Alas poor Carrick...WTF has happened?

Freak said:
When you pass it backwards and sideways to someone who's only 5 yards away, of course your passing completion is going to be high. He kept making these pointless sideways passes and only on few occasions delivered some great long balls. I'd like him to take more risks and pass it forwards.
Click to expand...

To who? His options on the ball were somewhat limited.
 
acnumber9 said:
To who? His options on the ball were somewhat limited.
Click to expand...

Exactly there were rarely players nearby him to pass too. Welbeck was giving no width on the left and kept coming inside which would be ok if he kagawa and clev didn't keep occupying a small amount if space. Clev completely vacated midfield a lot of the time, severely inhibiting our passing options as Southampton could simply mark certain players abd force either a back pass or risky pass. Poor play from clev and not enough players running in behind.
 
Freak said:
When you pass it backwards and sideways to someone who's only 5 yards away, of course your passing completion is going to be high. He kept making these pointless sideways passes and only on few occasions delivered some great long balls. I'd like him to take more risks and pass it forwards.
Click to expand...

You do know that Carricks passing stats, especially forward passes pr game is higher and more precise than Xavi's, right? I thought Cleverley had an atrocious match in terms of passing, but he had 49 successful passes out of 52 attempted. Not too shabby, and that tells me that we are too focused on what they are doing wrong to see the good things.

Carrick is great at what he does, so stop trying to make him into someone he isn't.
 
apotheosis said:
TC surprised me by how ineffective he became under pressure, he really just disappeared and did not even do a job defensively.

I think calls he may replace Scholes in a midfield 2 have been temporarily silenced after such a sobering display, against a very average but determined team.
Click to expand...

The problem is we have been banging on about how we are well stocked in that role and not in the "Carrick backup" role and yesterday it looked like a load of bull.

TC looks good with Ando exchanging passes and not doing bugger all defensively, but is far from being a balanced CM in a midfield two, which is what we need him to do. We need to try Ando alongside Carrick, see how that pans out and draw proper final conclusions for the midfield while Scholes can still rescue us from such poor displays.

Rossa said:
I thought Cleverley had an atrocious match in terms of passing, but he had 49 successful passes out of 52 attempted. Not too shabby
Click to expand...

So? Passing completion there is good but Scholes had a lower number of passes and lower completion yet made us look an entirely different side.
 
antohan said:
The problem is we have been banging on about how we are well stocked in that role and not in the "Carrick backup" role and yesterday it looked like a load of bull.
Click to expand...

It is a load of bull. People give us numbers of players for that role, but none are reliable or proven and those that are, far too old to be constantly relied upon.

TC looks good with Ando exchanging passes and not doing bugger all defensively, but is far from being a balanced CM in a midfield two, which is what we need him to do. We need to try Ando alongside Carrick, see how that pans out and draw proper final conclusions for the midfield while Scholes can still rescue us from such poor displays.
Click to expand...

Trouble with that is Ando is too unreliable, but that is our best all round pairing based on actual performances, not on speculation.

So? Passing completion there is good but Scholes had a lower number of passes and lower completion yet made us look an entirely different side.
Click to expand...

Tbf Carrick didn't have a great game, but he carried on and still tried to make things happen despite playing on his own really. He made more of the play and did the defensive work for all the midfield. He had to do far too much really, and he stuck at it until Scholes came on tbf to him.
 
apotheosis said:
Tbf Carrick didn't have a great game, but he carried on and still tried to make things happen despite playing on his own really. He made more of the play and did the defensive work for all the midfield. He had to do far too much really, and he stuck at it until Scholes came on tbf to him.
Click to expand...

I agree, I reckon the weak link was TC, not Carrick. I was referring to TC's passing completion being highlighted as good. Players are not just passing completion stats and whether they are forward or sideways. TC and Carrick was a car crash, Scholes and Carrick controlled the midfield, the tempo of the game and, while not setting the world alight, were a completely different proposition.

Carrick didn't suddenly start playing better. In fact, he carried on doing pretty much the same, it was the fact he actually had a proper partner which turned the screw. The fact Southampton brought on defensive-minded changes helped though, it has to be said.

