Well done. Ignore his entire post to which you had no answer
Danny Welbeck | 2011-14 Performances
- Thread starter KM
- Start date
- Status
Well done. Ignore his entire post to which you had no answer
Saha (initially - when fit) was a brilliant footballer for us. His ball control/first touch at times was absurd - it's as if his shoulders were feet.
Let's just add this to the list of weird assumptions you're making in this thread. When used the way you used it, whatever is very much a term.
Racist.
Ayee spot on, he was a brilliant patner for Rooney in that season. Really brought out the best in each other, and Welbeck had a great season leading the line.. Yet now it is being questioned whether or not he can play there because he had a shit season on the wing.
Ayee spot on, he was a brilliant patner for Rooney in that season. Really brought out the best in each other, and Welbeck had a great season leading the line.. Yet now it is being questioned whether or not he can play there because he had a shit season on the wing.
Let's not change history. He came when our team was poor (compared to other United teams) and then when RVN wanted to leave/left, he had two decent seasons. He was never excellent, he was decent. And then was replaced by Tevez.
Saha was excellent and his form in 2006 was better than anything we saw from Tevez, Berbatov and Hernández so far. He was just weak (mentally and physically)/injury prone. He was easily good enough to be a starter for us long-term if he stayed fit and I very much expect Welbeck to reach the same level and perhaps surpass it. He can definitely perform the same role too, despite Stickles' weirdly limited view of the game (which I can only imagine he's invented purely for the purpose of this discussion).
This must be a joke. And there's dozens of players that are technically inferior to Welbeck that went on to be hugely influential for us.
This must be a joke. And there's dozens of players that are technically inferior to Welbeck that went on to be hugely influential for us.
Saha was never better than Tevez on 2007-2008, or Chicha and Berbatov on 2010-2011. I can't ever agree with that.
I think that your comparisons with Saha are spot one. That is Welbeck's level, probably a bit higher.
I think that your comparisons with Saha are spot one. That is Welbeck's level, probably a bit higher.
Of course Saha was better than Tevez for us. He was a complete striker. Pace, strength, finishing.. he had it all
I'd say your opinions on Ronaldinho disqualify any of your views on football pre-2007, personally.
Saha was easily one of our top 3 performers in 2006 which included our best (?) start to a PL season ever. Certainly our most exciting and free-flowing anyway. He was class. It's just he got injured in January and never recovered from there. He was notably better and more important than Tevez in the following season, IMO. And more importantly he fit the team much better.
Saha was easily one of our top 3 performers in 2006 which included our best (?) start to a PL season ever. Certainly our most exciting and free-flowing anyway. He was class. It's just he got injured in January and never recovered from there. He was notably better and more important than Tevez in the following season, IMO. And more importantly he fit the team much better.
Then why did we replace him with Tevez and in next season we let him go when he was reaching his peaking years? Why did he had only half the appearances of Tevez on 2007-2008? Omarlogic at best from SAF... Or maybe he wasn't as good as Tevez, but because Tevez later became a cnut let's say that all were better than him.
Because he was injury prone and injured for large parts of the season?
why did we let the £18m midfielder Owen Hargreaves leave for nothing?
I'd say your opinions on Ronaldinho disqualify any of your views on football pre-2007, personally.
Yep. Who needs goals if you can dribble?! Goals are not important, especially for attacking players.
Saha was good on 2006-2007, especially on that 1-1 against Chelsea. But he wasn't one of our top performers. Ronaldo, Scholes, Rooney and half of defense players were more important than him. 13 goals on 34 matches for the leading striker are far from great (but likely the goals are not again important when the stats doesn't suit your opinions) but his overall game was great. In the second half of the season he was either injured or not that good. Tevez on 2007-2008 was after Ronaldo our best attacking player, better than Saha ever was and you know, he replaced him and then we sold Saha. If he was that good as you're saying surely we wouldn't sell him when he reached his peak.
Rooney better than Saha in that season...yep, it's pretty clear you didn't follow things closely enough to have a fair opinion on Saha. Rooney's best form came at the very end after Saha was injured, Saha and Giggs were our best two attackers for the first half of the season. The fact you didn't even mention Giggs speaks volumes...
Oh Lord, he had 30, 34, 24 appearances in his last 3 seasons here and then in next two seasons in Everton he played on 69 games.
Because he played a total of 5 games (at-least two of them were for only a few minutes) on 3 seasons, compared to Saha who played 88 games in 3 seasons
Rooney better than Saha in that season...yep, it's pretty clear you didn't follow things closely enough to have a fair opinion on Saha. Rooney's best form came at the very end after Saha was injured, Saha and Giggs were our best two attackers for the first half of the season. The fact you didn't even mention Giggs speaks volumes...
