He has nothing to his game a top midfielder requires other than a bullet of a shot. Would much prefer to see a technically gifted player on there who can pass and move well, control the tempo etc... Cleverly on the hand looks destined for a big future with us a proper team player.
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?!
Tbh he was asked to play on the wing so a good performance was not to be expected but still the way he played really surprised me.No envy, nothing and many silly and avoidable mistakes.
He should have used this opportunity to at least show desire to play
He should have used this opportunity to at least show desire to play
I didn't see the match last night and he still has a lot of improving to do (he is only 22 though, and CM takes a lot longer to develop at than most other positions; the Essiens & Fabregas' of the world are the exception not the rule), but there is a video in the post directly above yours that you would do well to look at.
The only time he looks good is when he's on the deadball or one of his long range efforts goes in. Every other time he reveals exactly what he currently is. A very average and limited midfielder. If he didn't have the knack of scoring goals he'd be gone the way of Chris Eagles and so many others before him...If Hargreaves wasn't such a crock I wonder if Gibson would still be at united.
I think the first thing he needs to do is lose weight. This is a make or break season I reckon for him because I think it's made for someone to break into the team. It's still pre season, the team chops and changes and we all know he's not a winger so we just have to wait and see
You have to assume the weight affects his mobility. The first game of pre season when he came on and it showed him, he resembled a pub player and I think he needs to work on a lot of things before the first game of the season.
We do have better young talents coming through and if i was honest, Gibson would be pretty much near the bottom and that's why for me he can't afford not to bust a nut
You have to assume the weight affects his mobility. The first game of pre season when he came on and it showed him, he resembled a pub player and I think he needs to work on a lot of things before the first game of the season.
We do have better young talents coming through and if i was honest, Gibson would be pretty much near the bottom and that's why for me he can't afford not to bust a nut
I don't think you can mention Gibson in the same breath with Essien and Fabregas. I actually think though where a problem lies is with who he plays with too. Gibsons a bland player. I think alongside someone more dynamic it would make it easier for him because I think we all like to see something from Gibson that maybe he just can't produce
You're right about the weight. He looked fat in the MLS game, and a few other mentioned the belly, but yesterday it showed as well. I'm not however sure if just dropping a few kg will help...he was slow to begin with, and while people have made the comparison with Keano he never at any point looked like a combative midfielder to me, so even with a great engine I don't see him pressuring the opposition like a Fletcher, Hargreaves or Keano used to do.
To me, Gibson looks like a very limited, bland version of Scholes. He's got the deadball skills, but none of the vision, passing range or touch. He also can't (or won't) tackle.
Yes. Goals will hide all criticism, I feel the same with Macheda.
The reason Gibson is still around is partly due to lack of available options, and due to the fact he does have a knack of scoring goals. If Hargreaves wasn't such a crock, do you think Gibson would get a chance? I don't see how considering he's a lesser player. If Anderson had kicked on and was pushing Scholesy for a place in the first team would Gibson still be in the picture? Again, I wouldn't bet on it...
We have a midfield that's just not as good as it used to be. That's beyond debate. We are still reliant on a couple of 36 year olds to come up with some magic. Besides Fletcher, all the other midfielders have come up short at some point against quality opposition (whether it be Carrick, Anderson or Gibson).
So, unless SAF goes out and spends 20 million on a world class midfielder (which he seems reluctant to do on account of there being no value in it), we really have to give our young players a chance.
I personally think Cleverly is a better prospect for the long term because he has a more well rounded skill set, but as long as Gibson can keep scoring 1 out of 5 goal attempts he will always be in the picture. I just hope he can add more to his game because unless he scores in a game there is really nothing else that distinguishes him as a united player.
You said you were going to drop the Macheda crap.
We get it already, you don't rate him. No need to post about it 100s of times in threads that have nothing to do with Macheda.
Hargreaves/Cleverley vs Gibson.. different sort of players and in Cleverley's case, he plays in a different position(wings).
See how Fletcher played in those days. He was far from convincing. While he runs around a lot, he had no presence on the field. Game would just pass him by. It's the same thing happening to Gibson and Ando IMO. While there's no guarantee they would improve on that, but naturally they would improve some with age.
And Carrick and Ando have peformed well before in the big games. Just because recently they're in a poor form doesn't mean they won't be able to reproduce them again.
Nonsense, Macheda is a striker, if he "only" score goals and nothing else then I think it's very good thing to have that kinda striker.However Gibson is a CM, he needs to do more than that and that's why we're frustrated
Jesus feck and you wonder why you're a running joke on here?
