Alas poor Carrick...WTF has happened?

Not many midfielders in the world can do what Carrick did today with only one partner in the centre.
 
Michael Carrick's high pass mark spoilt by Manchester United finishing

Midfielder Carrick answered any doubts about his importance to the league leaders with a commanding performance at Swansea

In this fixture last season, Michael Carrick made his return to Manchester United's starting line-up. Sir Alex Ferguson had been building a midfield without him – the emergence of Tom Cleverley, along with some decent performances from Anderson and Darren Fletcher, suggested that Ferguson desired a more mobile, fluid midfield. Carrick had become accustomed to warming the bench.

But that match, a 1-0 United win, was perfect for his return. Swansea's preference for short passing created a patient match based around technical rather than physical qualities, and Carrick was outstanding. Since then, of United's 43 Premier League fixtures, he has started 42, and finished 40.

His return to the Liberty Stadium was among Carrick's finest passing performances since his reintegration despite United dropping two points because of wasteful finishing.

There are two major criticisms of Carrick. The first is his inability to perform well under physical pressure, a concern that has been exaggerated following United's two Champions League final defeats to Barcelona, when he was pressed relentlessly by Pep Guardiola's midfielders. Nevertheless, it's certainly an area of weakness, which makes it surprising opponents don't keep him permanently occupied. At the start of this game, Swansea's most advanced midfielder, Jonathan de Guzmán, seemed to be staying close to Carrick and leaving Cleverley free; but the longer the game went on, the less obvious his marking was, and the more freedom Carrick enjoyed. He played 93 passes – 20 more than any other player on the pitch – and misplaced only six.

Which brings us to the second criticism: that Carrick's passing is sideways and unambitious, inflating his pass completion statistics while harming United's tempo. But Carrick's performance here was a fine riposte; rather than easy passes into wide areas, he continually hit the ball forward.

The key to that positivity was the movement and positioning of the United attackers, which offered three forward passing options. First, Ashley Young sensed the Swansea right-back Dwight Tiendalli was sticking very tight to him, so drifted inside from the left into dangerous central positions. Second, Wayne Rooney wasn't instructed to help out in the midfield zone, and instead remained between the lines, wandering from side to side into pockets of space. Third, Robin van Persie's history as a No10 means he naturally comes towards the ball, trying to drag defenders out of position and link play. Never before has Ferguson possessed a strike partnership so determined to receive short balls in to feet.

Almost all United's good attacking play stemmed from Carrick. There was the incisive, drilled pass towards the feet of Young that brought a fine save out of Michel Vorm and won the corner for United's opener, and the lofted, left-footed pass into the channel for Van Persie, which resulted in a good chance for the substitute Javier Hernández.

Unfortunately, Rooney had his poorest game of the season, Van Persie's first touch was unusually wayward, and Young's movement was superior to his finishing. Those three can hardly complain of a lack of service – they had 15 shots between them, and frequently received the ball in promising situations. Their end product won't be so disappointing again this season – with Carrick on the ball and clear forward passes available, United are a consistent attacking threat.
Click to expand...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/dec/23/michael-carrick-manchester-united-tactics
 
The Sawnsea game is a perfect example of what's been my argument for the last two years, that he's much more capable than what he often shows us.

When he's off form the apologists come out in force, claiming that it's not his game to offer anything offensively, that he's only there to sweep up and recycle session.

If you set your expectation levels so low you'll always be happy with him. I've always maintained that he's our best passer(outside of Scholes) so why only have him at the start point of our attacks? With his ability he has to be affecting the play higher up the pitch, not just the area directly in front of the centre backs. He showed against Swansea that he can do this and put in a defensive shift.
 
There are times though when he's just putting in a decent shift where he makes good passes through the middle too feet, not as expansive and wide ranging as the ones today but still useful passes that get it from our half to deep in the other half at say Rooney's feet, that often don't get credited. He definitely plays within himself alot but at the same time a lot of his passes seem to go unacknowledged which is probably highlighted by the perception of him as a sideways passer when he is amongst the highest forward passers in the league.

