I would just say he did nothing out of the ordinary. He had a manager who believed in him, was given a chance and played games for the club. A club where it's a no-brainer to stay at, if the manager favours you.I would agree that he has been a great servant. Came through and stayed when the fans were against him and he was made a bit of a scapegoat. Persevered and broke into the first team, became a solid partner for Carrick in the middle for a few years until his illness.
Not really sure why it is being questioned - why would you say that he hasn't been a great servant?
Not excusing his performances this season of course - he is finished and needs to retire, that is similarly not in question.
I would just say he did nothing out of the ordinary. He had a manager who believed in him, was given a chance and played games for the club. A club where it's a no-brainer to stay at, if the manager favours you.
Nothing more or less. He's a nice guy on top of that. Great servant doesn't really come into it for me.
Perhaps it is flawed. I personally don't give a huge amount of credit to Scholes and Giggs for staying at United for so long. I praise them for being good enough, for having the work ethic to remain good enough, and for their conduct, amongst other things. Perhaps that actually is the criteria you, and others, have for being a great servant. In which case it's just a case of my definition being off.He endured a lot of time where he was not first choice and potentially even out of favour, he showed loyalty and it was returned by SAF. I can't think of many players who do something "out of the ordinary" - by your logic here, Giggs and Scholes wouldn't be classified as 'great servants' either, they had a manager who believed in them and stayed at the club where it is a no brainer to stay.
I would suggest your definition is flawed.
Perhaps it is flawed. I personally don't give a huge amount of credit to Scholes and Giggs for staying at United for so long. I praise them for being good enough, for having the work ethic to remain good enough, and for their conduct, amongst other things. Perhaps that actually is the criteria you, and others, have for being a great servant. In which case it's just a case my definition being off.
And taking back to Fletcher, I don't see his actions when he wasn't a first choice player as showing loyalty. But that's just me I guess.
I still don't get how he looked so good in pre season. Granted playing friendlies against half fit teams isn't a proper barometer of quality, but even accounting for that, the drop since the season proper started has been shocking.
Aye, it's strange. Just goes to show the huge drop-off in intensity in non-competitive games. I'll be taking pre-season form with an even bigger pinch of salt from now on.
I would agree that he has been a great servant. Came through and stayed when the fans were against him and he was made a bit of a scapegoat. Persevered and broke into the first team, became a solid partner for Carrick in the middle for a few years until his illness.
Not really sure why it is being questioned - why would you say that he hasn't been a great servant?
Not excusing his performances this season of course - he is finished and needs to retire, that is similarly not in question.
As far as I recall, Fletch & Scholes worked, Carrick & Fletch usually resulted in crap midfield performances.
As far as I recall, Fletch & Scholes worked, Carrick & Fletch usually resulted in crap midfield performances.