Nobody build a team around anyone. It's a myth.
Does anyone really believe when looking to sign a striker the club firstly considered what would suit Bruno?
8
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 48
- Goals
- 15
- Assists
- 13
- Yellow cards
- 12
- Status
Nobody build a team around anyone. It's a myth.
Does anyone really believe when looking to sign a striker the club firstly considered what would suit Bruno?
Depends on situation, if he would have been putting up numbers like he did his first full season with us and they would be in middle of rebuild - most likely. Although none of those teams really "build a team" on one player, unless he is Messi/Ronaldo level.
They wouldn't need to. He'd be a part of a more functioning collective, which means that he wouldn't be the only one creating chances. For these teams I think his chance creation would go down, but he'd double his assists and also score a lot more goals.
Why should anyone do that? And are we doing that?
The Oracle has spoken!
Somehow, he'd improve his finishing to the level he would score a lot more goals, and double his assists to De Bruyne level despite not having the game revolved around him as much.
I don't think you understand why Arsenal create as much as they do. A big part of that is precisely because of a player like Ødegaard who is the exact opposite of Bruno in terms of a number 10. Replacing him with Bruno would lead to the same issues that we have.
The reason why Arsenal create is because they have one of the best RWs in the world in Saka, and productive Forwards to chose from for their striker position in Jesus and Trossard. They have a very forward thinking LB in Zinchenko. We only have Rashford who has a similar play style as Martinelli (though more productive).
Your obsession with Bruno not being De Bruyne is misguided - De Bruyne is one of the best attacking midfielders to ever play the game and there's not an attacking midfielder that exists in the world that's on his level.
Rather than focus on Bruno what we need to focus on is fixing the non productive positions in our squad - a RW, a striker (hopefully Hojlund), a productive CM (hopefully Amrabat, definitely not Mount), possibly a younger DM backup for Casemiro. Get those in and the team would create more simply because our attacking threats wouldnt be just Rashford and Bruno.
He wouldn't improve his finishing, but he would probably be at the end of more chances. Which in return would lead to more goals, because Bruno is not a bad finisher. And his number of assists would double because he'd have better attackers finishing his chances.
But I'm tired of replying to you now. You seem to believe that football can only be played one certain way and there is no changing your mind on that. I still maintain that you sound 100% like the people who claimed that Haaland was making City worse for a really long time last season. Just switch out "Haaland" with "Bruno", "goal scorer" with "chance creator" and "City" with "United", and it's practically the same posts.
And you seem to forget that there isn't a single team in the world that has been elite that has used a player like Bruno as part of their midfield. I'm not saying there is only one way to play football, but to win major trophies with a player like him is just not going to happen.
It really is a silly argument you're trying to make regarding Haaland. Haaland is a world class striker who has broken record after record and just won the treble in his first season for City at the age of 22. Bruno is just not close to being on the same level, and the fact you compare them as if they're comparable in this argument is just weird.
I'm not sure if this is what you're saying, but are you seriously giving more credit to Trossard and Zinchenko than Ødegaard? Ødegaard is their most important player, arguably ahead of Saka, and he is the one that allows Saka to be as productive as he is. Contrary to Bruno, Ødegaard has the calmness, press resistance and technique to hold the ball when required instead of mindlessly giving it away the moment he gets pressed. He can dribble, link up excellently and exploits space much better than Bruno. If we switched Bruno with Ødegaard, you'd see a massive improvement in our play, and Arsenal would do worse.
Payet spent a lot of time wide didnt he? At least in England he was playing from the wing. You dont expect a wide player to exert that much influence controlling things.
When I watched De Bruyne for Wolfsburg and Belgium before he moves to City he would be wasteful going for through balls all the time. At City he seemed to get the balance right straight away. He had 74.5% pass accuracy his last season in Germany, and in the premier league he had 1 season at 78.3% and every other season he's been 80% or more
I never said anything about world class. I wouldn't describe Bruno as world class, but if someone came on here and insisted that Bruno Fernandes was world class I wouldn't flog him for it as I would if the claim were made about say, Fred.
The only player on the United squad I would say is pretty clearly world class is Luke Shaw.
A matter of opinion, but I see nothing in Antony's game to suggest that we're weaker without him than with him. His end product is virtually zero. We can all see the athleticism and solid street football skills, but his end product is shocking for a player with his athleticism and skill. Not that I've given up no him, but several weeks ago I was calling out for Pellistri to get the start while Antony gets himself sorted out on the pitch. I do not opine on off-pitch issues unless the evidence of overwhelming, such as Suarez racially abusing Evra.
EDIT: Varane and Casemiro were of course world class at the peak, but they are both past peak now. Rashford isn't there. Martinez is on his way. Way too early to form an opinion on Garnacho and Hojlund, but the potential is there.