Also I think it does make a big difference for him having people moving in the front 4. He doesn't quite have the range to hit the pin point balls out wide like scholes can, but if players move he can find them very well in space. Too often we can be very static in the attack.
 
Ash_G said:
There are times though when he's just putting in a decent shift where he makes good passes through the middle too feet, not as expansive and wide ranging as the ones today but still useful passes that get it from our half to deep in the other half at say Rooney's feet, that often don't get credited. He definitely plays within himself alot but at the same time a lot of his passes seem to go unacknowledged which is probably highlighted by the perception of him as a sideways passer when he is amongst the highest forward passers in the league.

Also I think it does make a big difference for him having people moving in the front 4. He doesn't quite have the range to hit the pin point balls out wide like scholes can, but if players move he can find them very well in space. Too often we can be very static in the attack.
Click to expand...

It's an increasing trend with Carrick though to excuse him when he has a bad game, it's either the tactics or who's playing next to him that's to blame. He can do no wrong sometimes.

His passing is brilliant at times and he should show it off more often, everything is in place for him to do so, I reckon he needs to stay aggressive and avoid his natural passive traits.
 
MrMojo said:
The Sawnsea game is a perfect example of what's been my argument for the last two years, that he's much more capable than what he often shows us.

When he's off form the apologists come out in force, claiming that it's not his game to offer anything offensively, that he's only there to sweep up and recycle session.

If you set your expectation levels so low you'll always be happy with him. I've always maintained that he's our best passer(outside of Scholes) so why only have him at the start point of our attacks? With his ability he has to be affecting the play higher up the pitch, not just the area directly in front of the centre backs. He showed against Swansea that he can do this and put in a defensive shift.
Click to expand...
This is what I feel as well.

I think he too easily gets away with not imposing himself on games, being neat and tidy, doing the bare minimum. He's very rarely the worst player on the pitch, but it's even rarer for him to be the best.

It's a shame because I think the only real problem is himself in regards to that.
 
NinjaFletch said:
This is what I feel as well.

I think he too easily gets away with not imposing himself on games, being neat and tidy, doing the bare minimum. He's very rarely the worst player on the pitch, but it's even rarer for him to be the best.

It's a shame because I think the only real problem is himself in regards to that.
Click to expand...

Agree, the bar as been lowered for Carrick, you see it in the reaction to the Swansea game, I thought he payed well, plenty react as if they've never quite seen a midfielder do that before.

We dominate pisession in most games, we nearly always play inferior teams, the movement in front is there, he doesn't need to just be a defensive midfielder.
 
MrMojo said:
It's an increasing trend with Carrick though to excuse him when he has a bad game, it's either the tactics or who's playing next to him that's to blame. He can do no wrong sometimes.

His passing is brilliant at times and he should show it off more often, everything is in place for him to do so, I reckon he needs to stay aggressive and avoid his natural passive traits.
Click to expand...

But a lot of the time these things do contribute. I agree completely that Carrick can play within himself and its very frustrating as although he might do his role fine you know he could do so much more, particularly from an England stand point. But I think he has been hindered by his midfield partners and the way we've set up. And as you said it seems to be more a mental block on his part.

But like I said I do think there are other factors. I think there's been a clear switch in the way we've attacked over the past few weeks with Young increasingly offering more link up coming inside, and both rooney and rvp trying to link up with midfielders and playing off each other. This gives the likes of carrick different options as typically with the two wingers sticking to their flanks and the strikers playing high the choice of passes is limited.

Likewise having a partner pulling away midfielders and not allowing them to press too high, creates space for Carrick to pick out these passes.
 
Cleverly did quite a bit of defensive work today, more defensive work than a midfielder partnering Carrick has done in a while IMO(particularly Scholes). Perhaps that gives Carrick more freedom to get forward a bit more?

It's well known that Carrick loves a partner that loves to run around and hassle the opposition. I think that he feels content beside Cleverly for that, among a few other reasons.
 
Ash_G said:
But a lot of the time these things do contribute. I agree completely that Carrick can play within himself and its very frustrating as although he might do his role fine you know he could do so much more, particularly from an England stand point. But I think he has been hindered by his midfield partners and the way we've set up. And as you said it seems to be more a mental block on his part.

But like I said I do think there are other factors. I think there's been a clear switch in the way we've attacked over the past few weeks with Young increasingly offering more link up coming inside, and both rooney and rvp trying to link up with midfielders and playing off each other. This gives the likes of carrick different options as typically with the two wingers sticking to their flanks and the strikers playing high the choice of passes is limited.

Likewise having a partner pulling away midfielders and not allowing them to press too high, creates space for Carrick to pick out these passes.
Click to expand...

I just think they're all playing a bit better rather than any collective tactical change. The same goes for Carrick.
 
MrMojo said:
I just think they're all playing a bit better rather than any collective tactical change. The same goes for Carrick.
Click to expand...

Maybe, I'm not sure, Young definitely is drifting more than he was, rvp/rooney though is probably more them than tactics. But these little things make a lot of differences though.
 
I think people forget that you can't do it on your own. If you've ever played midfield, you'll know that if your partner doesn't help out you can feel pretty hopeless no matter how hard you chase. Having Cleverley in there closing down helps him a lot.

In simple terms, imagine the training game of piggy in the middle with 1 vs 4, there's always a free man no matter which spare man you pick up. You can work as hard as you like but you look like a twat running around trying to cover space.

Have a partner helping you, with one closing down and one cutting off the angles and all of a sudden you look a lot better.


That's a very simplified version of Carricks problem in terms of imposing himself on the game. Alongside other midfielders he hasn't had that support defensively and I think he's opted to play it safe and cover space and angles rather than chase around. With Cleverley he has someone who covers a lot of space and cuts out a lot of angles and it allows him to close down more which in turn makes him impose himself on the game more.
 
Like I say, he's got a set of pre ordered excuses, as displayed above.

He can be aggressive in his passing no matter who he's next to.
 
Pexbo said:
I think people forget that you can't do it on your own. If you've ever played midfield, you'll know that if your partner doesn't help out you can feel pretty hopeless no matter how hard you chase. Having Cleverley in there closing down helps him a lot.

In simple terms, imagine the training game of piggy in the middle with 1 vs 4, there's always a free man no matter which spare man you pick up. You can work as hard as you like but you look like a twat running around trying to cover space.

Have a partner helping you, with one closing down and one cutting off the angles and all of a sudden you look a lot better.


That's a very simplified version of Carricks problem in terms of imposing himself on the game. Alongside other midfielders he hasn't had that support defensively and I think he's opted to play it safe and cover space and angles rather than chase around. With Cleverley he has someone who covers a lot of space and cuts out a lot of angles and it allows him to close down more which in turn makes him impose himself on the game more.
Click to expand...

But that doesn't really explain why he's struggled to impose himself in an attacking sense, which has been as true with Cleverley as his partner as anyone else.

I think it's really simple tbh, I imagine he's the most quiet person in the dressing room (possibly tied with Evans). I think he's a polite, unassuming and nice bloke who wouldn't say boo to a goose and I think it comes across on the football pitch too much.

If it were he not Van Persie that had the ball smashed against his head he would probably have spent the next 20 seconds apologising to the ball rather than doing what RVP did and I think that's what really limits him as a player.

He's technically excellent, but he'd be far more important for us if he found a personality and started imposing it on games.
 
Watching Carrick play today was like a fecking fairytale.

Top quality performance, and won that deserved to be on a winning side.
 
Good performance from both him and Cleverley. They controlled the match well, particularly in the second half and really it was only the consistently rubbish final balls to each other by our strikers and wingers that meant we didn't win today.

