I never believe the hype on here until I've watched them in the PL myself.
Amrabat - Man United Player FINALLY - #4 confirmed
- Thread starter IrishRedDevil
- Start date
Hmmm....still on the fence but the lack of game time even when others are injured or been shit, hes gone back in the summer....
I thought he would be better than deccy rice 
on the fence? Lots of pundits said he was slow and not good enough for Premier league. He's slow, also lacks the physicality for the Premier league. Get rid. Play youth.
Impossible to judge players at mo, even those that I know arent shit. This is not the player I watched against West Ham in the final....
That player would be Martinez. He'll be back soon. Let's see if our play will improve.
He's a fine signing, let's be honest he's a loan who cost £8.5m and is backup DM + filled in at LB, generally is an ok squad player.
We have just been unlucky with injuries, Casemiro would start ahead of him most games and he's perfectly fine as a sub this season. We won't be making him permanent.
We have just been unlucky with injuries, Casemiro would start ahead of him most games and he's perfectly fine as a sub this season. We won't be making him permanent.
I really took to him. He was obviously no Scholes/Carrick/Keane level player, but I can’t see why he wasn’t kept considering we had no world class midfielder lined up. I’d feel much happier with him in our midfield 2 this season
He’s shit. I didn’t want him but would have been happy to have been proven wrong. I’m not saying sorry or keeping quiet for being right. The only time he’s looked half decent was the first couple of games where we played him as a roving left back. If we’re going to keep him for the rest of the season due to paying a fee for the full 12 months, he can have Reguilons minutes.
He was a loan signing because we needed men in midfield, and couldn't afford to buy literally anyone.
He has had some good games and some bad, exactly what you'd expect for a loan signing.
Why were Fiorentina ok with loaning him out with a view to a transfer? Was it just that by PL club standards they don't have as much cash and need to sell or even loan with the potential of a sale, bringing in some decent money for them?
They took Arthur Melo on loan from Juve in the same sort of position before this deal happned, I wonder if they just thought he was an upgrade and were ok with everything as a result of that?
Who knows! They're having a better Serie A campaign so far without Amrabat than they did last.
They took Arthur Melo on loan from Juve in the same sort of position before this deal happned, I wonder if they just thought he was an upgrade and were ok with everything as a result of that?
Who knows! They're having a better Serie A campaign so far without Amrabat than they did last.
Last edited:
Amazing to remember he played for Pool
It might be Martinez, I agree. But the idea to have Dalot to invert, or Shaw, makes sense to a degree as well. So I wouldn't see it as set in stone.
----
I just looked up and Fiorentina is currently in 4th place in Serie A. Last year they ended in 8th, which was about "fair" based on their numbers (goals, goals conceded, xG, xGA, xPTS), this year they seem to seriously overperform their numbers (the numbers have them again around midtable). So it looks like they haven't really gone down a level or a level up.
We were linked with him all summer. if we had sold Maguire or McT he may well have been bought outright. Stop with the excuses, another ex Dutch league player who played for at least 3 clubs there. Don't tell me ETH didnt want him
Amrabat is par for this squad, at the moment.
He provides a defensive -mid option, can operate at full back, looks a bit vulnerable when he gets caught up field, but he is doing a 'utility-player' job in the squad that ETH now has available . As players return his utility value will reduce and if we keep him ETH needs to be developing a role for a physically strong player, because a number of our players now on display can get blown over by a puff of wind.
Most all he seems to want to play and given the tepid performances of some of our 'established' players recently, that is a big plus!
He provides a defensive -mid option, can operate at full back, looks a bit vulnerable when he gets caught up field, but he is doing a 'utility-player' job in the squad that ETH now has available . As players return his utility value will reduce and if we keep him ETH needs to be developing a role for a physically strong player, because a number of our players now on display can get blown over by a puff of wind.
Most all he seems to want to play and given the tepid performances of some of our 'established' players recently, that is a big plus!
