[criticalanalysis]

He was decent on the ball but really bad off it. I'm no Mount fan but the comparisons are wildly out of context as this is a relegation battling team playing away, was poor (yes aside from scoring two goals) and sat off us giving us so much respect.

 

[CG1010]

Just signing “bodies” is a terrible strategy though. Signing similar profiles is how you deal with injuries, but instead we have 5 different midfielders that all have different weaknesses/strengths

Agreed with that and of course par for the course for our haphazard squad building since Fergie.

 

[Abraxas]

He was decent on the ball but really bad off it. I'm no Mount fan but the comparisons are wildly out of context as this is a relegation battling team playing away, was poor (yes aside from scoring two goals) and sat off us giving us so much respect.

How out of context is it really? Wolves were relegation battling last season. I wouldn't assume they're wonderful just because we conspired to make them look good on the day. They are largely the same side with a new manager walking in.

Mount would have been expected to do a lot more. The context really is that Mount doesn't seem comfortable offering the skills Eriksen did today. It wasn't just performance, it was suitability to drop in there and help with our passing which immediately came to the fore with Eriksen.

 

[IrishRedDevil]

Maddison would have been good cover for him.

 

[Andy_Cole]

Another level to Mount

 

[RedIan]

Erikson was quality today, no coincidence we controlled the game with him in midfield.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Suits much better than Mount, I thought the midfield was better today overall. Still work to do.

 

[criticalanalysis]

How out of context is it really? Wolves were relegation battling last season. I wouldn't assume they're wonderful just because we conspired to make them look good on the day. They are largely the same side with a new manager walking in.

Mount would have been expected to do a lot more. The context really is that Mount doesn't seem comfortable offering the skills Eriksen did today. It wasn't just performance, it was suitability to drop in there and help with our passing which immediately came to the fore with Eriksen.

Wolves packed the middle, played compact and had willing and capable runners left, right and centre. They ran through us because they were a genuine threat. Forest, sat back, gave us all the time in the world and were poor with their pressing and general all around attitude apart from the first and last 10 mins.

Eriksen is naturally a 'better' centre midfielder by his positioning but to use this game, where he wasn't even that great to bash Mount is odd. For the record, I have massive doubts about Mount too but it's not games like these that define who is more suitable for our midfield. My opinion is that unless there's a drastic change of tactics/improvement, neither are but that's for another discussion.

 

[M Bison]

Goes to show it’s a squad game, was written off by many at the start of the season but I thought he was excellent today.

 

[Holocene]

Goes to show it’s a squad game, was written off by many at the start of the season but I thought he was excellent today.

It's also the type of game most expect him to thrive in. Not to take away from his performance. He was good.

 

[Tony247]

Bruno plays far better when Eriksen is around. Without him Bruno perhaps assumes entire burden of creativity is on him alone.

 

[OverratedOpinion]

Thought he was good.

It's a little frustrating because watching him today you can understand why Ten Hag wanted Mount so much. When you just look purely at attributes Mount has a similar skillset and offers more legs and defensive endevour.

Difference for me is that Eriksen is just much more disciplined in staying in position.

 

[Leethal]

Thought he was good.

It's a little frustrating because watching him today you can understand why Ten Hag wanted Mount so much. When you just look purely at attributes Mount has a similar skillset and offers more legs and defensive endevour.

Difference for me is that Eriksen is just much more disciplined in staying in position.

Similar skillset, just Eriksen is miles better at what they are similar at - and it's not close.

Mount just can run more. But that's it. Nothing else is even comparable.

 

[OverratedOpinion]

Similar skillset, just Eriksen is miles better at what they are similar at - and it's not close.

No, he's not.

 

[jem]

Loved seeing him out there again. If he can get back to the level he was at pre-injury, it'll help us immensely.

 

[Sylar]

Wouldn't start him v arsenal but hes really useful for games like this.
Nice goal.

We need a profile like his in the team but one that can also move too off the ball

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

No, he's not.

Eriksen is slightly past his peak at this stage but Mount has never shown anything in his career to suggest he's a player equal to Eriksen's best. Just depends on how much you think Eriksen has declined but he's a higher level of player.

 

[Abraxas]

Wolves packed the middle, played compact and had willing and capable runners left, right and centre. They ran through us because they were a genuine threat. Forest, sat back, gave us all the time in the world and were poor with their pressing and general all around attitude apart from the first and last 10 mins.