Since when the form on the most important part of the seasons doesn't count? Rooney had an overall a better season than Saha, he had more games, around twice the goals and made a great partnership with Ronaldo. I didn't mention Giggs cause well I think that Ronaldo and Rooney were better than him on attacking positions and wanted to mention players from all departments.
Yeah, you're wrong. Giggs was obviously better than Rooney, and the only reason Saha didn't have a better season than Rooney is because he was injured. That's entirely irrelevant when it comes to talking about his quality. In 2006 (i.e. half of 05/06 and half of 06/07) he was better than Tevez ever was for us. You might not remember it but it definitely happened...As for the idea that Tevez is now being underrated because he was a prick, well, who do you think Solius was referring to back then?
PFA Team of the Year[edit]
Goalkeeper: Edwin van der Sar (Manchester United)
Defence: Gary Neville, Patrice Evra, Rio Ferdinand, Nemanja Vidić (all Manchester United)
Midfield: Steven Gerrard (Liverpool), Paul Scholes, Ryan Giggs, Cristiano Ronaldo (all Manchester United)
Attack: Didier Drogba (Chelsea), Dimitar Berbatov (Tottenham Hotspur)
PFA Team of the Year[edit]
Goalkeeper: Edwin van der Sar (Manchester United)
Defence: Gary Neville, Patrice Evra, Rio Ferdinand, Nemanja Vidić (all Manchester United)
Midfield: Steven Gerrard (Liverpool), Paul Scholes, Ryan Giggs, Cristiano Ronaldo (all Manchester United)
Attack: Didier Drogba (Chelsea), Dimitar Berbatov (Tottenham Hotspur)
Giggs in there but no Rooney? Weird, eh?
Anyone that doesn't realise Saha was sold purely because of his injury issues must not have paid attention at the time, it really is that simple.
He had 5 league starts in the entire calender year of 2007 because he constantly had niggly injuries which meant he was very unreliable and hence the signing of Tevez. In other words we could not rely on Saha being fully fit
No he wasn't.
You clearly didn't read my post, or the one I quoted. We were both talking about Welbeck - though I do agree with Brwned about Saha
This. So much this.
The amount of thick plank numpties that go around spouting twonk like "Danny Welbeck is rubbish and will never be good enough I hope we get rid" makes my fecking blood boil. As though they have absolutely no desire to actually get pleasure out of watching a player grow and just want to buy instant success success success. It totally goes against the DNA and the general philosophy of the fecking club for christs sake.
Err? Rooney was a striker and both Berbatov and Drogba had better seasons than him so nothing strange that Rooney wasn't there. Also, I don't think that there is any way to use these lists as arguments, after all Giggs win it entirely on 2009 (with less than 15 starts) and Bale who was nowhere near the best player won it on 2011 (and his main competitor was Parker).
I think that Rooney was simply a better player last season, his stats were better despite playing less advanced than Saha and Saha took the penalties, and Rooney was very important especially on the partnership with Ronaldo (and in big matches). Giggs was good but I think that he was overshadowed by both Ronaldo and Rooney.
I remember pretty well Brwned, thank you!
You're stats-obsessed and yet you're looking at the wrong stats. Rooney failed to get a goal or assist in 17 of his first 25 starts of the season. He scored the majority of his goals when he moved up front on his own (which he generally struggled with at that point and it harmed us that season). Saha on the other hand got a goal or assist in 14 of his first 21 starts of the season. He was much better than Rooney when fit.
Saha was bloody brilliant in 06/07, the team looked so fluid with him up top.
Good comparison between him and Welbeck.
Good comparison between him and Welbeck.
Both were unreliable due to injury problems. Yes, Hargreaves was more serious, but that doesn't mean Saha didn't have injury problems that cut his United career short.
Either way, Saha was excellent for us and was a great partner for Rooney. If I'm remembering correctly, he once said that Saha was his favourite strike partner to play with.
I never said that Rooney was better than Saha on the first half of the season, but said that he was better in the overall seasons.
How did Rooney harmed us that season (although he didn't played all the games as our most adcanced striker even after Saha got injured, Solksjaer and Smith played some games there too)? We won the title, and got in semi of UCL, a competition where Rooney was arguably our best player.
You cannot compare the situations of their injuries. One played 5 games in last 3 seasons with us, the other played 88 games. Saha wasn't injured as much as Anderson, let alone as much as Hargreaves.
Anyway, time to finish this debate in Welbeck thread.
Saha was miles better for us then Tevez ever was... and I'll side with with Brwned in that in 2006 he was one of our best players.