I've liked a lot of what I've seen of Cleverley but we can't live on "he needs games so that hopefully he can be a world beater in two years time". feck that, he will get enough games as a sub and hopefully earn his place when it's due. Right now he is not a starter, no way. Give Ando a run of games while he is fit and that's make or break for him.

I'm fed up, and not precisely with Carrick.
 
Carrick wasnt amazing but he played some very nice balls into the front players (something that went out of game for a while despite being one of the best in the league at it) and at least tried to keep RVP involved by putting the ball over the top for him.
 
apotheosis said:
Very difficult to make the play and track the runners on your own. TC did neither. His was an extremely poor contribution in my view.
Click to expand...

After watching the game again a second time properly I just can't agree with that. Cleverley's mobility was always giving space and time to Carrick who almost never looked for the return ball to him when he dished it off.

I think the criticism of TC from this game is completely unjustified.


apotheosis said:
Agreed, but all that suggests is that he will always be ineffective in a 2 man midfield. He needs a player like Anderson, but because of the defensively suspect nature of that pairing, they need the security of a holding player behind them. TC surprised me by how ineffective he became under pressure, he really just disappeared and did not even do a job defensively.

I think calls he may replace Scholes in a midfield 2 have been temporarily silenced after such a sobering display, against a very average but determined team.
Click to expand...

I think it suggests the contrary. That he is more effective in a two man midfield that includes a less static defensive player.

If Carrick was playing a limited anchor man role where he always stayed deep in the central zone deep of every attack then it would go a way to complimenting TC's role but he doesn't. He basically plays as the more defensive of the two central players, neither in the anchor position all the time making ball winning challenges and recycling the ball or playing the entire midfield zone role in a short pass and move style of way.

It is completely to the contrary of what Cleverley wants to do in have an option forward and backward when he's on the ball. Instead in that Saints game he spent a lot of the time fighting with Kagawa coming deep for positions. If Carrick had the engine to be a fast pressing ball winner and still distribute the ball effectively it would go a long way to complimenting the style that Cleverley looks for. The new wave British 'pass and move' style of player. If we are going to play with nobody pressing and ball winning in midfield and with Carrick in the side then we mays well play without any defensive shielding at all. Anderson when fit's movement and energy is more useful than Carrick's awareness and passing from deep when he's going to just occupy the zone and dish off. When he's under pressure the range gets shorter and shorter until even RvP is coming back beside him to get involved.

(disclaimer: In no way am I saying Carrick is shit.)
 
What you are saying is Cleverly and Carrick don't make for a good partnership, which I think is what most have pointed at.

Problem is, Carrick should start so if Clev can't work with Carrick he will just have to collect splinters.
 
antohan said:
What you are saying is Cleverly and Carrick don't make for a good partnership, which I think is what most have pointed at.

Problem is, Carrick should start so if Clev can't work with Carrick he will just have to collect splinters.
Click to expand...

Whoever is fittest and in form should start every time. I think somebody pointed out that it was one of the very few times that Carrick and Cleverley started in midfield.

I was merely pointing out my findings from the wash-up of the game against the Saints. I am saying that the base roles they played in that game are like chalk and cheese. If it were to continue that way then it would take a lot of work to get it to be viable.

Many factors contribute to it. The fact they haven't played together that often. Carricks re-transition back to being a midfielder again. Carrick waking up and being a little more mobile and trying to compliment Cleverley (even though we haven't really seen that from Carrick for 2 or 3 years) or TC himself having the awareness to adjust his own natrual instinctive game to not be so loose and attempt to combine better with Carrick.

Only one of these players has more developing to do. So make of it what you will.
 
ghaliboy said:
or TC himself having the awareness to adjust his own natrual instinctive game to not be so loose and attempt to combine better with Carrick.

Only one of these players has more developing to do. So make of it what you will.
Click to expand...

The latter, his instinctive game is more advanced and for the final third. Needs to wake up and smell the coffee. Kagawa has that role and his is as a CM.

Yes, he got into good positions sometimes, but at times he reminded me of Phil Jones getting all gung ho and seemingly not having any positional awareness of the role he was meant to perform.