I notice he always deferred to Scholes to control the game, instead playibg the simple passes. I can understand that.
To be fair the general point he's making is valid. Goals skew people's opinion. Not just on here, but in all kinds of media too.
It's classic with strikers and midfielders on here though. A striker could have a shit game but score and people will big him up to the high heavens on here. A striker could have a good game but not score and can get slated.
Because the comment came from Scholesy the validity of his statement was immediately dismissed.
The point stands - that Macheda can be fairly anonymous and add nothing to our game and if he scores - all is good. With a CM the standard is doesn't matter if he scores but, if he doesn't contribute otherwise - he is still judged on that.
Why is it that then a striker can be slated for contributing little else in a game he doesn't score in? So it's okay if he gets one chance in a game and scores and does nothing else but, should he not be provided that one chance - then he should have contributed more?
Gibson needs to do more than shoot. He hasn't looked that good in pre-season and neither has Macheda. Both their overall games are lacking right now to be effective in proper games. Macheda can get away with it because he can still play in the reserves and probably is at best 4th choice if not 5. Gibson though cannot - he needs to really find a way to up his game now.
Agree with all of that.
Some people only expect strikers to score. At this club you need to do more than that. Darren bent is a guaranteed goal scorer. Would i want him at United? Would I feck.
I'd say SAF vehemently disagrees with your assessment of Macheda, esp. given what he said immediately after the All-Stars game.
That's good enough for me.
As for Gibson, he is an average player with a very good shot. He sucks balls as a midfielder, and it's plain to see. It doesn't help that he's put on a few.
You slightly contradict yourself there.
You rejected Shimo's claims on Macheda because Fergie rates him and you say that's "good enough for you" but the fact Fergie rates Gibbo doesn't change the fact that you don't rate him.
I missed the comments where SAF said his overall game has been fantastic.
I haven't put down either of his finishes. I agree with SAF comments that he is a goal scorer.
However, before he can do it for United consistently - he needs to build other parts of his game.
SAF said that he has more than just talent. He has that 'something else' required to play for this club.
Of course he also mentioned his finishing.
One would do well to remember that this is a man who watches him in training.
That's what I was alluding to.
A striker's primary role is to score goals, some strikers like Michael Owen can spend an entire match on the periphery of a game making runs and never touching the ball but if he scores it's job done, with a midfielder goals are a bonus, the main job of controlling the play is the measure by which the role is judged.
Take a look below and I quote people who agree. I am not a joke. I at least discuss football in a football forum, you do not really post anything useful or anything about football.
You are a joke, Scholesy.
A big one.
Macheda is only 18. Hardly a finished article.
Ooops. I forgot. You think technical development is finished at 16, or is that 12?
You see? - Joke!
A big one.
Macheda is only 18. Hardly a finished article.
Ooops. I forgot. You think technical development is finished at 16, or is that 12?
You see? - Joke!
The point I made was not a mad one though.
How the hell this topic turned out to be slate Macheda one?
Macheda is 18 years old goalscorer who has scored some crucial goals already for the club.
When a goal scorer does what he should do best - score goals at 18, I think there's plenty of time to add something to his game in the fututre, don't you?
Macheda is 18 years old goalscorer who has scored some crucial goals already for the club.
When a goal scorer does what he should do best - score goals at 18, I think there's plenty of time to add something to his game in the fututre, don't you?
It was inaccurate though. While it's certainly not enough to judge a 23 year old midfielder on the few goals he has scored it is fine to do so for a striker. Especially one who is 4-5 years younger. Gibson is at an age where he should be making that transition from the reserves to the first team, Kiko has a few more years of development in him still. So it's early to judge him just yet. That being said, there is a point to your comment if it's applied to midfielders because they shouldn't be judged just on goals as a midfielder have more responsibility (especially in the system we play).
No doubt - he does seem to possess something special.
As for the seeing him in training and more on this topic - Gibson has been talked up by SAF as much and he does see him in training. What we are discussing though what we are seeing on the pitch.
I thought Gibson ended the season well but, I really hoped he would take the bull by the horns so to speak and come out with some real fire. You see the energy some of these other guys that are trying to make the team and just don't see that from Gibson on the pitch so far.
Right now he is offering very little outside from the shot. That isn't going to get him many games except maybe to be thrown on in desperation time when we need a goal and having a long range threat will help. His passing, his runs, making himself more available to the ball coming out the back and his effort to win the ball back all need to improve.
The qualities seem to be there - just the application is missing.
The problem with these types of threads is that actually, we dont know what "good enough" is.
