lex talionis
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2017
- Messages
- 16,054
He was intended to succeed Fred, not Fernandes.
I have a hard time believing that, although that may be true.
He was intended to succeed Fred, not Fernandes.
His contract is already to 2026 with an option to extend by a further year. His status in the squad hasn't really changed for him to be getting a pay rise either in my opinion. I can understand a pay rise and no extension if you've gone from rotation to starter or a key player but just doesn't seem to make sense from the club's perspective.I'd be happy with 3 years. He has another strong couple of years left in the tank. No way we should be offering any 29 year old a 5 year contract.
I have a hard time believing that, although that may be true.
What's with this 'chances created' stat? Does this mean Bruno is probably wasted on us?
I need more context to judge what's going on here.I think it should give our forwards serious food for thought. So many chances wasted.
Have you not been watching our games this season? ETH has wanted to play two pressing 8s/10s every game!
Bruno and Mason do not work well together at all, which might come as a surprise to Erik but not to most of us who were puzzled as to why we spent 60m on player doesn't complement Bruno in any way.
Very creative. Doesn't change the fact, that you seemingly have no clue a) what criticize means because I haven't criticized him at all and b) you should remember that as long as you have nothing substantial to prove that Bruno knew where Mainoo was, then your take isn't better than any take around. Including mine.Someone who is alleging that one of the top creative midfielders in one of the top leagues in the world could not possibly be aware where his teammate was.
I dunno, I think I might have called it early
It isn't knowledge at all or was there any official statement or substantial hint I missed? An assumption doesn't become knowledge when enough people share the assumption. It is one of the most plausible explanations for adding Mount but the way we play now (or we try to play now), Fred would have been ideal for it. Also DVB should be ideal for it - that makes two players who could have been given a shot before bringing in Mount for a dumb price at the dumb point in time.Don't disagree but as was inferred, ETH had been planning that since last summer and Mount was indeed bought to replace Fred. It's quite common knowledge.
I need more context to judge what's going on here.
Nothing is really going on, if they got it from opta then its key passes(last pass that leads to a shot without scoring) plus assists. We have an xG of 55.1 and we scored 55 goals, those key passes are low quality.
Why do you think that is a reflection on the quality of those passes and not the quality our finishing?
Not to mention that our xG (and goals) would be a lot higher if we had more players than Bruno chipping in regularly with those key passes.
It isn't knowledge at all or was there any official statement or substantial hint I missed? An assumption doesn't become knowledge when enough people share the assumption. It is one of the most plausible explanations for adding Mount but the way we play now (or we try to play now), Fred would have been ideal for it. Also DVB should be ideal for it - that makes two players who could have been given a shot before bringing in Mount for a dumb price at the dumb point in time.
It isn't knowledge at all or was there any official statement or substantial hint I missed? An assumption doesn't become knowledge when enough people share the assumption. It is one of the most plausible explanations for adding Mount but the way we play now (or we try to play now), Fred would have been ideal for it. Also DVB should be ideal for it - that makes two players who could have been given a shot before bringing in Mount for a dumb price at the dumb point in time.
Don't disagree but as was inferred, ETH had been planning that since last summer and Mount was indeed bought to replace Fred. It's quite common knowledge.
I also believed that Mount was signed to be a better version of Fred. The hard working off the ball stuff that Fred provided, plus better quality on the ball. That was the plan anyway.Another poster replied to this point but I'm not sure it was common knowledge at the time that Mount was seen as a straight replacement for Fred nor do I event trust that analysis. In effect yes of course Fred was told to leave and Mount brought in so it's a straight swap in that sense, but they are quite different players. Fred was a tenacious ball-winner who lacked finesse with the ball, whereas Mount has finesse with the ball but in no way a ball-winner. Mount is a like-for-like attacking midfielder that replicates Bruno's strengths rather than complements Bruno's strengths. That's at least the observation that I hold.
I also believed that Mount was signed to be a better version of Fred. The hard working off the ball stuff that Fred provided, plus better quality on the ball. That was the plan anyway.
Sorry, he isn't worth 350k a week. He's a good player and stands out as our best because of the shower of shite around him. If a club came in tomorrow offering 80/90 mil, INEOS would be dumb not to take it. Again, people on here acting like the foundations of Utd would crumble if he left. It wasn't all that long ago he was also a shower of shite, constantly giving the ball away, screaming at players for mistakes he made, losing the ball more often and not.....only recently has he really upped his game and has scored some great goals. Will never judge his work rate, but lets not go overboard with the guy,.Bruno doesn't want to leave and nor should we be looking to sell him.
