Because he's not up to the pace not because he can't pass.
Darron Gibson - is he good enough for Everton?
- Thread starter Name Changed
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
There's been absolutely nothing to suggest that in his games in the first team so far.
Oh i see, so its based on what you believe hes capable of rather than what he actually does?
Ok.
What he's done before rather than what I imagine he can do.
Gibson is capable of some very creative passing. However, much like Anderson, he's also naive and therefore sometimes careless and/or reckless with his passing.
Fletcher is a more reliable passer, but not necessarily better.
Fletcher is a more reliable passer, but not necessarily better.
Obviously this is an experience issue. Like carrick he might need more time to develop his game before he is ready for a club of united's stature. To write him off is daft. Fletcher is another example of someone who's game has improved immensely under experience.
I don't understand why people keep comparing him to Fletcher. Fletcher has so much more to his game than Gibson does, even at that age. He is a far superior player. Gibson is more like Carrick at that age.
I do agree he has a much better passing ability than most on here give him credit for (simply because he's barely shown it), but he's certainly not a better passer than Fletcher is yet. Maybe in the future, but even that is doubtful.
It's ludicrous to claim he is a better passer than Fletcher, Fletcher is steady, yet unspectacular most of the time, but that is still fecking loads better than Gibson. Watch Fletcher's ball into Tevez v City last year for the second goal in the game in May
So you mean to say that midfielders generally don't improve after age 22?
Are you retarded?
His point is valid, even if Gibson gets better I doubt he will ever be 'good enoguh'
At 22 Fletcher's passing ability was more inferior to Gibson's. Yet Fletcher had played many more games in comparison.
No. That bolded bit isn't true at all.
Many keep on mentioning Fletcher which I think that its a bit unfair since we are talking about individuals here. There is no guarantee that what had worked with Fletch would work with Gibson as much as there is no guarantee that Gibson will have the same opportunity (so many games with the first team ) or the quality of players (Giggs and Scholes) around him to help him develop.
To conclude I do rate Gibson. I think that he is better that Fletch was at his age. On the other hand considering that we will soon need a major revolution in midfield (Scholes and Giggs won't last forever and new players will be brought in) and that we already have many players 'under construction', for example Anderson, then maybe he is running out of time. Lets face it, central midfield is one of our weaknesses at the moment.
To conclude I do rate Gibson. I think that he is better that Fletch was at his age. On the other hand considering that we will soon need a major revolution in midfield (Scholes and Giggs won't last forever and new players will be brought in) and that we already have many players 'under construction', for example Anderson, then maybe he is running out of time. Lets face it, central midfield is one of our weaknesses at the moment.
Indeed.
IMO though I feel we have room for at least 2 players under construction in center midfield. For as Giggs and Schoels retire, their squad places need to be filled. So IMO Gibson will be around as long as his patience permits him to be. Since SAF truly seems to have faith in him
Is that what I said? Yes, most will improve but not at the kind of rate Fletcher did. Most will still be average or just above.
Are you retarded?
Why do you insist on always posting your opinion as if it's undeniable fact. Prove it.
He's a decent player who will never be first team but will do as someone to fill in if needed.
All players aren't either amazing or shit. There is some middle ground.
All players aren't either amazing or shit. There is some middle ground.
I get what Brwned is trying to say, but what you also have to take into account is the ability to manufacture space for yourself in order to pull off great passes.
Gibsons technique for passing and vision is actually quite decent, I don't think its better than Fletch at this moment in time but he looks a better passer than a young Fletch based on pure technique alone.
However once you're playing against top opponents, who will close you down much quicker.. if you haven't got the mobility to create space, you won't execute passes with the same efficiency say you were playing reserve level football where the pace is slower. You'll be rushed and off balance, constantly keeping it simple in order not to give the ball away and unable to express your passing range. Consequently you'll appear to be a bad passer.
Players like Scholes/Fabregas/Xavi.. its their first touch, ability to create space which allows their passing technique to shine.
Gibsons technique for passing and vision is actually quite decent, I don't think its better than Fletch at this moment in time but he looks a better passer than a young Fletch based on pure technique alone.
However once you're playing against top opponents, who will close you down much quicker.. if you haven't got the mobility to create space, you won't execute passes with the same efficiency say you were playing reserve level football where the pace is slower. You'll be rushed and off balance, constantly keeping it simple in order not to give the ball away and unable to express your passing range. Consequently you'll appear to be a bad passer.
Players like Scholes/Fabregas/Xavi.. its their first touch, ability to create space which allows their passing technique to shine.
I think he has the potential to be a better passer than Fletcher but right now i think Fletcher has improved that side of his game bit since last season.
Are you saying Fletcher at 22 wasn't better than Gibson is now? Fletcher was far better.
Scholes is just 1 player Chief so if we get a new midfielder then things can get tricky, expecially if Hargreaves can return to his former glory. Stating that football can be highly unpredictable and character can beat over experience, fees and high profile. I mean there was a time when Fletch was considered as a 5th choice midfielder (behind Hargreaves, Carrick, Scholes and new signing Anderson). Look at him now.