Payet was moved wide because he couldn't operate centrally with any sort of consistency when it came to the basic of being a 10, wide you can hide his flaws and focus on his strengths. As for De Bruyne, you could say that they are a similar type of player but there are two differences, De Bruyne is more consistent against top opposition, is better at controlling a situation through carries, his positioning his better whcih makes him an integral part of City's ball movement schemes. But it's true that he is a high risk player, he tries passes that shouldn't be tried and misses a fair amount of them.
Bruno like the others needs a system that protect him from himself but because you can't trust his floor, it's questionable if it's worth it. And if you try it, it won't be as a 10 because his fundamentals are not there, Bruno never mkaes things easy for his teammates, his movement duing the recycling phase his terrible, he can't carry the ball well, and he often struggles to keep possession under pressure.
Last edited:
[
Ok
The club will be foolish not to consider it
.
Our game is built around the strengths of Rashford and Bruno, that’s no myth but a fact. Some might not like it but it’s not wrong.
True.
How is our team not built around Bruno?
No our strengths are Rashford and Bruno. Not because the team is geared that way but because they're the only two with consisten output. The others can't do it.
So which players have been bought with the criteria being: what suits Bruno?
Because that's what building a team around one player means.
Are you just trying to force an argument or you believe every statement is an attack on Bruno.
Not at all, I think its a fair question. Your argument wouldn't be an attack on Bruno anyway. He doesn't decide who is bought and how the team is set up does he.
If you think the team has been built around Bruno, explain how. Tell us which players have been bought with the priority being how well they compliment Bruno.
For example, has Hojlund been bought primarily because he suits Bruno? Or because the manager thinks he's a good player? Which of those was top of the list for ETH do you think? Easy question to answer I'd say.
It's easy to chuck out these statements, like teams being built around one player. But have a stab at explaining how that works in reality.
Is anyone outside the United fan base rating Bruno? I would not expect other top teams to want him given the way he does not demonstrate any of the leadership skills required from a senior player. Of course he has quality, he has shown that on numerous occasions, but is this guy someone who you want on your team with his poor attitude whenever something goes against him? I don't think he would start for another top team.
I’d like to think both considerations come into play in deciding what players we sign, especially when looking at a striker for us.
I'm saying Arsenal have way more better options in attack = Odegaard is able to do more with the ball. He can pass it to Saka, Jesus, Martinelli and they might make something happen. Zinchenko might make a forward pass.
Have you considered the reason Bruno plays so many risky passes, is because what else is he meant to do? Pass to Antony, who will either lose it or pass it backwards? Mount, who does nothing? Weghoust previously? The only one that does anything is Rashford, who also gets criticism for trying to beat his man and losing the ball so much.
Asking Bruno to pass sideways more isn't that hard, if he was playing with a good front 3 I'm sure he'd play it simpler. The problem is he barely got the ball in the Arsenal game and no one else was doing anything other than Rashford. I'm fine with him trying high risk passes, without it we'd have almost no edge to our attack.
Your argument is that Bruno doesn't deal well with pressure and is very wasteful, but the stats do not illustrate this. Compared to his elite peers he gets dispossessed roughly the same amount and his pass accuracy is only marginally worse. Out of 50 passes per game (which is very high involvement for an AM by the way, but I doubt you'll give him credit for that) he misplaces 11. That's roughly one pass worse than De Bruyne.
You keep going on and on about keeping possession, but I'm not sure if I would have this in my top 5 most important skills for an AM. Definitely not in my top 3!
Your argument style is identical to the Haaland critics in that other thread. I'm not saying that Bruno is as good as Haaland. I'm saying that claiming that you can't win the PL or CL with Bruno is as dumb as claiming that Haaland makes City worse. Actually, scratch that last part. It's far, far dumber.
The problem isn't that he tries risky passes. The problem is that he lacks so many important skills. He can't drive with the ball, he does not have press resistance, he can't dribble, he's not able to calm the play and hold the ball when necessary, his finishing is mediocre, his link-up play is surprisingly poor for a number 10, even though he has good moments, it's not very consistent. He doesn't operate well in tight spaces, so when players press him, it is very likely he will lose the ball or give it cheaply away, and he doesn't shield the ball well. Not particularly strong either, and falls over easily.
He is excellent when he has space, or when countering where he can hit a long ball quickly to Rashford (and hopefully Højlund forward).
What do the best AMs ever who has played for the greatest teams all have in common? Because it's not chance creating alone.
No, it's not, because Bruno hasn't won anything while Haaland made City better. Why could we not win against Sevilla in the semi final when we have much better players? Why could we not win against Villarreal in the final? We had Bruno who creates so many chances, you'd think it was impossible to lose.
Good post.
One person having an absolute mare in this thread. 
It's like a personal vendetta which has clouded any reasonable viewpoint.
It's like a personal vendetta which has clouded any reasonable viewpoint.
One person having an absolute mare in this thread.