Eriksen is naturally a 'better' centre midfielder by his positioning but to use this game, where he wasn't even that great to bash Mount is odd. For the record, I have massive doubts about Mount too but it's not games like these that define who is more suitable for our midfield. My opinion is that unless there's a drastic change of tactics/improvement, neither are but that's for another discussion.

I agree, Wolves were far better on the day and you'd expect them to have a reasonable season with some of the talent they have and they probably underperformed at times last season whereas Forest are destined for trouble. But it's still a home fixture against Wolverhampton Wanderers, you would still expect a Man United team to get a grip on things and ultimately there is absolutely no reason not to perform in such a fixture. Mount wasn't the only one by any means but nor did it help that our midfield was so open with him not having the game intelligence to drop in and help in any respect, not defensively and not in the build up phases. He wasn't responsible for the whole team structure but he was certainly an element within that as a key part of midfield.

Eriksen wasn't "great" but it was still a..6.5, maybe 7 type of performance. You say it's not games like today that will define who is suitable, but games like today are meat and potatoes. That's what we built around last season, solid home form. There are a fair number of teams that are only slightly better than Forest and at home we have to dominate. If we have players putting in stinkers like Mount did with no positional sense it doesn't help.

Let's see how Mount adjusts when he returns (this injury is very frustrating for building him into this team) - but at the moment I wouldn't put anything on him being the better option and it's not just based on a few games. It's based on his profile as a player and the fact Eriksen has real quality within the skills he does have.

 

[Matt851]

Thought he was good.

It's a little frustrating because watching him today you can understand why Ten Hag wanted Mount so much. When you just look purely at attributes Mount has a similar skillset and offers more legs and defensive endevour.

Difference for me is that Eriksen is just much more disciplined in staying in position.

Do they actually have a similar skillset or are they just a similar build. Eriksen is a much better passer, and more of a play maker. Mount seems more of a transition player

 

[Maroon Lucifer]

Eriksen has a football brain that works at the speed of light. It's like he has a birds eye view of the game. He knows where everyone is on the pitch. It's just that his body is a bit slower than it used to be. He was never fast or strong, but stamina might be an issue in higher paced games.
He still has the ability to control a game if he has the space in my opinion.

 

[simonhch]

Tremendous classy footballer. Very intelligent. Needs players around him to do the running, but he’s a wonderfully intelligent and graceful player. Like him a lot. Great option to have in the squad.

When Bruno plays like he does today, Eriksen can really shine.

 

[RuudTom83]

I never worry about him playing at Old Trafford.

But the Away games are the problem...which applies to a bunch of the players not just Eriksen.

 

[Borys]

No conclusions should be drawn from this game, and certainly no extrapolation for what will happen in the future.

He had a good game because we were not troubled at all after 2 goals down. Eriksen is perfect for those games indeed, I wouldn't be surprised that if he DIDN'T start, he would be thrown on after 5 mins because Forest were expected to keep all players behind the ball, what suits Eriksen.

 

[criticalanalysis]

I agree, Wolves were far better on the day and you'd expect them to have a reasonable season with some of the talent they have and they probably underperformed at times last season whereas Forest are destined for trouble. But it's still a home fixture against Wolverhampton Wanderers, you would still expect a Man United team to get a grip on things and ultimately there is absolutely no reason not to perform in such a fixture. Mount wasn't the only one by any means but nor did it help that our midfield was so open with him not having the game intelligence to drop in and help in any respect, not defensively and not in the build up phases. He wasn't responsible for the whole team structure but he was certainly an element within that as a key part of midfield.

Eriksen wasn't "great" but it was still a..6.5, maybe 7 type of performance. You say it's not games like today that will define who is suitable, but games like today are meat and potatoes. That's what we built around last season, solid home form. There are a fair number of teams that are only slightly better than Forest and at home we have to dominate. If we have players putting in stinkers like Mount did with no positional sense it doesn't help.

Let's see how Mount adjusts when he returns (this injury is very frustrating for building him into this team) - but at the moment I wouldn't put anything on him being the better option and it's not just based on a few games. It's based on his profile as a player and the fact Eriksen has real quality within the skills he does have.