No he wasnt.
I don't need to prove squat. Having been some one who supported Fletcher through thick and thin. I trust my judgement of him better than that of people like you. Besides, I've already posted a link in this thread to one of the infamous Fletcher bashing threads. & nothing in here is as bad as the things that were being said about a 22 year old Flecther in that one thread.
I'm 100% certain he wasn't. Despite having played many more games. The things that were said about him at the time are concrete proof of this. Gibson by comparison is getting way more respect at the same stage of his career. Even in the media.
Fletcher's sort of the ultimate example of a player who wasn't amazing in his early years (though better than a lot of people thought), but is now excellent, and it's true that the same process occurs with a lot of central midfielders particularly. Not all though. Butt and Beckham both looked pretty complete when they started playing - the level of potential was way above the likes of Gibson). Also the thing with Fletcher is that the work rate/attitude was always there. I'm not convinced that's the case with Gibson, though I would agree their levels at age 22 are not dissimilar - obviously Gibson has more goals in him, but Fletcher's engine is much better.
There is Giggs too. Remember he is only on the wing due to our lack of a another natural left sided starter. For all intents and purposes he is another CM we will be losing. Who's squad role will need filling
Indeed. That is why I'm encouraging people to wait and see. Give the lad time. SAF has already shown more faith in him than he did with the likes of Richardson so that should make people at least admit there is something SAF see's in him.
It does seem worthwhile giving him time because he ticks a lot of boxes. His passing is pretty good, his shooting is really good, he has some skill on the ball, and he makes good, well-timed forward runs. What I'd really like to see from him is more hard work off the ball.
Spot on post.
I agree. IMO he should try and emulate Carrick. Who despite not having Fletcher's energy levels works hard enough off the ball. Right now at times Gibson becomes like an Emperor with ''new clothes'' when we don't have the ball!
Prove it.
Gibson may well be a future Phil Neville, Nicky Butt and John OShea type squad member that's been so important in our success.
I agree with this gimp. The main issue with Gibson seems to be his mobility and work-rate.
Fletcher's passing in his first couple of years in the squad wasn't particularly good - less good than Gibson's. He generally just laid it square to Keane and Scholes. It was clear he could pass because he did it in the reserves but he was pretty tentative for a good while, whereas Gibson's fairly confident and will spray it wide or try the odd through-ball.
Actually I think Fletcher's passing has improved playing with Carrick, he plays a lot more neat direct balls to the front players, cutting through the midfield.
Go to the thread link I posted you dumb ass. That is just one example of the many Fletcher trashing threads of the time. I don't even need to put up media links to crap that was said about him in the media. They should be easy enough to find for a retard like you.
Fletcher at 22 was better than Gibson, it was exactly the season when people realized he was kind of useful and he actually proved he could play football. I remember him scoring a very good goal early in 06-07 season and things only got better from that point, to the moment when he shone for us in CL against Roma and, if I remember correctly, Milan as well.
Nevertheless, just because Fletcher was a late bloomer (relative term, 22 to 23 years old isn't that late) doesn't mean every single midfielder after him has to be the same. Don't forget that Fletcher was set back by a bad injury and if it wasn't for that, he would have probably come good a lot quicker.
Plenty of midfielders weren't good enough for us at 22 and - shock horror - they are still not good enough.
People's bashing has actually little to do with player's actual ability. In Fletcher's case, it took something undeniably good to convince everyone that he's good enough - and it only happened a couple of years ago. But he was already a good player before he became excellent, it was just a part of his career that is easily forgotten. For many he simply skipped the good-player part and jumped straight into excellent-player part.
I, for example, only recently realized that Park has actual football skills. Prior to that, I thought he could only run miles and do nothing valuable. And it took a couple of very good games to convince me - simply good performances just don't do a trick once you've set your mind up about something.
Thing is, all three were at some point potential regular starters and didn't really progress so they became squad players. Not sure if we ever really developed a squad player, and Gibson even now doesn't look like anything more.
He's a decent player. He may develop further, but looking at our midfield options, it'll have to be a pretty rapid and impressive progress for him to have a chance, because we may well sign a midfield player sooner rather than later.
The relative paucity of success at the time would have an influence on people's patience with players. Wild opinions don't prove Gibson was better than him. Retard.
I agree with this mostly.
The thing I would say with Fletcher though, is that you could see the potential. Even when he wasn't really producing it for the first team, the potential and ability had been there in the reserves and was plain as day. Not really sure you could say the same with Gibson. Even Ole said something about him being a decent player, but only when he managed to drag himself out of first gear.
It's the workrate/positioning thing that gets me too, and his selfishness in the final third. Confidence is a good thing, but arrogance/ignorance/whatever it is, doesn't really work unless you're good enough to make it into a strength, and there's VERY few players who can do that. Darron Gibson not being one of them.