As you say, he can work on it, but I'd rather he worked on it more sporadically in easier home and cup games.
 
ghaliboy said:
After watching the game again a second time properly I just can't agree with that. Cleverley's mobility was always giving space and time to Carrick who almost never looked for the return ball to him when he dished it off.

I think the criticism of TC from this game is completely unjustified.




I think it suggests the contrary. That he is more effective in a two man midfield that includes a less static defensive player.

If Carrick was playing a limited anchor man role where he always stayed deep in the central zone deep of every attack then it would go a way to complimenting TC's role but he doesn't. He basically plays as the more defensive of the two central players, neither in the anchor position all the time making ball winning challenges and recycling the ball or playing the entire midfield zone role in a short pass and move style of way.

It is completely to the contrary of what Cleverley wants to do in have an option forward and backward when he's on the ball. Instead in that Saints game he spent a lot of the time fighting with Kagawa coming deep for positions. If Carrick had the engine to be a fast pressing ball winner and still distribute the ball effectively it would go a long way to complimenting the style that Cleverley looks for. The new wave British 'pass and move' style of player. If we are going to play with nobody pressing and ball winning in midfield and with Carrick in the side then we mays well play without any defensive shielding at all. Anderson when fit's movement and energy is more useful than Carrick's awareness and passing from deep when he's going to just occupy the zone and dish off. When he's under pressure the range gets shorter and shorter until even RvP is coming back beside him to get involved.

(disclaimer: In no way am I saying Carrick is shit.)
Click to expand...

Agree.
 
antohan said:
The latter, his instinctive game is more advanced and for the final third. Needs to wake up and smell the coffee. Kagawa has that role and his is as a CM.

Yes, he got into good positions sometimes, but at times he reminded me of Phil Jones getting all gung ho and seemingly not having any positional awareness of the role he was meant to perform.

As you say, he can work on it, but I'd rather he worked on it more sporadically in easier home and cup games.
Click to expand...

Yeah exactly, clevs style is fine but it has to be used at the right time and he got his timing completely wrong in that game. That first 10 mins showed they could play well, carrick showed he was happy to play a quicker game but once Southampton started pressurising out back 4 with aerial balls to Lambeth they were able to push up and we needed to counter that by just playing a little slower to get in top of the game again, but cause clev kept pushing forward before we had a chance to get real control of the ball it really inhibited us.

I personally don't think it had anything to do with clev and carrick not having compatible games or anything like that. I think it was simply a case of clev being shown up for his lack of experience in the middle.
 
It's not right how all the blame is being put on Cleverley in this thread. Carrick was woeful himself. And you expect better from someone so experienced. He's not had a good start to the season. But I expect him to improve with time.
 
My main issue with Carrick was that he looks a bit lacking in sharpness defensively, and also he took about 6 touches every time he got the ball.

We were too slow on the ball in general vs Soton, and Vidic and Carrick in particular were to blame.

Has to be said though, bar van Persie, none of the other players did really make any good and consistant off the ball movements.
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
Me thinks Carrick was just having his traditional slow start to the season symptom. He just seemed a bit complacent. Its Tom who looked lost. I dont get what was wrong with him
Click to expand...

I think that sometimes players like Cleverly follow Fergies words to the letter instead of playing within the bosses perameters but still expressing themselves.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
It's not right how all the blame is being put on Cleverley in this thread. Carrick was woeful himself. And you expect better from someone so experienced. He's not had a good start to the season. But I expect him to improve with time.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you noticed but I counted at least three passes by Carrick over Soton's defence to van Persie who was threatening the room behind their defence. Whether it was a tactic to exploit their cb's lack of pace or if it was coincidental I don't know. What is certain is that Tom didn't try it. Make of it what you will.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
It's not right how all the blame is being put on Cleverley in this thread. Carrick was woeful himself. And you expect better from someone so experienced. He's not had a good start to the season. But I expect him to improve with time.
Click to expand...

What's he meant to do if his midfield partner goes mia? We started off the game really well and then clev decided he was going to go hard on the attack and didn't stay back enough to help with Southamptons increased pressure. We needed him in the middle. Carrick was effectively left to do all the work in midfield. That was a poor display from clev. He didn't stay in his position to help us get control and he and kagawa got on top of each other in attack.
 
