Legend for me. Don't even think 12/13 was by far his best season, his performances were just noticed more because we played crap most of the time. He was brilliant from 06-09 and in 10/11. Also disagree that he's a big match bottler, he was great against Barca in 07/08, Inter the season after that, Madrid in 12/13, Bayern in the Moyes season and in countless matches against Chelsea, Liverpool etc.
Where does Carrick go in terms of all time greats for United?
- Thread starter Cooksen
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
He is not one of the all time greats for United but he's had a good career at the club. I think the top players tend to have a bit of a nasty streak and Carrick never had that. We can talk about that period where we dominated in Europe but maybe people forget the other players we had 
We just matured as a squad.
We just matured as a squad.Below Scholes and Keane, and a tier above all the other CM we've had recently. He is a good player (relative to the high standards we have and hence not a great), while others like Fletcher, Butt and Park are good servants.
I think Herrera will eventually join him (if we start winning) and hopefully Pogba will join the tiers of Scholes and Keane (only if we start dominating again).
I think Herrera will eventually join him (if we start winning) and hopefully Pogba will join the tiers of Scholes and Keane (only if we start dominating again).
It's so funny how people just rate players based on their ability but what about the influence of the players with the team? Do you understand the meaning of "influence"??? The likes of Ronaldo never won trebles with us but I rate his influence higher than Giggs, Beckham and Scholes.
The reason why you think it's a bizarre because you didn't read my post properly. Winning treble or more trophies doesn't make you become Tier 1. If you swap Stam with Vidic in 1999 squad, we would still winning a treble!!.
Tier 1 doesn't make you a better player either. I rate Scholes and Beckham as better players than Keane but I put Keane in tier 1 because of both his ability as a no6 and his influence in our game was bigger than the likes of Scholes and Beckham.
And I said the same thing about Vidic, Vidic's influence in our team was higher than Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, Neville. We didn't win 3 PL for three seasons in a row!! Vidic came and we won 5 in 7 seasons!! Do you not understand the meaning of "influence"?
Good shout. Id say Butt was marignally better.
First you say you rate Vidic more because we won titles with him where as without him we didnt with the same midfield which translates to influence, then you go on to say Ronaldo was more influential than Giggs and that it has nothing to do with winning titles.
We are talking about United's all time greats and you rate Vidic above Beckham Scholes and Giggs.
Anyway I completely disagree with just about everything you say so lets just leave it at that.
Last edited:
How come Becks, Giggs are tier two?? In their prime two best wide players in the world?
Last edited:
Agree with a lot of what you've said here. Never lead our team like many others mentioned, and still now, when he is recognized as a great and important player, I see some other more important players in our team. A great facilitator as it were.
This is about right for me.
Hah, for some reason this made me laugh! They really do have emoticons for every occationNevermind.
Yea. There are many reasons why I think Vidic is above them.
1) In my opinion he's more influence than them. In 8.5 years, we have won 5 PL titles when he was with us (1 of the season he was injured and the other season he passed his prime). So pretty much when he was fit we won.
2) I remember we didn't win a single PL in three years even though we had the likes of Scholes, Giggs, Rio and Keane. And when Vidic joined us, our back four became way more solid.
3) Stam is probably on par or closed with Vidic but what makes me picked Vidic ahead of Stam because I have seen Vidic played with a young inexperienced Evans and Smalling and he still made our backfour like a world class.
4) Vidic is the best centre back in his generation. And tier 1 players will be in my best United XI and Vidic is one of them.
I rate Vidic more. But in term of what?? If you read my post again above, I rated him higher in term of both ability and influence of him in our team. The impact that he gave to our defense is higher than the impact that Scholes, Giggs and Beckham did to our midfield. You can't deny the fact that we didn't win the league for three seasons with Scholes, Giggs, Rio, RVN in a team but we won 5 in 7 seasons with Vidic. When RVN left and both Giggs and Scholes passed his prime and we still won the league!!
Ronaldo was just an example of how I described tier 1 players is actually based on how important their influence/impact to our team!. Not only based on how many trophies the players have won with us or if they can win us treble.
Because As great as they are they're not as good (in my opinion) as the players I've listed in tier 1
All I can assume is that you never watched us play in the 90's or in fact 1999.
What worse is actually your inability of reading people post.
Scholes has always been the best midfield in league history in term of his ability and way better than Keane. But in term of impact or influence Keane has always been higher than Scholes and that's why I put him in higher tier than Scholes.
