Alas poor Carrick...WTF has happened?
- Thread starter Carl
- Start date
I think he just means Carrick could play the same role, in stead of comparing them on quality. Even so, that won't happen, as Carrick's clearly a more defensive player than Fellaini, and also far more positionally disciplined, so he'll still be the holding player. They both might be deep lying midfield passers, but that's where the comparisons between Carrick and Pirlo ends.
Carrick has been the elephant in the room since at least 2006 as far as England's midfield issues are concerned.
But the really stupid thing is it's not even about big names now. Ask anyone except a scouser who is currently the better midfielder, Carrick or Gerrard (or, indeed, Carrick or Lampard) and the answer will be Carrick. So he's the right choice for the team shape and he's the better player. It really is a massive no-brainer.
Carrick can't grow a beard like Pirlo can, which is by far the most important factor here.
Firstly people overrate Carrick's passing in an attacking sense, they attribute to him qualities of imagination and a deftness of pass in the final third which doesn't exist (on rare occasions you see it, but nowhere near enough to the likes of Pirlo/Scholes etc) - he's good at passing in between the lines from a deep role and spreading the play/switching it but that is it, not enough to be given a more attacking responsibility. Secondly his ability to run with the ball under pressure is poor, and that is a quality which the likes of Pirlo/Scholes/Xavi have always had, that is why they can commit players and then find space in which to thread through balls etc.
So basically he can't be a Pirlo, not against half decent opposition anyway. That game against Roma was probably the only time ever we saw an attack minded Carrick and that is only because everyone was on form that day, it was an anomaly.
Remains a quality DM though.
What can you expect to happen with Carrick when Scholes, FREAKING PAUL SCHOLES, was overlooked for the National Team? It's mindblowing, but we should never be surprised for the stupidity.
Atleast he's fresh for United.
Where did I say anything that would make you think I am overrating him?
You saw me using Carrick and Pirlo in the same sentence, and you immediately thought I am saying he can be good as Pirlo, even though I never said that. Comparing two players by positions and roles they are playing hardly has anything to do with comparing their quality.
No I meant he can't play the Pirlo position, re-read my post... I gave two reasons why he can't operate as a Pirlo type playmaker, regardless of whether or not he'd do it better or poorer. His natural position is more of a DM with a good range of passing.
Unfortunately Lamps and Gerrard as long as they're still playing will always be considered big names. The most stupid one is Lamps as its fair enough Gerrard plays in the team. Lamps as a deeper central midfielder does not add enough to justify his inclusion at all over Carrick.
OK, now you are underrating Carrick.
You can't really take for granted that Carrick's passing in final third is poor, just because you rarely see him going forward. His passing accuracy in final third proves he isn't uncomfortable there as some people think he is. During his whole United career he is playing in system where he is the most defensive oriented midfielder, one who has no one to cover the space left behind him(except when he was playing with Fletcher, but still that was two man midfield for most of the time, and Carrick was still the one sitting deeper), while all of those players mentioned above have always had more defensive oriented player(s) playing alongside them, especially Pirlo who had proabably two players for most of his career doing that, so of course Pirlo was always more creative in final third, he wouldn't be playing there if he isn't that creative.
As for your second reason you gave, while I agree that he isn't as good with running with the ball as Pirlo, Scholes and Xavi are, that doesn't mean that he is poor at doing it. He just doesn't impose himself as those players are, he is playing more safe game than them. Yes, he rarely gets into tight areas, but sometimes he does, and I rarely see him giving the ball away. If he is poor, he would surely be dispossesed at least 5 times per game, no matter who is he playing against.
If you said he can't run games like Pirlo does, I would agree with that, but I don't agree with those reasons you gave.
feck off Woy you incompetent old coot. Let's stick with Gerrard and Lampard, it's served us so well over the years! When was the last time Wilshere actually performed at his best? Lampard is only there to shoot from 25 yards and take penalties. I completely agree with Hamann and Lineker.