Ash_G said:
What's he meant to do if his midfield partner goes mia? We started off the game really well and then clev decided he was going to go hard on the attack and didn't stay back enough to help with Southamptons increased pressure. We needed him in the middle. Carrick was effectively left to do all the work in midfield. That was a poor display from clev. He didn't stay in his position to help us get control and he and kagawa got on top of each other in attack.
Click to expand...

Oh Cleverley was poor and the worse of the two but Carrick was bad as well. He spent ages on the ball just seemingly staring at it to the point where he players knicked it off him a few times.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
Oh Cleverley was poor and the worse of the two but Carrick was bad as well. He spent ages on the ball just seemingly staring at it to the point where he players knicked it off him a few times.
Click to expand...

Yeah he definitely dallied a few times on the ball and played a few sloppy passes but then I also think there was a serious lack of movement from the attack. Like I said clev and kagawa got on top of each other and so there was Carrick and then big gap and then clev and Kagawa hovering in the a/m position, which is a tough ball to find from deep. Welbeck didn't stay wide and came inside which is fair enough but he wasn't making runs behind the defence he was simply drifiting inside, Valencia was holding his width as you'd expect so it was just RVP offering any runs behind which Carrick found nicely at times.

Carrick was a bit slow but I don't think he was that bad and made to look worse by his partner. Tbh though I was really surprised by how Clev played. I know he has defensive issues but he was really quite reckless. I'm hoping it was just a blip as I think the trio of Carrick, clev and Kagawa can do much better than they showed there.
 
Ash_G said:
Yeah he definitely dallied a few times on the ball and played a few sloppy passes but then I also think there was a serious lack of movement from the attack. Like I said clev and kagawa got on top of each other and so there was Carrick and then big gap and then clev and Kagawa hovering in the a/m position, which is a tough ball to find from deep. Welbeck didn't stay wide and came inside which is fair enough but he wasn't making runs behind the defence he was simply drifiting inside, Valencia was holding his width as you'd expect so it was just RVP offering any runs behind which Carrick found nicely at times.

Carrick was a bit slow but I don't think he was that bad and made to look worse by his partner. Tbh though I was really surprised by how Clev played. I know he has defensive issues but he was really quite reckless. I'm hoping it was just a blip as I think the trio of Carrick, clev and Kagawa can do much better than they showed there.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything there, I think people underestimate the importance of a midfield partnership. It's even more crucial in our team as we play very wide so it means the midfielders need to help each other out constantly.

I remember making the same point last season when Anderson and Fletcher played together briefly, Fletcher was just making random runs forward all the time rather than showing for the ball. Not surprisingly Anderson got slated on here.
 
Awful seems ott to me, and like I said you have to have someone to pass to. With clev seemingly spending most of his time next to kagawa rather than Carrick it made a pretty big gap.
 
Smores said:
I agree with everything there, I think people underestimate the importance of a midfield partnership. It's even more crucial in our team as we play very wide so it means the midfielders need to help each other out constantly.

I remember making the same point last season when Anderson and Fletcher played together briefly, Fletcher was just making random runs forward all the time rather than showing for the ball. Not surprisingly Anderson got slated on here.
Click to expand...

Exactly if you want quick passing in the middle but also to have wide attackers then your central 3 need to stay close to each other and move the ball progressively. Clev completely voided his role. Whenever we won the ball back, regardless of where, he started pushing forward, he never gave us a chance to stem the Southampton pressure and build from the back. Whenever he did stay in his position we got on top of them. It's easy to criticize Carrick but yeah he was a bit sloppy at times which is fair enough considering he's just come off two games in defence, still at least he did his job, Clev didn't do his. Hopefully it's something he'll learn from as he can't play like that in tough games.
 
Lawman said:
Agree to a point but we all talk like Cleverley is 18-19years old he should be holding his own and not needing Carrick to hold his hand.
Click to expand...
It has feck all to do with holding his hand. As the more experienced partner in midfield he should have showed better at the very least leadership. Bottom line is Carrick wasn't doing his job at all. But some are trying to paint it like it was Cleverely and the forward-line who were at fault. Yet the forwardline clicked into gear once Scholes came on and too things into his own hands by being consistent with his passing.
 