Yeah that's pretty much what I thought as well. Like I said before, he is just too slow and has no stand out abilities so IMO makes little sense to keep him as he doesn't solve any of our many issues. I think his passing is the biggest disappointment - but I always thought on all those clips he only made easy passes, but there's just no space for that here.
I am ok with keeping him as a squad player but I think even for that prive we can do better. He's a senior player with low resale value if we sign him on a 4 year deal so I don't think he'll stay.
It is really puzzling why ETH doesn't seem keen on playing him though. He always seems to find excuses to go with someone else. This has also collided with Eric's and McTominay bromance so maybe that's the reason.
So it's high risk - low reward, isn't it? Genius
Amrabat spent all summer making it clear he wanted the move to United, and on the last day of the transfer window even skipped training trying to force the move. In the end it seemed like Fiorentina were just trying to force as much money as they could out of a loan move, since that's the only thing United wanted/could do.
I think for a team that is synced and knows what to do it's medium risk high reward tactics. But for a team like ours (low defensive line, and attacking formation out of sync in pressing + indivuduals not suited to press) it's high risk low reward. What really makes me question ETH - what did he really expect to happen.
Based on my limited knowledge of him I think Sabitzer would be better fit in what we are trying to do than McTominay, more involved in build up, as well as being a willing presser, which may have given them more impetus to sell the latter.
Yeah and I agree, we needed DM cover regardless. That was always going to be a need given Casemiro's age and the necessity to build a succession plan for him. We got shafted by Mainoo and Casemiro being injured for a similar stretch of the season this year, which is unfortunate.
But then Sabitzer had his own injury concerns so who knows? It was just something I was wondering when I saw people bring up Sabitzer, who to me seemed a better fit for what we are trying to do now than Amrabat, who, aside from a couple of performances, just looks slow.
Precisely. Genius.
We were linked with him because he was supposed to be dirt cheap. We then signed him on loan when we couldn't afford his upped price tag. Of course Ten Hag wanted him, that doesn't mean he thought he was going to be Roy Keane reincarnate.
Do you think we would have signed him as a starting player if we had the money and option to sign a more expensive DM?
I do. In the world of ETH, if we had three times the money, we'd just pay three times more for Amrabat. Like what we did with Antony. And Hojlund.
Is it really that hard to comprehend that the manager does not control our finances and purchase prices for players?
No, you don't understand how it works. If the manager is stubborn and insists on someone, you cannot just go and buy him a random player he doesn't want. You can do one thing: sack him. And it is time we do this.
One is the tactics, the other is the execution. If you go for a Lamborghini and then crash it in the first crossing, doesn't mean Lamborghini is a bad car. It isn't just a failure of ETH, but also from the players. That being said, it certainly raises some doubts that ETH still isn't either going full survival (back to last years tactics) or full revolution (press like shit and only players that do well in tight spaces). Right now, he seems to try to balance those things but fails on both ends.
Come on guys, that is harsh. I was on the forefront of criticizing this huge outlay for Antony but it isn't just ETH. He probably told the club that he wanted a player like Antony for the right wing and as the club wasn't able to provide a scouting list with alternatives, it was only Antony to go for. And ETH shouldn't be the one to count the pennies anyway. He probably asked if it was possible and our higher up numpties told him sure.
Young promising strikers do cost a lot, at least the ones with the relative low risks. Who were the alternatives for striker - only no names? At least as long as you didn't expected us to go 100 million plus.
I think, it is a pretty majority position these days that recruitment failed. And even with ETH, it still seems to not have turned the corner yet. But lets not put that on ETH alone.
Problem with this scenario: It originates completely in your fantasy at this point. You KNOW nothing of that, I'd even go as far as You cannot know about this anyway. The stubborn and insisting storyline is one of many, and it just feels as likely as it does to you, because you are frustrated with him and want him gone. Thats fine. But lets not invent stories to make you feel more right.