I don't think the Carrick debate has much to do with Wilshere. Even when supposedly 'not hitting his best', Wilshere is more than worth a starting place. The point is that Carrick and Wilshere should absolutely be starting together. I'd pick both of them over both Lampard and Gerrard without hesitation.
Carrick's often had these moments that make you think "why the feck doesn't he do that more often?". I definitely think he plays within himself in some respects, and I was agreeing with people last year that said he could've been even better as a footballer. Still, what he does for us now is absolutely what we need; he's fantastic in his role.
It's exactly what Hodgson needs as well, the madman.
It's exactly what Hodgson needs as well, the madman.
So what???? He is still capable of it even if you are incapable of recognizing it.Firstly that is a rare occurrence, secondly it is QPR.
Isn't the whole point that with a midfield of Carrick - Wilshere, you wouldn't have to bypass the complete donkey dick midfield because they can actually make themselves available for a pass and they won't panic and hoof the ball away if they get pressured.
As well as that, you'd want Carrick simply for his defensive role in midfield given that the team would be consistently surrendering possession to the opposition by playing hoofball. The best way to stop an opponent scoring is to keep the ball, but even if the team can't keep the ball it's best to have players in midfield who won't leave the defense considerably less exposed. I don't understand how a manager in such a position can't see that mindlessly lumping the ball forward and not playing players who can keep possession isn't actually going to do a team's defence any good. It's such a silly way of going about things, particularly against a team like Ukraine.
You have to remember in this that, for whatever reason, Carrick has always underperformed for England. That said, he merits another chance over the tired midfield we have playing at the moment.
Precisely. I find it beyond ridiculous that Hodgson is opting to play the way England did.
Carrick and Pirlo play in similar roles and I think that they are equally effective in that role. The latter is more technically gifted and creative, however Carrick compensates to that by being more defensive sound than Pirlo. Its beggars belief that Carrick is not a regular English International. He would walk straight in the Italian national team and he'll probably feature more with Spain and Germany. England trio Carrick-Gerrard-Wilshere could do the trick for England.
Agree 100% Carrick who should be partnered with Wilshire and another preferably not a Gerrard (legs are gone) if you want England to do well.
True but the players picked ahead of him, like Scott Parker, didn't do any better, really. And Carrick is a far better footballer than Scott Parker. Or even Gareth Barry.
Martin Samuel wrote in his latest debate column that "surely all those successive England managers can't be wrong about Carrick?" I don't quite see why not... it's more likely than Ferguson being wrong about him all these years while winning loads of trophies.
All those successive managers has one thing in common ie they were old school managers still stuck to an outdated football system were caution is paramount. If you don't have 11 stars in the team then just play defensive football and hope that you're end up scoring a goal. Carrick is not England's best DM and not England's best AM. He's a hybrid of both roles and that role doesn't exist in Capello's and Hodgson's world.
Carrick is England's best defensive midfielder (easily).
He's a gorgeous footballer. I love every inch of him.
Cool beans, and now we'll jizz over his zidane turn v Palace and say he's as good as Zizou, Xavi et al. He's a quality DM with superb range of passing, but he's not a playmaker.. if he was, we wouldn't be playing such ugly football at times.
I can't believe some people on here think he's not that great defensively. 9 interceptions in the first half according to WhoScored.
Think how good he'll be with someone shifting play around him to make more interceptions. 20pg avg.
His passing has been poor, though.
He's been class all round today. Looking forward to seeing him with Fellaini now.
His passing has not been brilliant, but he's been immense defensively. An impressive ten interceptions and two tackles.
He's probably had a handful of poor passes, he's also put in some really good passes too.
Zinedine Carrick!
Abit harsh, some of his long passing has been fantastic especially in the second half.
Average today I thought. Certainly not the world class Carrick we've been accustomed too. Passing was off.
It was sitting at 75%, which isn't that great for him. Anyway, defensively, as I said, he was excellent: