I love Fletcher and it's amazing he's back on the pitch
But but but he isn't Manchester United quality anymore........sorry it's a fact
But but but he isn't Manchester United quality anymore........sorry it's a fact
Darren Fletcher | 2013/14 Performances
- Thread starter Fiskey
- Start date
- Status
He missed both Liverpool games that season and we got battered in both. Think the Supercup against Zenit was the only game we lost when he started that season. And people laughed at the suggestion he may have made a difference in Rome.
Bad game from him today, got caught on the ball and off the pace quite a few times. Him and Carrick in a midfield two gives us nothing going forward through the centre. Neither are mobile enough to provide a quick attacking threat, or drive down the middle. One of the reason I always like Anderson, was because he gave us that at least when on the pitch. I don't think fletcher has the legs anymore to really track runs from opposition midfielders either, plenty of time he has just let them go this season. While it is great to see him back after his Illness, he isn’t going to solve any of our issues in CM. He can stand in for Carrick, but we still need a much more mobile player coming in.
Was poor, and at fault for their first goal I felt. He also looks like he's treading water when he moves. Initially, I put that down to him still getting his sharpness after his lay-off, although it hasn't improved much. He makes Carrick look agile and dynamic.
It's almost as if all that time out of the game has had some effect on his abilities. How incredibly unexpected. Moyes should add that to the list of 'Things that don't make sense" just underneath 'crossing all the time doesn't work?!?!??!!'
I'm not knocking the lad he's shown great determination to fight back but he really shouldn't be anywhere near our starting 11, even with our midfield, barring an injury crisis or a league cup tie at home to Bury.
I'm not knocking the lad he's shown great determination to fight back but he really shouldn't be anywhere near our starting 11, even with our midfield, barring an injury crisis or a league cup tie at home to Bury.
Gutting to see how poor he was yesterday. He's an absolute warrior and to fight back from his illness is nothing short of incredible, but his time is up.
It is. There's little point hanging onto sentiment. I don't understand why, if we keep Carrick deep we can't plug the hole in CM with Mata or Rooney or even Januzaj. It's not as if we've exactly had a 'ball winner' in the middle of the park these last few years to miss one not being there again this time.
I'd play Jones there, possibly Fellaini. I think we need more protection for the back four than Carrick alone. I know Jones isn't a midfielder but he's a better option than Fletcher/Giggs/Cleverley and we always seem much more solid with him playing. I know that lacks creativity but we have no better option and some combination of Mata, Rooney, Januzaj, Kagawa, RVP in front could give us enough of that until the end of the season.
I don't see where this need for 'protection for the back' has come from. That brief fortnight Hargreaves managed to play aside, we've not really had that on a consistent basis since Keane. So I don't understand why everyone seems to view it as a vital component.
You can't use that argument. You don't go back into history to fix the issues with your team, surely? I think it is a lot simpler than that. We watch the games and our defence lacks protection from midfield, so we suggest some protection from midfield. Nothing to do with whether protection was an issue 10 years ago. It clearly is now (in addition to other issues to be fair!)
I don't think it is an issue at all. We need players who can use the ball and retain possession. I think it's a fairly out-dated approach to sacrifice one of your 'forward 6' to be a ball winner who sits back. It's also fairly ineffective too as the reality of modern day full backs mean that any side looking to attack will just use the flanks or play long passes.
You speak about me wanting to go back in history but that's precisely what people who make the argument you make are doing. No different to the 'big man up top' argument. Yes it may work for some teams in some circumstance but I don't get why anyone would view that as a necessity in a strike partnership. Similarly I don't see why there's a urge for some teeth and ass in central midfield. Surely that argument is actually looking at how things worked in the past rather than trying to find a new way forward.
If we are caught out at the back I'd suggest it has far more to do with poor defending that's exposed by inefficient use of the ball in advanced areas, as opposed to needing a ball winner just for the sake of tradition.