Lets look at Fletcher. Is "good enough" to command a first team place, which he has done with some success, or is "good enough" meant to mean he reaches a level consistent with what we've had previously ie Robson, Ince, Keane...
Players like Gibson fit directly into this category. He may well make a good first team player, but will he ever make it to the level of players who he will replace or have become legends within the team.
Personally I think he fits well into the first category, but I wouldnt say he's likely to make it into the second.
Naturally you want the new crop of players to be better than the last, thats expected, but in some instances, its impossible to achieve. Fletcher couldnt surpass Keane, it was physically impossible, and I dont mind admitting that I've slated him in the past for not being good enough, when perhaps my expectations of what a player should be able to do were way too high in the first instance.
Lets look at Fletcher. Is "good enough" to command a first team place, which he has done with some success, or is "good enough" meant to mean he reaches a level consistent with what we've had previously ie Robson, Ince, Keane...
Players like Gibson fit directly into this category. He may well make a good first team player, but will he ever make it to the level of players who he will replace or have become legends within the team.
Personally I think he fits well into the first category, but I wouldnt say he's likely to make it into the second.
Naturally you want the new crop of players to be better than the last, thats expected, but in some instances, its impossible to achieve. Fletcher couldnt surpass Keane, it was physically impossible, and I dont mind admitting that I've slated him in the past for not being good enough, when perhaps my expectations of what a player should be able to do were way too high in the first instance.
re: Fletcher, i think he s more than just a good player and yes i m convinced that he ll be in the same category as robson, ince and keane. Maybe he s not there yet but he ll be soon.
Re: Gibson. Till now there s nothing indicating that he ll develop into a top midfielder. I ll be quite happy if we see him develop into an 'average midfielder' who scores 10 goals a season
Re: Gibson. Till now there s nothing indicating that he ll develop into a top midfielder. I ll be quite happy if we see him develop into an 'average midfielder' who scores 10 goals a season
I am afraid I would have to disagree there.
Having seen Keane, Ince and Robson from their arrivals at United to the end of their careers, I would say Fletcher is a long way short of the level they reached at United, and I dont think its within him to go much higher than whats hes at now.
Not saying he's a bad player, I just don't think he will achieve the standards that those three players did.
I remember keane and ince very well and robson to a lesser extent. Keane and Robson were much than just players for united. Even if they were not playing well, their presence was still felt on the pitch - they were a source of inspiration for the rest of the team. I do not recall Ince having that quality. And Fletcher is the same till now...that is...
But football-wise i think fletcher is not far behind...
That's my opinion of course..
Ince was a superb motivator of the team, never afraid to give advice and his opinions.
Ince would have been a legend in his own right if he werent in the same team as the two best CMs United have ever had. He was overshadowed somewhat, but he was equally as motivational and inspirational.
Sadly the cnut went and fecked it all up kissing THEIR badge.
From that day on I have hated that cnut with a passion..
Gibson is pretty fat and not really athletic and is still learning how to play in our midfield. But he scores goals with an awesome long shot and he can hit a dead ball unlike the rest of our team. Goals from the midfield are feckin huge. Anderson and Carrick have really failed to take pressure off our strikers. Like it or not Fergie rates Gibson and we will see more of him this season especially if Hargreaves and Anderson continue to be hurt.
Lets do this Gibson, I believe in you. First, lose some wieght and ask Valencia for some sprinting lessons.
Lets do this Gibson, I believe in you. First, lose some wieght and ask Valencia for some sprinting lessons.
SAF has never been as effusive in his praise of Gibson as he was of Macheda and Chicharito the night after the All-Stars game.
He's more talked about Gibson's 'power and strength' and that sort of stuff, rather than anything else. I just don't get the sense that Gibson knows what's going on around him when he receives the ball most times. That's criminal for a central midfielder in a club like ours.
So what you might call a lack of application I simply term a lack of imagination. I mean, I often see him bust a gut to close the opposition down or to chase back, but I don't see that same mobility or awareness when we have the ball.
Just from having a look at Cleverley for the reserves (which I didn't take too seriously at the time), and more importantly for us in pre-season as well as away on loan, he is a much more well-rounded player: mobile, quick, always looking for space and a threat in and around the box. He said he wanted to emulate Park, so I guess with his ability to find space, he's doing that. LOL!
Gibson just...underwhelms me.
Gibson and Cleverley don't play the same position.
I can't get my head around Gibson. It's obvious that his all round game isn't special bur he scores goal, lots of them. Bit like lamptard really.
It could be argued that they do.