The same thing with Vidic, Ronaldo, and Robson.
Totally agree. He has been an important part for all of our titles since he joined. When healthy he is very very good. His form dips significantly, though, when he is fighting any type of injury or knock. I remember a number of years ago he had a poor second half if the season and many here were ready to sell him. Then in the summer we found out he had been struggling with an and injury for months.
Again you don't read my previous post
. Can you please don't jump into conclusion?You swap Vidic and Stam in 1999 we would still won treble!!
And also mate, when you have a bloody Roy Keane, Giggs, Beckham, Cantona, Cole, Scholes in XI, it's pretty much not about individual players but the whole squad were fantastic. But if Vidic had to play with Anderson, Cleverley, Jones, Valencia, Park and Nani and still able to won the league and went to final CL with this team, well surely you can see the difference.
This is about right. But players need the right partnerships and systems to shine, and Carrick may just be what Herrera and Pogba need to shine. In every team I've seen him in, he's just kept playing a similar game, performing at a consistently high level with the occasional spike (Roma 7-1, 12-13 season) and dip (last season with LVG) along the way.
Barring those, he's been a good, model professional for me and one of those players that every team needs to hold the other pieces together.
Not legendary but has been a massive part of Manchester United. He's one of those players and characters who fans and players alike will always speak highly of. Not many, if any, will have a bad word to say and that's a great way to be remembered.
I've supported Utd since the early 70s and by far Robson was the best player we've had imo. He could pass, tackle, score goals, lead the team etc. All this whilst probably being drunk from the day before and playing on mudbaths not the billiard tables they play on nowadays. In todays value, if he was 25, his transfer fee would be well over 100 million. He came back from a broken ankle, leg, swolled his tongue and dislocated his shoulder. They didn't call him Captain Marvel for nothing.
Scholes did not play in central midfield for United in 95/96 so was certainly not the heart of the midfield that season. Butt and Keane were the pairing with McClair occasionally filling in. Scholes was used as a forward with Cole until Cantona came back from suspension and was in combination with Cole for the rest of the season. First time Scholes had any real run as a central midfielder was paired with Butt in 1997/1998 after Keane did his cruciate aside from the odd game when we used a 3 man midfield which was extremely rare.
You seem to forget that when we signed Vidic we also signed Van de sar. We started winning again because we finally found a partner for Rio who was world class,we got a world class goalie, Ronaldo wasnt 17 anymore and started breaking all sorts of records and we also signed Evra and Tevez and Rooney was at his best. So I dont see why you seem to imply that the team was shit and only became good when we signed Vidic which means he was so influential...
Those years you keep referring to we were also in a transition period playing with the likes of Kleberson Djeba Belion and Howard.
Last edited:
I think you need to remember that Vidic's arrival coincided with a huge turnover of players.
Six months either side of his arrival we released Kleberson, Fortune, Bellion, Djemba and Tim Howard and brought in van der Sar, Vidic, Evra and Carrick as well as Park. Huge upgrades that turned out to be mainstays of the side. Vidic also turned into a massive upgrade on the players we had for the second CB spot, namely Silvestre, Brown and Heinze.
The three years before before his arrival were always going to be barren years because SAF seemed to take a chance on anyone with a bit of talent. Also, Rio was suspended for 03-04 and Scholes was ruled out for most of 05-06 with his eyesight problems and Roy Keane left quite early on in that same season too.
He isn't a goal grabber or a guy that will force the play. So he is never likely to be a legend, however for me ability wise he is up there with all our greats.
For me, the achievements of the teams Ince was part of are equally important - Fergie's first trophy, our first European trophy in ages, first title in ages, and first double as part of my favorite United team. Those years set the foundations for what followed.
Obviously Carrick is the more likable as Ince was a cnut, but I rate Ince as the better player, so that's why I'd have them on an equal level.
Vidic above Rio and Scholes not in tier one. Have you watched them play?
Giggs was better than Cantona in my view, by a distance too.
Eric was a catalyst/leader but wasn't at Giggs level.
But the catalyst/leader is what makes him the better player in my eyes!
We've been lucky as a club to have some great players (and let's face it our tier 3 legends would still rank higher than most other clubs tier 1) for example is Stevie G had played for united he would be the same level as Carrick in my opinion.
A very very very good player.
In a lot of clubs, he'd be in their top.10.... it just reminds you of how many great players we've had when you think Carrick probably wouldn't get in most people's top.20?
