asking can they really improve the team. If not, saying that the would not be worse is pointless.
Well, any improvement is good. I highly doubt they couldn't at least keep possession against weaker teams, something this lot struggled at last tournament, because that alone would be huge improvement on current England's midfield and England's midfielder from last few years.
What's the point in playing Sturridge over Welbeck when he didn't improve the attack one bit? What's the point of playing Gerrard at all when England never did good with him in the team? I don't get your point.
You think Scholes-Carrick wouldn't be major improvement on Parker-Gerrard?
You say that Carrick was letdown in England's shirt, but who exactly from current players is actually performing great for them? Welbeck has better goalscoring record for England than for U ited and that's about it.
In Ferguson's system, as I mentioned, yes. In Moyes system which put more defensive responsibility on his positional play and game reading, he floundered. He breaks every single positive combination we have in the squad.
Ferguson himself stated that Carricks reading of the game was one of his strongest attributes
With the rank state some of the fans were in this season I consider this a '1.5k post' account. It was easy mode. Talk any complete sense down there and it was worth 10 likes and a promotion. Don't feel bad.Sometimes, I look at people post their weird opinions here, and compare their post counts to mine, and wonder how I took over a thousand posts to get promoted.
I really enjoy all the opinions coming out after England played Italy, that Carrick shouldve been in the team - so that England had a passer of the ball. Some of the articles even mentioned the ridiculous need to fit a younger Gerrard and Lampard in the England squads previous had pushed Scholes to the wing - thereby again removing the best passer of the ball for England from his best position.
Tbh, England managers seem stupid to me. Pirlo has been a saint at Juventus, same could be said, bar this season, about Carrick at United, yet he's never given a shot at England due to the fact Gerrard and Lampard are just bigger names.
I hope one day names will matter less for England and actual performances for clubs will matter more.
Tbh, England managers seem stupid to me. Pirlo has been a saint at Juventus, same could be said, bar this season, about Carrick at United, yet he's never given a shot at England due to the fact Gerrard and Lampard are just bigger names.
I hope one day names will matter less for England and actual performances for clubs will matter more.
If England really wanted someone to play that role of sitting in front of the back 4 they should have taken Carrick. I think he does it better than Gerrard and even for the majority of football fans that wouldn't have that hes certainly the best option to stand in should Gerrard get injured. Im not sure Roy was desperate for a player to do that role, he just allowed Gerrard to do it as that is where he is limited to playing now.
I didn't see those opinions but agree completely. If Carrick had played ahead of Gerrard (and put in a decent performance) the pattern of the game would have been completely different. Baines wouldn't have been exposed so often and England would have been a bit less frantic and more composed in possession.
Carrick and Cole should both have gone to the World Cup.
I thought they should have taken Barry. He came off a pretty good season at Everton, unlike Carrick.
Agreed. Mostly I like the squad we took, but if it has a weakness it's that some positions are overloaded and some under-represented. Hodgson's been unable to resist the temptation to bring all those talented AMs and WAMs - Lallana, Barkley, Chamberlain, Welbeck, Sterling etc etc - but that's left gaps elsewhere.
We have just one RB, Johnson, despite most people having known beforehand that he would be a weak link - someone like Clyne should have been brought as an alternative option.
And we only have one player capable of playing a more defensive midfield role, Gerrard, and even he isn't actually specialised in that role. Lampard should have been left out - Gerrard, Henderson and Wilshere are all comfortably better options for the more attacking CM partner these days - and Carrick included as back-up for the more defensive job. Hell, even Gareth Barry - who for me was the very worst thing about our 2010 team - would have been a sensible inclusion if he wanted to pick based on recent form.
If Gerrard gets injured, our midfield is an open door. We'd have to throw caution completely to the winds and play Wilshere-Henderson, or do something awkward and makeshift like putting Milner or Jones there.
After seeing Wilshire these past couple of weeks, and knowing how crap Lampard has become with age, it really does beggar belief how Carrick hasn't travelled to Brazil. I think he would be the perfect substitute for Gerrard when he starts cramping up at 60 minutes and you could even debate the merits of having him start games.