I think Eriksen had a decent game on the ball and popped up with an important goal but was bad off it. I know it's been said a million times but since the injury he has lost that match sharpness and stamina (that wasn't even that great to begin with but serviceable) from the beginning of last season.

I understand 'you can only beat what's in front of you' and I don't want to downplay the result or performances but I feel like games like today are going to be 'rare' instances of poor quality opposition. Perhaps Luton will be similar. Otherwise, I feel teams like Fulham, West Ham, Everton, Burnley, Palace etc are the 'meat and potatoes'. If we continue like this and expect a Eriksen to work 'better' ahead of Mount against those teams, then it's very wishful thinking.

To clarify again, I'm not saying who is better, I just don't think today's game will be a good indicator against the teams I mentioned above. It's certainly not a reason to say 'Eriksen showed Mount how to play midfield' because quite frankly, Forest, 2 goals aside, were really poor. And by extension, it showed how bad we were. Anyways, regardless of those two players, the biggest 'issue' and responsibility falls with ETH imo.

 

[OverratedOpinion]

Do they actually have a similar skillset or are they just a similar build. Eriksen is a much better passer, and more of a play maker. Mount seems more of a transition player

I think Mount is a very good passer, obviously hasn't shown it so far with us but I think that is mostly due to our issues as a team. Good passer, set piece taker, score pretty similar types of goals and yeah similar build.

 

[Ole'sgunnarwin]

Bruno plays far better when Eriksen is around. Without him Bruno perhaps assumes entire burden of creativity is on him alone.

I agree with that. I think he's key for making us tick and Bruno certainly improves

 

[city-puma]

He has wonderful football brain. But, his legs have been long gone. His off-possession action is like slow motion. If he is three years younger, it could make huge difference.

 

[OverratedOpinion]

Eriksen is slightly past his peak at this stage but Mount has never shown anything in his career to suggest he's a player equal to Eriksen's best. Just depends on how much you think Eriksen has declined but he's a higher level of player.

I mean you just keep saying that. But he isn't and no stats support the assertion.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Eriksen is slightly past his peak at this stage but Mount has never shown anything in his career to suggest he's a player equal to Eriksen's best. Just depends on how much you think Eriksen has declined but he's a higher level of player.

Mount is a higher level of player now. He is stronger, faster, has far more stamina, doesn’t let players walk past him as if he’s 82, scores more, assists more and only one of them is capable of pressing (excellently at that). Eriksen is a better passer / playmaker still but that’s about it.

Funny how so many are saying our midfield (or balance thereof) was better when it was Forest at home. The other teams we played had vastly better midfielders than them.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Mount is a higher level of player now. He is stronger, faster, has far more stamina, doesn’t let players walk past him as if he’s 82, scores more, assists more and only one of them is capable of pressing (excellently at that). Eriksen is a better passer / playmaker still but that’s about it.

Funny how so many are saying our midfield (or balance thereof) was better when it was Forest at home. The other teams we played had vastly better midfielders than them.

Eriksen is a much better passer and when in attacking positions he is more decisive than Mount. Being able to run more does not equal a better player. Especially when he lacks the positional discipline to play the role properly.

Not sure where you’re getting he’s a better assister either. He got 2 last season and Eriksen got 8. Mount got 10 assists in a season once, but the seasons around it were 2, 5 and 7. By comparison, Eriksen got double digit assists for Spurs 4 times, reaching a high of 15 in a season.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Mount is a higher level of player now. He is stronger, faster, has far more stamina, doesn’t let players walk past him as if he’s 82, scores more, assists more and only one of them is capable of pressing (excellently at that). Eriksen is a better passer / playmaker still but that’s about it.

Funny how so many are saying our midfield (or balance thereof) was better when it was Forest at home. The other teams we played had vastly better midfielders than them.

Telling that most of those attributes you've listed are off ball (bar assists - which isn't actually true, and goals - which is true).

On the ball, I don't think Mount is close to current day Eriksen.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Eriksen is a much better passer and when in attacking positions he is more decisive than Mount. Being able to run more does not equal a better player. Especially when he lacks the positional discipline to play the role properly.

Not sure where you’re getting he’s a better assister either. He got 2 last season and Eriksen got 8. Mount got 10 assists in a season once, but the seasons around it were 2, 5 and 7. By comparison, Eriksen got double digit assists for Spurs 4 times, reaching a high of 15 in a season.

