That to me is the issue and why Mata is the better. Fellaini symbolized our declining expectations and acceptance of mediocrity and hoofball. Mata didn't. That we failed with managerial appointments after this is not down to Mata. So to me, Juan "Juanfield" Mata will also be a far better signing than Marouane "Elbow Tree" Fellaini. Like I said, no disrespect for what Fellaini did for us, nor for his commitment etc., but no comparison. Mata wins hands down.
But what does that have to do with the player? We bought him so that isn't his fault. Emotions and aesthetics as well as lowering the bar for Mata to make them seem comparable from the outset will obviously skew the poll.
If you mean goals conceded, then I agree.
It's not close. The transfer fees were comparable and while Mata hasn't lived up to the high expectations, he's been a way more useful player for us than Fellaini. The latter had his use as an impact sub but more often than not, his technical deficits have prevented us from playing the way we want to play. And let's not forget, Fellaini hasn't lived up to expectations either. Despite being a very expensive signing at the time, he never managed to really nail down a place in the team.
We've played like donkeys and just plain, cold and practical for a number of seasons, which lessened Mata's functionality greatly. Mata hasn't been a viable player for us under most conditions for almost the entirety of his tenure. This, coming from a one-time star of the league who we expected to do similar things for us as he had for Chelsea.
We paid a full £10m more for Mata than Fellaini - a club record fee at the time, which is representative of the respective standing of the players at the time.
Even as we got Fellaini we knew precisely what to expect, and got it. Mata's story hasn't been the same and if we had got what we paid for with him, he'd be an absolute legend at the club by now.
Mata is one of few players who gets a free pass from our support for being affable, saying the right things, making no fuss and having his moment of wonderful goals or technical feats whilst Fellaini is the manifestation and emodiment of everything most of do not want in a Manchester United player, at the same time, Fellaini is the one from the two who has delivered to what his capabilities and remits are and were, not Mata.
Nope. We paid for a proper midfielder that we so desperately needed in Fergie’s last years. All we got was a makeshift target man.
It’s on Moyes, of course, as he knew him best but still chose to sign him for a wrong role.
We paid for exactly what Moyes wanted, whatever that is supposed to be. To get the absolute optimum out of Felliani, we would have to change our style completely to model the team around him, which is absurd and why he shouldn't have been signed in the first place (on top of not being good enough, of course) but under the circumstances, Fellaini has delivered what Fellaini can, whether played deeper in midfield or further forward.
We can't blame him for what he is as a player not being good enough for us, which is what I think a lot of people are doing.