I think Roy has done a good job with England, but I don't agree with some of the peoples he's left at home.
I think if Cole, Terry and Carrick [off the bench] had been over there we would have looked a better side.
I think Roy has done a good job with England, but I don't agree with some of the peoples he's left at home.
I think if Cole, Terry and Carrick [off the bench] had been over there we would have looked a better side.
Shoulda fking brought both to Brazil. I'd left Lampards at home.
Yeah. Look at those trophies England had won to justify those managers selection on picking up Gerrard-Lampard and others. Not to mention the superb football style England midfield have been displayed in all these years.
Lampard has goals in his locker and Wilshire is the 'rising star'. Cleverley and Carrick did absolutely nothing at all this season to justify a call up. Also with the fractured relationship Carrick has to the national team.
One of Aragones best decisions for SPA was to leave Raul behind. England would have probably taken Raul to Euro 2008 and tried to find a way to fit him in somewhere in the team. Yet we are still trying to force this lampard thing...
Well Carrick had chances to prove himself in England's shirt and the team was not playing better with him in it. And he was not doing good as well. Now if you're gonna say that it was not his fault, you may well play this card for Lampard-Gerrard pairing before that.
Didn't you say the pairing of Carrick-Scholes wouldn't be any better? That's the point i was highlighting. It works at United. Why do you think the England midfield was better in the past than those two in pair?
So in your eyes, Carrick had done nothing to earn a call up, while Wilshere was on the other side and earned his call up? Have you seen Wilshere or Carrick play this season? Very strange comment.
Wilshere has the talent and will most likely be the future of the England midfield, hard not to take him and give him the experience that will be invaluable to him to progress.
Definitely agree with the poster who said Carrick and Cole should have gone.
One of Barry or Carrick should have gone.
Why in my eyes? I don't make the decisions, who cares what I think regarding the callup. Carrick had a mare of a season and barely looked like a footballer. Plus has a history based around being fecked over in the NT. I didn't say Wilshere deserved a call up. He's seen in the media as the 'rising star' player. Carrick the old goat that is only rated by a select few United fans.
yup. and don't get the idea of including lampard in the team but didn't use him at all when a goal is needed.
Going by form which is what hodgeson has almost done it would have been Barry who deserved to go. Far more than Carrick
I actually thought Barry was picked until just before the tournament began. Was pretty surprised he didn't go, he was England's best central midfielder last season
The "has talent and will come good" excuse can only be used for so long before you realize he'll always leave you guessing what could have been. World cup is not a place for letting him discover himself as a player, if he was the answer, he should have been given more time before going to the tournament in the first place and going by his club performances he barely deserved that.
I'm not whilsheres greatest fan but I would have picked him if I was Roy too and I also would have started him over Henderson
Lampard would have been much better than Gerrard.
i know we all prefer someone for the future like barkley or ox chamberlain to get playing time but if you include lampard in your squad and you need a goal, then you simply have to use him.
Michael must be laughing his arse off.
His form in the last games of the season was dire though.
Lampard was also dog shit in the friendlies.
He probably doesn't give two shits about this Gerrard and England thing.
Already have more medals than some players combined in this so called Hodgson's collective.
Carrick should be partnering Hendo. Gerrard, for me, does not have the ability to control games against top opposition on his own. I'm sorry, but he's never been able to do it. He had Alonso next to him when people were raving about him being the best midfielder in the world, but on his own he's never been able to do it and now he's adapted his game and moved even deeper.
Carrick on the other hand, although he lacks Scholes' ability, can actually dictate a game, especially with a Cleverley-like player in Henderson next to him. At the minute, England are playing with basically 2 out and out DM's
Carrick on the other hand, although he lacks Scholes' ability, can actually dictate a game, especially with a Cleverley-like player in Henderson next to him. At the minute, England are playing with basically 2 out and out DM's
Carrick should be partnering Wilshere. Nobody fights on field like Jack.
Few spunk the ball away like Jack either.
But he's like Rooney. Plays his motherf'ing heart out. Same cant be said for Gerrard and Spackerson.
- Status