I've no doubt that he wants a new contract, but with the option of an extension, he's tied own here until 2027. There's no need for us to rush out and offer him further years now.
Bruno should be matching the highest earners at the club, but hopefully INEOS will never allow another wage in the same park as Varane, Casemiro and Rashford. If Bruno is demanding more money then he can go, but I think he will be satisfied with the contract he's on once we clear the overpaid players.
Another poster replied to this point but I'm not sure it was common knowledge at the time that Mount was seen as a straight replacement for Fred nor do I event trust that analysis. In effect yes of course Fred was told to leave and Mount brought in so it's a straight swap in that sense, but they are quite different players. Fred was a tenacious ball-winner who lacked finesse with the ball, whereas Mount has finesse with the ball but in no way a ball-winner. Mount is a like-for-like attacking midfielder that replicates Bruno's strengths rather than complements Bruno's strengths. That's at least the observation that I hold.
He sounds like he tried to support City but got off the wrong bus. The ludicrous posts advocating the sale of Bruno could be put beside the clowns hoping to see the club bought by an oil state. 50% percent polyester, and that’s a generous estimate. Still good to see some real supporters with love and appreciation for the remarkable talent that leads the team.You make it sound like we have cohesive team but somehow one or two players are disrupting it.
He was intended to succeed Fred, not Fernandes.
I thought it was a Bruno flick; acute but telling?Amad assisted Mainoo, Bruno didn't touch it. No one got the assist for Amad's goal as Newcastle headed the ball to him.
Give him the assist! Justice for Bruno!!
He’s a different type of player yes but ETH is under the impression that Mount is a better presser up front and would win the ball higher up the pitch.I'll have to trust you that that was the plan, but what a daft train of thought if that was the case. Mount just isn't a better version of Fred -- he's a completely different kind of midfielder. You send Fred into the minefield and take one for the team and fukk things up for the opponent who are trying to score goals on you, whereas you send Mount into the breach to create things, such as goals.
Building around him is not ideal, it would just be us settling for a standard that's not quite good enough. There's actually no need to build the team around anyone, build a system and let players contribute to it.
I agree with your point on systems. But I disagree with your point on the bolded. If we have Bruno quality players in every position and on the bench we would be competing and winning the highest honors. He wouldn't look out of place in any squad in world football.Building around him is not ideal, it would just be us settling for a standard that's not quite good enough. There's actually no need to build the team around anyone, build a system and let players contribute to it.
Laugh all you want but as far as I am aware of, it was this position that DVB played in the Ajax side that probably earned ETH the United job. Granted, he might have had a purple patch and it doesn't mean anything, but it is at least a little odd that he hasn't been given a shot at all.
I completely agree with you. If people wanted to replace Fred with Mount then my best guess is that those people didn't have any idea of what the positive thing was that Fred added to the team. It certainly wasn't on the ball stuff - it was is mobility, energy, workrate and willingness to get stuck in. No question that Mount is way better on the ball but apart from that... It has to be said, that it fits the picture of our team composition, not just decision makers, also a part of the fanbase. They are ready for the glass cannon approach - adding as many people to the team for their ability in attack or ability on the ball but failing to get the balance right for the moments where we have to actually win the ball or defend as a whole. McTominay as DM, McTominay as CM, Bruno as CM, Eriksen as CM... Doesn't make no sense. Now you see Mainoo and Amrabat who are at least average in those off the ball aspects and it is obvious how benefitial it is to the team overall. You can have prime Casemiro in there, it still wouldn't be enough to carry all the defensive load to have Mount and Bruno free to attack. Maybe if you have Kante in his prime, maybe. But probably not even that.I'll have to trust you that that was the plan, but what a daft train of thought if that was the case. Mount just isn't a better version of Fred -- he's a completely different kind of midfielder. You send Fred into the minefield and take one for the team and fukk things up for the opponent who are trying to score goals on you, whereas you send Mount into the breach to create things, such as goals.
I think this Rashford comment was in the context of Bruno celebrating a certain number of appearances or something. So the notion of him leaving doesn't really hold up.Apparently there is a comment on X from Rashford saying it's been a pleasure to share a pitch with you so X is kicking off with the "Bruno leaving" rumours..
Yes, if we had better players, we'd be a better team. Lessening Bruno's influence and importance would be the net effect, and that's a good thing.I agree with your point on systems. But I disagree with your point on the bolded. If we have Bruno quality players in every position and on the bench we would be competing and winning the highest honors. He wouldn't look out of place in any squad in world football.
Sure, but your post made it sound like he's not quite at the top standard, I disagree, he absolutely is top draw. Hes just surrounded by dross.Yes, if we had better players, we'd be a better team.