I understand we need to rotate, but I'm not sure I want to see the cleverley/carrick partnership broken up to much over the next month even with the congestion in fixtures. They are really starting to gel now and this can only strengthen the team long term.
 
i'm with Mojo. Though carrick had a great game but at the same time, I do think a fair amount of fans have lowered the bar when it comes to Carrick. The same is done for some of our other players too. not a big deal but I think it leads to some overrating when assessing how good our players really are.
 
SSN just said he's played more forward passes than anyone in the League this year.

Can only pass sideways... :wenger:
 
Carrick finally getting some mainstream media love! Which is a bit strange as yesterday aside, I don't think that he has been close to his level of last season.
 
Enjoyed his performance yesterday, playing with Cleverley allows him to be more attacking and I think RVP due to him being so good with back to goal hold up play, gives Carrick an easy forward pass option.
 
Not sure what the consensus in this thread is about the Swansea game? He was very, very good in my opinion. In fact it was a good performance barring some terrible finishing, it certainly hasn't got me down and it was hardly a gimme 3 pointer away to Swansea anyway.
 
MrMojo said:
Like I say, he's got a set of pre ordered excuses, as displayed above.

He can be aggressive in his passing no matter who he's next to.
Click to expand...

When you say "aggressive in his passing" what are you actually implying?

It's quite a loose term.
 
NinjaFletch said:
But that doesn't really explain why he's struggled to impose himself in an attacking sense, which has been as true with Cleverley as his partner as anyone else.

I think it's really simple tbh, I imagine he's the most quiet person in the dressing room (possibly tied with Evans). I think he's a polite, unassuming and nice bloke who wouldn't say boo to a goose and I think it comes across on the football pitch too much.

If it were he not Van Persie that had the ball smashed against his head he would probably have spent the next 20 seconds apologising to the ball rather than doing what RVP did and I think that's what really limits him as a player.

He's technically excellent, but he'd be far more important for us if he found a personality and started imposing it on games.
Click to expand...

Of course he imposes himself in an attacking sense....you don't have to be operating in the final third to influence attacking play. Look how many times he played the ball into the space between the lines yesterday, who was there...Wayne Rooney, Van Persie, Ashley Young. He did it time and time again. Someone just posted that he has played more forward passes than anyone else in the league this year.

Regarding personality I would suggest the opposite. It's his calmness and composure that allows him to play his natural game in the first place.
 
Comsmit said:
When you say "aggressive in his passing" what are you actually implying?

It's quite a loose term.
Click to expand...

I think that he was more ambitious and attacking with his passing, he also seemed to be moving the ball at a greater pace than usual.
 
Comsmit said:
Whpassesou say "aggressive in his passing" what are you actually implying?

It's quite a loose term.
Click to expand...

it means make the kind of passes that his talent warrants. The passes that put the opposition under pressure. Those twenty yard passes that he drills to the centre forwards.
 
Would be good to see a compilation of that performance because that was one of his best performances for years, top drawer
 
If you're looking for a laugh;

Bleacher Report ratings

Michael Carrick: 5

There are few players in the United squad who divide opinion like Michael Carrick. Some say he's an understated genius, others that he rarely contributes anything meaningful to the cause.

On Sunday, he started brightly, setting Ashley Young up with a stunning through ball that led to the opening goal. But as the game wore on, his passing became increasingly lackadaisical, while his decision-making occasionally bordered on atrocious.
Click to expand...

Even better watching the guy defend it in the comments.
 
Idiot, and his comment on giggs is even funnier.
 
He was a monster against Swansea, I wish he performed like that every game.
 
The comments make me want to weep; I'll avoid looking at articles from there in the future.
 
100 said:
The comments make me want to weep; I'll avoid looking at articles from there in the future.
Click to expand...

Indeed, that entire mob doesn't have the slightest understanding of anything football related among them. The entire site is shocking and makes you feel like you're living on a different plane of existence.
 
If anyone thinks that Carrick was anything less then brilliant against Swansea... then that person is both a) an idiot and b) not worth listening to about anything, ever.

Here's hoping to similar levels of excellence today.
 
Was bloody Hernandez that stole the ball of Smalling and then decided to smash it to Carrick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.