Ash_G
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2010
- Messages
- 7,405
I don't think anyone is suggesting our attackers were potent. On another day one of Scholes' 4-5 passes could have let to a couple of great chances. The fact remains however that the pair of them were inept defensively. If they did their jobs Villa wouldn't have been leading 2-0 and would not have done more with their terrible possession than we did with our far superior possession.
I'd much prefer to make changes at 0-0 and work from there, rather than our attackers having to salvage the game as has happened against several teams this season.
They were open but any combination that includes Scholes will be susceptible to a counter, I can't think of anyone why could stop that, like I said when Keanes legs went we brought in Fletcher who had an engine as good as anyone to help out and Scholes played as well. Now Scholes is even older than Keane was and we're only playing Carrick with him and using a very wide formation. There isn't a top team out there who sets up in a similar fashion to us. It's unrealisitic that Carrick can cover the whole midfield in a counter. And that will be the case regardless of whether its Scholes or not because we don't have another proper central midfielder bar Fletcher.
Clev and Ando's legs make them better trackers no doubt and they're stronger defending a counter cause of this but when we're organized they're quite prone to getting attracted to the ball and lose their tactical position, something Scholes doesn't to the same extent. When we're more organized, as a combo they're quite good as in terms of tactical positioning Scholes has a better understanding than Clev/Andol, which is reasonable given his experience.
But either way in a wide system there will be space to exploit as most other teams attack centrally and we're typically only playing with 1 midfielder who has a proper understanding of a deeper role. Also I'm not sure what either of them could have realistically done for the second goal but I can't remember it fully.
But going back to the attack, their sloppyness/lack or urgency in the first half allowed Villa in to the game and gave them confidence. Us having to go a goal down is nothing new atm, regardless of if Scholes/Giggs etc are playing, and that will always cause problems, because most the times other teams are stopped by their fear that if they attack you, they'll get opened up on the counter, but if they see that our attack is simply not doing it, it gives them confidence to have a go and it causes problems. If the attackers had started the way they finished we would have probably killed the game after half an hour.