It's like a personal vendetta which has clouded any reasonable viewpoint.
Look at your tagline. You're really not one to talk
It's not a personal vendetta because I think he's not good enough. You should ask yourself: if Bruno delivers so many good performances, why are there so many posters saying he doesn't? Surely people would be happy with him if he performed great.
I can't fathom how a United fan can be so fond of Bruno when he has not performed once in a big game. Are there any other United player who has been defended so badly despite never playing well in a big game?
Honestly, give it a rest mate, my tagline is in relation to Eurovision but you wouldn't know that yet deem it relevant to cast aspersions, which about sums your input in this thread up really.Look at your tagline. You're really not one to talk
It's not a personal vendetta because I think he's not good enough. You should ask yourself: if Bruno delivers so many good performances, why are there so many posters saying he doesn't? Surely people would be happy with him if he performed great.
I can't fathom how a United fan can be so fond of Bruno when he has not performed once in a big game. Are there any other United player who has been defended so badly despite never playing well in a big game?
It's quite clearly a personal thing as people have supplied multiple posts of evidence that Bruno is an asset to this team, but still you clutch straws and claim otherwise.
Carry on regardless though as each to their own.
I've argued why I, ultimately, don't think he is good enough. The only thing you've argued is that he's been our best player and that he creates chances, which aren't actual arguments. It doesn't really say a lot about him as a player or how we function with him as the leading force in our team. I guess our playstyle and vulnerability speaks for itself, but let's ignore that.
Can you name one team that has won major trophies with a player like Bruno Fernandes? By that I don't mean a number 10 that creates chances, but a player similar to him.
Good post.
I liken Bruno to being Uniteds TAA, although Trent actually performs in big games so maybe not.
He is obviously essential to our chance creation and as a team that has bren struggling to score is needed. However he has obvious flaws that hinders parts of our game, in his case build up and retaining possession mainly.
I think its why we have seen him moved to RW often and I actually think with Mount and Amrabat coming in along with the emergence of Mainoo we might see it a lot more often
Ive been a big advocate of replacing him with or adding Maddison to the squad.
Whilst there is alot of criticism of Fernandes. We should also acknowledge that he excels at one of the hardest things in the sport. Creating and scoring goals, hes a weapon and has created many chances for us already this season. That robona ball into the box for Rashford vs Spurs is the type of thing we want from a United player, flair and insane ability. Along with that ability he also has a very good work rate
The challenge for ETH will be to find the best way to harness that talent whilst also improving our build up and ball recycling patterns.
To be fair also to Fernandes I think playing with a CF like Hojlund can help to enhance his weapons too.
The challenge for ETH will be to find the best way to harness that talent whilst also improving our build up and ball recycling patterns.
To be fair also to Fernandes I think playing with a CF like Hojlund can help to enhance his weapons too.
How about United and Sporting with Bruno in it?
I bet domestic trophies don't count though right?
It's fine, moving goalposts is something you're good at.
I asked for major trophies, and you come up with the Primeira Liga and League Cup
Yeah, there really is no argument to be had here when you consider those major trophies.
There you go again, believing that anyone you disagree with, who doesn’t think Bruno is regularly great, is having a ‘mare’.One person having an absolute mare in this thread.
It's like a personal vendetta which has clouded any reasonable viewpoint.
What is this reasonable viewpoint?
I’m hearing the poster in question back up his opinions with detail. Explaining how he perceives Bruno’s weaknesses and the impact they have on the team.
In return all I’m reading is ‘chances created’ and comparisons with what somebody said about much better and more successful players?
As is the case most weeks Bruno starts off with his poor performance critiqued and the more days that pass since the game…the better he gets based on nothing relevant to his performance.
What?
He didn’t win the league in Portugal. He won two league cups and a Portuguese cup.I asked for major trophies, and you come up with the Primeira Liga and League Cup
Yeah, there really is no argument to be had here when you consider those major trophies.
They won the league, and more trophies,once Bruno left.
I've criticised his wastefulness, I thought the complaints about him moaning were stupid.
But vs Arsenal it was getting on my nerves. Threw himself to the ground, refused to track back multiple times since he was complaining. On more expected lines in a big away game, he mostly wasn't good with the ball either. Eriksen created more with his passing, and Rashford provided the cutting edge
Overall a really really poor performance.
In preseason he was spamming a lot of insane passes, like a fifa cheat code, but other than flashes it's not been the case during the season.
But vs Arsenal it was getting on my nerves. Threw himself to the ground, refused to track back multiple times since he was complaining. On more expected lines in a big away game, he mostly wasn't good with the ball either. Eriksen created more with his passing, and Rashford provided the cutting edge
Overall a really really poor performance.
In preseason he was spamming a lot of insane passes, like a fifa cheat code, but other than flashes it's not been the case during the season.
I did not know that. That makes it much worse, but it also makes sense. Yet to some, he's our saviour.
- Status