I'm biased (see name) but Robson and Keane were better MFers than Carrick as was Scholes (I'm still laughing at that comment on page.1 suggesting Scholes is over-rated!!!). And if I was playing a plain 4-4-2, I'd have McGrath (definite legend for me) and Ince before Carrick too though Carrick beats Ince (and most players) for longevity. It depends on whether peak ability or longevity is your key factor.
Comes behind Keane/Robson/Scholes but edges Ince, Beckham and above people like Butt, Muhren, Moses, Sammy Mc and others like that.
In a lot of clubs, he'd be in their top.10.... it just reminds you of how many great players we've had when you think Carrick probably wouldn't get in most people's top.20?
I'm biased (see name) but Robson and Keane were better MFers than Carrick as was Scholes (I'm still laughing at that comment on page.1 suggesting Scholes is over-rated!!!
). And if I was playing a plain 4-4-2, I'd have McGrath (definite legend for me) and Ince before Carrick too though Carrick beats Ince (and most players) for longevity. It depends on whether peak ability or longevity is your key factor.Comes behind Keane/Robson/Scholes but edges Ince, Beckham and above people like Butt, Muhren, Moses, Sammy Mc and others like that.
You would play McGrath over Carrick in central midfield in a 4-4-2? If so, why?A very very very good player.
In a lot of clubs, he'd be in their top.10.... it just reminds you of how many great players we've had when you think Carrick probably wouldn't get in most people's top.20?
I'm biased (see name) but Robson and Keane were better MFers than Carrick as was Scholes (I'm still laughing at that comment on page.1 suggesting Scholes is over-rated!!!
Comes behind Keane/Robson/Scholes but edges Ince, Beckham and above people like Butt, Muhren, Moses, Sammy Mc and others like that.
BTW - I don't disagree with most of your post other than this part.
This is absolutely spot on, which means lots of people won't want to hear it. Carrick has been a very good midfielder over the years, mind.
He's had some memorable midfield performances for us. Against Platini's Juventus, for example. Not that I agree with his opinion though.
Charlton
Keane, Robson, Scholes, Edwards
Carrick, Stiles, Crerand, Ince
That's how it is for me. In the first two tiers I have midfielders who can single-handedly win you the game. Carrick doesn't belong in that category for me, but he showed that he can be a crucial part in successful teams.
Keane, Robson, Scholes, Edwards
Carrick, Stiles, Crerand, Ince
That's how it is for me. In the first two tiers I have midfielders who can single-handedly win you the game. Carrick doesn't belong in that category for me, but he showed that he can be a crucial part in successful teams.
When Liverpool talk about their all time greats, and have Stevie G perhaps only second to Kenny D, I instantly think we had 3 better players on one statue! Let alone the recent greats!
How can they not have had better than Stevie G in all their glory days!
He's not Charlton, Scholes, Keane, Robson and Edwards level who for me are our top five midfielders in my opinion.
I'd have to really think hard on our list of midfielders to give a definitive place but I'd say Carrick is a top ten midfielder in our history and without question the most underrated, I'd love to go back in time and bring Carrick from ten years ago back to the present with me and stick him in our team now as replacing him is a thankless task.
I'd have to really think hard on our list of midfielders to give a definitive place but I'd say Carrick is a top ten midfielder in our history and without question the most underrated, I'd love to go back in time and bring Carrick from ten years ago back to the present with me and stick him in our team now as replacing him is a thankless task.
And for Ireland too, esp since they were well stocked in the centre-back department (Moran, McCarthy etc) and Jack Charlton himself deemed McGrath 'too good' to be a centre-back and played him as a DM.
To be fair, Souness was better. Maybe Barnes/Rush too, although it's much harder to compare.
They really have an underwhelming list of legends, considering their success
The 'play him over Carrick' bit is simply because I think McGrath was a great talent.... a "natural" footballer and a rarity in looking so accomplished as a MF and a CH (admittedly where he played a lot of his career..... and tbf, in my all time XI, I have him as a CH).
Had a great talent for reading the game, was deceptively fast over 5-10 yards, hard as nails in the tackle (but not nasty) and could run with or pass the ball.... all attributes a MF needs?
The 'play him in a 442' bit is just because United played 442 in early/mid 80s (as did most clubs in the 80's..... a simpler time?).... Hughes/Stapleton up front, Muhren, Whiteside then Olsen taking the wide positions.
Imagine how much better McGrath would've been if he hadn't been playing with a perpetual hangover!
Good post.