Ash_G said:
Awful seems ott to me, and like I said you have to have someone to pass to. With clev seemingly spending most of his time next to kagawa rather than Carrick it made a pretty big gap.
Click to expand...
Carrick contributed greatly to the gap. He also never helped Kagawa by mostly giving him the ball with out an option to pass to whilst he was being man marked. He like Cleverly were guilty of that when it came to Kagawa.
 
The two of them had a terrible match, I just don't understand why there is the need to know who was more to blame than the other or who had a poorer match
 
kouroux said:
The two of them had a terrible match, I just don't understand why there is the need to know who was more to blame than the other or who had a poorer match
Click to expand...

It's not about attributing blame, it is simply analysing the problem. one thing we can all agree upon is that TC and Carrick have not complimented each others game as quickly as we would have hoped.

Many were looking at these 2 to be our new 'go to' pairing. But i felt there was very little natural understanding of what each required of the other.

Although Ando's fitness is still an issue, it must still be he and Carrick who have the best all round game as a pair. Imo TC and Ando would be better suited to playing as they usually do, but with Carrick behind them. How that works into a system we can use, im not sure, but they are far too open and defensively suspect as a pair in my view.
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
Carrick contributed greatly to the gap. He also never helped Kagawa by mostly giving him the ball with out an option to pass to whilst he was being man marked. He like Cleverly were guilty of that when it came to Kagawa.
Click to expand...

I don't think he did personally. Once they out us under pressure carrick was as deep as he needed to be to help out the defence. It was clev who was to eager to get forward that didn't allow us to propel get control of the ball once we did get it back. Carrick had his issues but he was let down by clev imo. Kagawa was unfortunate as clevs eagerness made him have to try and cover for him at times and you're right carrick could have shown more, on the other hand he too was a bit off his game as well and dallied at times himself.
 
Cheeky bump. Thought he had a really good second half, was decent in the first half, couldn't really do much as we were fairly static in attack, but second half he defended well when he needed to and did some great passes short and long. He's started trying to venture forward a bit more and he shows that when he does get around the box he can pick out some smart, incisive passing. Ridiculous that he's still not starting for England despite showing the exact qualities we lack in the middle. Oh well, at least it keeps him fresh for us.

Hear Ando could be back for midweek, given he didn't play for England I reckon Carrick can start the game hopefully we win the game quickly and he can come off for Ando second half some time. Will need him fully fit for Liverpool.
 
He also made two Scholes passes. Solid game from him. Scholes-Carrick duo is brilliant 80% of the times.
 
That movement and pass for the opener was beyond class. If that was Xavi or Iniesta people would be going mental over it.
 
He was absolutely pathetic in the first half though.

He's a central midfielder, and in an entire 45 minutes of football, he didn't show or position himself to receive the ball once.

He was a lot better in the second, but I thought it was fairly obvious he'd received a bollocking from someone at half time...probably from more than one person considering the work Scholes and Giggs were having to put in to compensate.
 
noodlehair said:
He was absolutely pathetic in the first half though.

He's a central midfielder, and in an entire 45 minutes of football, he didn't show or position himself to receive the ball once.

He was a lot better in the second, but I thought it was fairly obvious he'd received a bollocking from someone at half time...probably from more than one person considering the work Scholes and Giggs were having to put in to compensate.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this and said it in the match thread. I thought both him and Nani got the hair dryer at half time.

They looked like different players.

Carrick was terrible in the 1st.
 
noodlehair said:
He was absolutely pathetic in the first half though.

He's a central midfielder, and in an entire 45 minutes of football, he didn't show or position himself to receive the ball once.

He was a lot better in the second, but I thought it was fairly obvious he'd received a bollocking from someone at half time...probably from more than one person considering the work Scholes and Giggs were having to put in to compensate.
Click to expand...

I remember him being caught in possession a couple of times, his ability to receive the ball and turn is awful.

There was also a couple of really promising counter attack where he just sat there and made no effort to get forward.
 
Carrick's second half was pure class. When he starts carrying the ball forward at full pace he's very hard to stop as he's pretty much like an oil tanker out there; god awful acceleration, but good top speed and hard to stop. His passing is also sublime when he is on top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.