In fact, I'm constantly surprised by the levels that Tevez has reached at City, because for us he was often a headless chicken, running down blind alleys and was often unable to control a bag of sand. I'm not saying Tevez was crap or anything, but he was never the player for us that he has been for City.
In fact, I'm constantly surprised by the levels that Tevez has reached at City, because for us he was often a headless chicken, running down blind alleys and was often unable to control a bag of sand. I'm not saying Tevez was crap or anything, but he was never the player for us that he has been for City.
I like Tevez despite the fact that he left for City, and indeed I think his impact on games is far ahead of what one would call his natural skill and talent.
Whereas Welbeck has abundant talent but the fecker can't score, can he?
I actually think the Welbeck/Saha comparison is quite a good one. Both technically very good players, full of pace, good at leading the line. But neither natural goalscorers. I expect Welbeck to eventually become a better player then Saha was, mind. I think he has more to his game.
I think Saha was a natural scorer. He just kept getting crocked. I'm just surprised at how many rate Welbeck that highly. I reckon unless Rooney leaves and we don't buy another striker, Welbeck will be in for a long (not playing much) season.
Why was that relevant? Who was arguing otherwise. I said Saha was better in 2006 than Tevez ever was, not 06/07.
I thin in the 3-0 loss to Milan and the 1-0 loss to Chelsea - our two most important games in the last stretch of the season - were at least partly down to Rooney's inability to get involved in the game from such an isolated role. Larsson and Saha (and occasionally Smith) were much better #9's at that point so we had the joint-loss of losing our best #10 and having a somewhat below-par/unreliable/inconsistent #9 when Rooney was forced to play up top on his own. He obviously had a strong second half to the season (15 goals and 7 assists can't really be argued against) but a lot of his best form was alongside Larsson. Saha was a big, big loss then.
Saha was never a natural goalscorer, you only have to look at his record to see that. He would miss plenty of good chances, but seemingly had a knack for scoring the harder ones. I do think Saha is slightly overrated on this forum tbh. He was a good player with lots of qualities, but I think Welbeck will go on to be a better player.
Weird you say that, given that Rooney excelled against Milan in the first leg of the tie, scoring 2 goals and linking up well with Giggs and Ronaldo.
I think the whole team was fecked at the tail end of the title race, and it showed in the 3-0 and 1-0 losses.
I don't know if you're just pissed off at Rooney or something but he was far more important than Saha that season, he scored 2 against Milan in the first leg so it's hardly fair to blame him for us losing the tie.
He scored as many goals as Ronaldo that season and let's also not forget that he was 21 years old. Considering his age it was a great season, considering that he also offered a lot more than just goals and assists it's an even better season, considering the attention on him in the aftermath of the World Cup then it's better still, that's without mentioning the fact that he got injured before the world cup and was rushed back to play the majority of England's games while Saha played about half an hour in total for France, even if you disregard those 4 things he still had a better season overall than Saha. The fact that Saha had a better start to the season is hardly a major surprise all things considered. Context is pretty important when comparing two players but especially in this case.
It may not have seemed important considering how the second leg turned out, but he got a crucial away goal in Rome as well when we were down to 10 men. Saha never had the same impact as Rooney did in the big games regardless of injuries. I liked Saha but there's some ridiculous revisionism going on here. It really is worth remembering that he was 27 and Rooney was only 20/21 with our wonderful media watching his every move, none of us can really relate to the kind of pressure he was under.
I'm not really arsed about Rooney making a fuss. Not pissed off at all. I just know that Rooney went through one of his leanest streaks in that first half of the 06/07 season while Saha was in the form of his life then and the 6/7 months previous. The reasons for that are pretty irrelevant in this case and I don't have a clue why that brought about such a staunch defence of Rooney here. I agree Rooney had a better season in 06/07 simply because he didn't end up missing the season like Saha. All this stuff about his age or the pressure he was under or whatever else is a little absurd.
As Decotron said let's get this thread back on track and start talking about Welbeck again.
As Decotron said let's get this thread back on track and start talking about Welbeck again.
Is Stickles Scholsey in disguise? His assertion that Welbeck has bad technique compared to Hernendez and Neville is up there as one of the most ridiculous statement that someone has posted, that and his insistence that Welbeck would never make it for us as he's far behind others in development is similar to Scholesy's theory that players technique can't be improved after a certain age.
I was thinking Kietotheworld, but he hasn't mentioned DDG yet! (or Canute)
Actually I never liked Saha, cos the fecker was always injured. That said, I await the transformation of Welbeck to a striker that actually scores goals...because at the moment he is shit at it.
- Status