I can see where you're coming from. And I agree partially. I think we need a midfield that can use the ball and retain possession. I just think that the need for that, and a need to be less easy to play through are just as pressing as each other for us. I don't think it's out-dated to have a defensive midfielder either. If he can pass the ball, I don't see the issue. My theory is that, except in rare cases where you have two outstanding all-rounders, the job of an effective midfield can only be carried out by three players. A midfield is supposed to defend, control and create, ideally. I think with two me in there, typically at least one of those duties would be sacrificed to a degree. If we were fortunate enough to get Vidal and Bastian in the summer, then I'd agree we do not need a defensive midfielder. However, if we had two Toni Kroos' in there, we would suffer.
But not all fans saw it that way - not by any means. There was loads of debate about it, including on the caf.
I dont agree that Fletcher was so poor that we want to write him off and make him part of the coaching set up. I think the problems which we have affect each and every player. Yes Fletcher didnt track the run of Sidwell, so too others did not cover for his lapse. A while back we all wanted him back to play for the first team, now he is and he makes a mistake (which I'm sure he would admit to) and we try to cut him to pieces.
We are all hurting and what is needed is to stick together during this time.
We are all hurting and what is needed is to stick together during this time.
During his two year period of excellent form, a time in which he was one of Europe's most effective central midfielders, it would have taken a moron of exceptional extremity to debate his worth as a regular starter. I don't doubt that there was debate, but it only ratifies the belief that they were, at the time, morons.
During those two years, the only debate about Fletcher was whether he was one of the best central midfielders in the world or not, that was Caf debate, not whether he was good enough to start.
Love the guy and glad to have him back. Unfortunately I don't feel he is up to it anymore. And some of that he has done since returning has been vastly overrated on here due to who he is.
I think Fletch's performances haven't been any less erratic than most of our players. Seems no player is immune from the fundamental lack of self confidence that has gripped the squad this year.
He's not doing badly per se, he just doesn't look able to play at this level anymore. He actually looks as if he's treading water on the pitch. The first goal on Sunday was a feck up on his part, but in general, he's just physically not up to it.
What a shit position we've manouvered ourselves into in central midfield. I can't think of a bigger failing of Fergie in his entire time here than his handling our our central midfield in recent years.
And that debate did not stretch beyond the caf to be fair.
Possibly not, but that isn't the point, the point is his place in the starting eleven was certainly not under question.
Well it was tbh. His good period was while Carrick and Scholes were at the club for starters. I don't recall a period where either of those two were substitutes for a prolonged period, Fletcher was certainly no automatic pick even then (unless there was a period of injury for either of the aforementioned two). With the likes of Giggs, Ronaldo, Scholes, Carrick, Hargreaves and an Anderson playing better, I don't recall it being a case of 'which one of them is going to partner Fletch'?
He was brought in largely to kick better players than himself when we played talented sides (which of course is a very overly simplistic description of it).
What have Ronaldo and Giggs got to do with it? Neither of them would have partnered Darren Fletcher back then. Hargreaves was actually shunted out wide, he played very little in the centre as the season went on, and Anderson was most definitely not first choice. Darren Fletcher was the first name on the team sheet for the big games, strangely enough I think if you're in the first 11 in the all the big games it means you're first choice, and he was immense in Ronaldo's last year with us, absolutely fecking immense. And no, he didn't just kick better players, Jesus Christ. Fletcher continually gets underrated with regards to his actual ability, this is a guy Ferguson wanted to play at 15, he's rather good technically. Unfortunately I'm not sure he can return to his previous level, which is a massive loss for us because that Fletcher would be our best midfielder by a mile.
Also, unless my memory is playing tricks on me didn't we play a midfield three back quite a lot then? I remember Rooney having to play wide a fair bit.
Last edited:
What Ronaldo and Giggs have to do with it is the fact that Fletch has often lined up nominally on the right hand side in big games when we had to play three in the middle. Rooney played wide far less than people make out too. The wide men were relevant as Scholes/Carrick made it strong competition in the middle, and the fact that Giggs/Ronaldo were around meant they often played wide too (or Park), so we either did not play with three, or Fletch did not play on the right.
Fletch had some ball ability, but it was more a case of 'great, a guy that is there to kick and close people down is not actually useless on the ball. Result', as opposed to him simply being a top notch ball playing midfielder in his own right. It was always a case of 'and he can actually play a bit too'.
And being in the first XI in big games doesn't make you 'first choice' per se, it is a tactical selection, perhaps borne out of fear even. Just like playing Danny Welbeck ahead of Wayne Rooney because we are more scared of what Alonso can do than thinking about the problems Rooney can cause for Alonso.
I may sound like I'm being too harsh on Fletch, maybe I am unintentionally to make a point. But he was never as good a ball player as Scholes or Carrick, and was played because he did more work than them. In my view, maybe Fergie wouldn't trust Scholes and Carrick to win a straight football match against some of the best midfields like Arsenal or Chelsea. We've lined up in games against them with Phil fecking Neville in midfield, and the job description was always the same - to go around and kick. We seem to brag about the fact we kicked Reyes about at Old Trafford, when in reality, all it is was a concession that we couldn't play as well as Arsenal. Fletcher wasn't in the team against the very best due to how he can hurt them with the ball. It was just a bonus that he wouldn't hurt us with the ball either.
We been blessed with perhaps the best CB partnership we had. I doubt we'd get as good as that one for a long time. They could play well without midfield cover.
But I'd say our new partnership would need a bit more protection from midfield.
I really did think after the first couple of games he'd inspire us from central midfield. Especially how he was able to keep the ball and work with the forward players. Not sure if it's him or the tactics - probably the latter because it doesn't seem to matter who is in CM, none of them seem to be able to actually work with our forward players. Maybe Fletcher, Cleverley et all are not world class but, we've seen enough of them to know they are well capable of playing the ball in triangles and give and gos.
Seems now what Cleverley said is true, the midfield's job is not to actually do anything but, get the ball out wide and sit back and let the front players create. Obviously we are not going to be able to play through the middle if our CM are instructed to not join in the attacking play. They may not be the players everyone is drooling for but, surely they are more than capable of playing both in attack and defense.
Seems now what Cleverley said is true, the midfield's job is not to actually do anything but, get the ball out wide and sit back and let the front players create. Obviously we are not going to be able to play through the middle if our CM are instructed to not join in the attacking play. They may not be the players everyone is drooling for but, surely they are more than capable of playing both in attack and defense.
He's lost his engine, which was half of his qualities as a player.
Now he's a decent player who passes it well but contribute nothing in defense.
Now he's a decent player who passes it well but contribute nothing in defense.
This is not true.
He was first choice in 09-10 - the season he made the PFA Team of the Season. There was an element of rotation for the CM positions but Fletcher started more games than the rest (he started 29/38 league games - compared to 24, 22 and 10 from Scholes, Carrick and Anderson. Hargreaves was injured all that season, making 0 starts. Giggs was still playing predominantly from the wing or off the striker rather than in CM). When available, he played. He only made 2 substitute appearances all season. He was too good to sit on the bench. The only games he didn't play were when he was rested, injured or suspended. There was a spell where we would play a 3 man midfield of Carrick, Scholes and Fletcher all together, but for the most part it was a case of who would partner Fletcher.
People forget that the 09-10 season when he showed his best form, he was only 25/26 and just starting to enter into his prime. He was improving his passing, starting to control games, spraying Scholesy-esque balls around the pitch and adding assists to his game as well as the physicality, discipline and work rate which he was renowned for. His illness stopped him in his tracks. We can only speculate on how he would have progressed, but even if he had simply managed to sustain his 09-10 form for a few more seasons then he would have been considered one of the top midfielders around, certainly one of the very best box-to-box midfielders in the game. Given his progression during the previous few seasons, I think it's safe to assume that he would have been able to step it up even further.
It's a shame that his reputation isn't what it deserves to be. Even United fans forget just HOW GOOD he was that season, instead falling back on the traditional image of him being merely a destroyer, a hatchet man who would be picked to kick Arsenal or Chelsea players. He really stepped up in 09-10 before struggling in 10-11. People were quick to shoot him down as "thinking he's better than he is", or "letting it get to his head". Then the truth emerged about his mystery "virus" that was holding him back. Yet the suggestions that he didn't have ability have stuck, and all suggestions that he was a top central midfielder were unfairly dropped.