Let’s compare G plus A over the past 4 years then.

I’d expect Mount to prove he’s a better player. His best at Chelsea which is achievable given his age is better than Eriksen now - which at his age I don’t see Eriksen improving upon.

Telling that most of those attributes you've listed are off ball (bar assists - which isn't actually true, and goals - which is true).

On the ball, I don't think Mount is close to current day Eriksen.

Off the ball is hugely important. With Eriksen in the team it often felt like we were a man down in the latter part of last season. He had the physical presence of Juan Mata.

On the ball what are the stats for the last 3-4 seasons? I would have thought barring last season when he was injured Mount would have more productivity in attack. Not to mention he’s younger, quicker and a better dribbler all of which help In attack.

 

[Kag]

There’s time and a place for Eriksen and yesterday was it.

Worrying that we still haven’t bought a younger deep-lying player to effectively do what he does so well (as well as the things he doesn’t quite do so well).

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

I think Mount is a very good passer, obviously hasn't shown it so far with us but I think that is mostly due to our issues as a team. Good passer, set piece taker, score pretty similar types of goals and yeah similar build.

Eh he's a good crosser, he's not a very good passer and is a much lower volume type passer than Eriksen. He's never someone that will make progressive passes from deep.

 

[Lyng]

Let’s compare G plus A over the past 4 years then.

I’d expect Mount to prove he’s a better player. His best at Chelsea which is achievable given his age is better than Eriksen now - which at his age I don’t see Eriksen improving upon.


Off the ball is hugely important. With Eriksen in the team it often felt like we were a man down in the latter part of last season. He had the physical presence of Juan Mata.

On the ball what are the stats for the last 3-4 seasons? I would have thought barring last season when he was injured Mount would have more productivity in attack. Not to mention he’s younger, quicker and a better dribbler all of which help In attack.

The one thing that is a massive issue with Mount is that he doesnt really unlock Bruno. Its no coincidence that the Bruno's best match so far was with Eriksen behind him.

 

[roonster09]

The one thing that is a massive issue with Mount is that he doesnt really unlock Bruno. Its no coincidence that the Bruno's best match so far was with Eriksen behind him.

Also because we played one of the worst teams in the league at home who also scored 2 goals in 5 mins and had no interest to string couple of passes together.

 

[Lyng]

Also because we played one of the worst teams in the league at home who also scored 2 goals in 5 mins and had no interest to string couple of passes together.

True enough, but we looked more composed regardless of that.
Its also a very different midfield setup when Eriksen plays because he occupies the deeper areas, wheras Mount plays level with Bruno.
I think it can work, which we saw against Spurs in the first half, but its something Bruno and Case need to adjust to. They both looked way more comfortable yesterday.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

The one thing that is a massive issue with Mount is that he doesnt really unlock Bruno. Its no coincidence that the Bruno's best match so far was with Eriksen behind him.

This massive issue is based on a very minuscule sample size though. Eriksen and Bruno have trained and played together for over a year, and had our easiest match together this season.

I too thought we could do with a different profile of midfielder but I’m at least going to give the managers pick a chance to adapt and gel with his new team.

 

[roonster09]

True enough, but we looked more composed regardless of that.
Its also a very different midfield setup when Eriksen plays because he occupies the deeper areas, wheras Mount plays level with Bruno.
I think it can work, which we saw against Spurs in the first half, but its something Bruno and Case need to adjust to. They both looked way more comfortable yesterday.

Yeah Eriksen plays deeper but IMO there is no set system. One of the player drops deeper while other is more attacking, in general both of the mids are attacking. Eriksen offers better passing range from deep, Mount offers good pressing in the attack which helps us to regain possession in opponent third, shame we made 0 use of that in last 3 games.

 

[Lyng]

This massive issue is based on a very minuscule sample size though. Eriksen and Bruno have trained and played together for over a year, and had our easiest match together this season.

I too thought we could do with a different profile of midfielder but I’m at least going to give the managers pick a chance to adapt and gel with his new team.

My point is not to drop Mount. The point is more that Bruno and maybe Casemiro need to adapt to a very different style. Eriksen takes up deeper spaces and unlocks Bruno with excellent passing. Mount works almost level with Bruno and it forces Bruno to do more work himself.