Nope, he didn't tell the club "he wanted a player like Antony". He told the club he wanted Antony. Period. That's why we paid so much for him.
Really, what does "like Antony" mean? A useless player that can't do anything well?
I think his intention is for Dalot or Shaw to push into that midfield position when in possession, leaving a 3 at the back of the 2 CBs and the remaining FB.
I still dont think I like it though, as our two most effective wide players (Garnacho and Rashford) thrive on 1 on 1 situations, which are mainly created by attacking FBs overlapping and taking a player away. The FBs are typically too deep in this shape, leaving the wingers wide and isolated. This why the shape suits City who have technical players out wide (Grealish, foden, etc) who are just as capable in intricate build up as they are in 1 on 1 situations. It also congests central attacking areas which I dont think suits Bruno, who needs space to operate.
I'd much rather see us play a traditional double pivot midfield which can defensively cover wide areas and protect the centre halves, freeing up the FBs to get forward and provide width, which in turn allows Garnacho and Rashord to play in the channels, and gives Bruno his preferred free role at 10.
Nope, it is not just my opinion. I have read enough to know that this is how it worked for ETH in Man Utd. Antony, De Jong, Onana, etc. It is the same story over and over. De Jong did not want to come and ETH insisted for months. Multiple stories about the fact that he wouldn't agree to become Man Utd manager if he didn't have control over transfers. The fact that he brought in mostly players that he knew before or had the same agent as him, and so on. ETH wanted the power. And he misused the power because he is not very capable.
https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_...g-says-taken-man-united-job-control-transfers
Erik ten Hag says he wouldn't have taken Man United job without 'control' over transfers
Thought he was better as an inverted left back.
ST
LW CM CAM RW
LB (Amrabat) CM
LCB RCB RB
GK
LW CM CAM RW
LB (Amrabat) CM
LCB RCB RB
GK
It’s such a shame that he’s turned out to be subpar, he was brilliant in our only good performance this season (the league cup win against Crystal Palace)
You have zero clue whether Ten Hag was 'stubborn' about any signing, he identifies targets with the club and they go after them.
It's up to the club to have a good setup in place, to ensure you aren't leaving a manager with 1 viable option at a ridiculously inflated price in the final days of a transfer window.
No new manager trying to make it at a club turns down a player in the last minute for no replacement.
How anyone could watch how our club has operated in the transfer market in the last decade, through 5 different managers, and surmise that this is all Ten Hag's fault is absolutely laughable.
I still dont think you get the best out of our squad this way though. Rashford and Garnacho are too wide with minimal overlaps. They just become ineffective. It also congests the space where Bruno operates best. I'd still like to see us play an attacking 4231, which in possession looks something like:
LFW --- 9 --- RFW
LB ------ 10 ------- RB
CM -------- CM
CB --- CB
GK
I think we have loads of decent options for those CM roles (Amrabat, Casemiro, Eriksen, Mainoo) who can shunt across and cover wide area on breaks, leaving their partner to hold the centre groundLB ------ 10 ------- RB
CM -------- CM
CB --- CB
GK
Isn't it more common for just one of the fullbacks going up?
Tell that to the best Liverpool teams of the last 6 years or so.
Or the city teams before Pep decided to go with two inverted wingbacks.
Is he still present, or has he headed off to AFCON? If that's the case, will he participate in any more matches for United? No further matches in Europe, where he managed decently; Casimero is set to return soon, and Mainoo has firmly established his position. Another peculiar signing, indeed.
ETH is definitly to blame for that.
Were there no alternatives? If he wanted a young promising winger, we could've gone for Olise (he was 19 back then).
We also had Sancho, Pellistri and Amad on our books.
The ONLY explanation for this transfer is that ETH wanted him really, really badly.
For other "failed" transfers, the blame is even between ETH and the rest of the club officials I guess. I still don't get why we only chased Hojlund but that's another story.
Too slow, so easy to get past and a poser. Enough said!