Fletcher had one excellent period of about 12 months in his career with us. Before that he was potential but not there, and we're now at after.
We'll keep him around this season because we literally don't have have anyone else who can do a better job in midfield. But the only reason he's still at the club as a player is his history, not his current contribution. It's motivational, he's lovely, he's a youth product - all true - but have him as a brand ambassador or something. It sucks, life is unfair all that jazz.
But as long as he's filling another 'midfield' spot, it means he's another excuse for the manager to not get in a midfield that is Manchester United quality.
I had hoped when he came back that he'd be useful as a 'suring-up sub' - the guy we bring on with 20 minutes left to make sure we win by a single goal. But I've watched every appearance he's made so far on his come back, and unless things change he's not really suited to that role either. He doesn't have the closing speed or even the stamina to do that role. It's completely understandable, but I fear we're doing another Ole here - desperately clinging on to unjustifiable hope that a player will not have aged.
We'll keep him around this season because we literally don't have have anyone else who can do a better job in midfield. But the only reason he's still at the club as a player is his history, not his current contribution. It's motivational, he's lovely, he's a youth product - all true - but have him as a brand ambassador or something. It sucks, life is unfair all that jazz.
But as long as he's filling another 'midfield' spot, it means he's another excuse for the manager to not get in a midfield that is Manchester United quality.
I had hoped when he came back that he'd be useful as a 'suring-up sub' - the guy we bring on with 20 minutes left to make sure we win by a single goal. But I've watched every appearance he's made so far on his come back, and unless things change he's not really suited to that role either. He doesn't have the closing speed or even the stamina to do that role. It's completely understandable, but I fear we're doing another Ole here - desperately clinging on to unjustifiable hope that a player will not have aged.
He's been our best performer in centre midfield this season, easily.
Yep that sums our midfield plight up that a midfielder who'd struggle to get a game with Sunderlands of this world is our best midfielder this season.
It's still incorrect to reason Fletcher shouldn't be at the club for his current contribution. By that reckoning Carrick, Fellaini, Cleverley and Jones should all be on the first flight out of Manchester.
Yup, Fletcher has nothing on Lee Cattermole.
Current being the last 18 months, say. Not just the last 3. Fletcher hasn't been at the top level for almost 4 years
I'd love for him to be an answer to our woes, but he really isn't.
Also, he's not been our best midfielder this season at all. He's only really been back for January. And that went well.
Ok. Having trouble making my point but it is simply this: it might be ok to carry a really special player who can't quite hack the pace at the top level, it is not ok to carry a very good but not special player who can't. Now fletcher has done well since coming back, considering... But the performances and fitness levels are not at the level we need, and this is because Fletcher is clearly not in the Scholes or Giggs class. He doesn't let play pass him by a bit, put a few dodgy tackles, but simply play the game at a different level to most others and unlock defences and spray the ball around beautifully like Scholes did. He needs to be properly fit and at his best to be worthy of a place in the team, and he isn't there. Would be nice if he could get back to that level but not convinced he can.
Let's wait to judge him at the end of the season eh? He's not Rooney or Carrick who you can judge off little. He's been in and out of the game for the last few years. Needs to be judged after a good amount of games behind him.
During his best couple of seasons, there were maybe about 3 people on here who were giving out about him, that was it. There are people who give out about every player. Anyone who gave out during those couple of seasons clearly had an agenda. There is no doubt that he was one of the first names on the teamsheet, which was reiterated by Ferguson on numerous occasions. The difference in the win ratio with and without him in the team was huge. He was outstanding in most of the big games.
In general Fletcher has been decent since he has came back. He has had more good games than bad. The last couple were poor. Is he any worse than Cleverley though? We simply don't have any options.
From the tail end of 2008/09 up until his illness really got to him in 2010/11 Fletcher was arguably the most important player at United. He drove us on in so many games. I just remember him being imperious in the Milan Champions League ties in 2009/10. Bossed it.
Fletcher can't run anymore imo he would struggle to hold down a starting berth with any premier league team.
- Status