Old enough to have watched Fabregas break through? He's the one I'd compare Mainoo to
England Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Old enough to have watched Fabregas break through? He's the one I'd compare Mainoo to
What. Explain
I guess that poster will answer, but I understand it in terms of midfielders breaking through at a young age? What don't you get about it?
If you check the post I quoted, he stated best 18 year old CM they had seen breakthrough. Fabregas at 18 was the best I've ever seen breakthrough. He was incredible in that Arsenal side
I think we're overrating Mainoo here.
He's excellent, but Fabregas came out at 18 as ready made one of the best CM's in world football. Mainoo is not that.
In the past 5 years, there have been better midfielders at 18 years of age. Pedri, Gavi, Bellingham and Camavinga are the standout ones.
My original post was replying to someone saying Mainoo was the best midfielder they had seen at 18, my reply was that its Fabregas that you'd need to compare him to for that mantle and he isn't there yet.
I do think that there tends to be an unwillingness to name players as being as good as some of the top players from the past though. Mainoo has been excellent in his debut season, Fabregas had his debut season at 17 (debut at 16, but no league games that season) and didn't feature anywhere near as much, whilst obviously being in a better side. It wasn't until 05/06 when he became the mainstay in the side playing 90 minutes most weeks, so it's not as if he himself wasn't eased into the first team picture.
- Of course Barca's midfield trio would have less coherence without the other 8 Barca players surrounding them. No one is arguing that it wouldn't.
- Of course Spain would have had a weaker (though I'd argue not "much weaker) team without Alonso in it. No one is arguing that it wouldn't.
- Of course Spain chose the formation that gave them the best chance of winning. No one is arguing that it didn't.
- Of course Spain could easily played 4-3-3. No one is arguing that they couldn't.
I don't have any particular affinity to a 4-3-3. If I did have some emotional attachment to a formation, it would be 4-4-1-1 for reasons that would be obvious to any Arsenal fan who became a fan as a child in the 90s.
Had I been priviledged enough to be Spain Manager 2006-2010, I would also have selected Xabi Alonso. Not because doing so was the pragmatic choice. Or even the "ideal" choice. But because it was the right choice. Playing Alonso made Spain better and Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets are all tactically flexible, technically gifted players.
Yes I'm 34 so I do remember Fabregas breaking into Arsenal's midfield as a teenager and he's certainly got some similar qualities.
For me though, and this isn't a comparison many United fans will relish...Mainoo reminds me of the player that Paul Pogba should/could have been.
Great at shielding the ball, skillful and can beat a player, press-resistant, can control the tempo of a game, great range of passing, offers a goal threat....all the while being much better defensively than Pogba and much better (already) at decision-making and knowing when to dribble, when to pass, when to play one-touch etc...Pogba massively complicated everything at his worst. Mainoo makes everything look easy and almost always takes the right decision.
There's also something of a player like Andrea Pirlo in him, he's got that effortless ability on the ball which allows him to seemingly play at half the speed of his opponents and yet always look to have loads of time and be in full control.
You literally said it was "Insane" to say Xabi Alonso was picked for tactical reasons by Spain, over them strictly using the Barca magic triangle in midfield.
In addition Spain being able to play 4-3-3 or not had nothing to do with my argument nor our debate. Rather my argument was the didn't use it because it wouldn't have made them strong enough to win.
The same way I'm arguing England picking the XI and tactics YOU outlined, wouldn't make them strong enough to win.
You're misconstruing the context of me using the word ideal. I'm simply using the word implace of "preffered'.
I'm not accusing you of just having "a fancy idea in your head." I'm stritcly disagreeing with the XI & preffered tactics you outlined. Nothing else.
My contention is England doesn't have the personnel for the superior tactics y'all believe he lacks. I also feel y'all regularly unfairly accuse him of botching his sub's. Even in games in which the sub's NEVER cost you the tie.
Who said Alonso wasn't picked for tactical reasons? Me? The person who said this?
Had I been privileged enough to be Spain Manager 2006-2010, I would also have selected Xabi Alonso.
And this?
Playing Alonso made Spain better and Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets are all tactically flexible, technically gifted players.
What are you talking about? For the last time, feel free to disagree me, but continually disagreeing with things I never said it kinda boring. What I actually said was:
We know that Alonso’s selection wasn’t due to Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets being unable to function without their Barca teammates because:
A) That’s an insane idea to begin with
B) They had a bunch of their Barca teammates in the Spain team
Which of those things (you know, things I've actually said) do you disagree with? Stop with the straw man aruguments.
Mainoo promoted.
Southgate better not feck it up!
Southgate better not feck it up!
Not behind the decision. Best thing for him would be to focus on United for the rest of this season. Then relax in the summer. This is an unwelcome distraction.
Only caveat is that I’d rather he play 10 minutes for the senior team than 90 minutes for the 21s
Only caveat is that I’d rather he play 10 minutes for the senior team than 90 minutes for the 21s
Southgate isn't the type to just thrust him into the deep end. I'd expect this camp is more for him to see him in training and possibly get a cameo in one or both of the games. I think the aim for this camp would be to integrate him into the wider group and get to know him and his football a bit more.
I mean... I'm super happy for Kobbie who completely deserves it, but what exactly has changed since last week? I didn't see anything about another midfielder pulling out because of injury, so is Southgate really just drafting him in because of the weekend performance?
Not necessarily a 'deeplying playmaker', more just a midfield that retains possession and is composed in the bigger games against teams with equally qualified central midfields (normally Semi Finals onwards).The main reason why England lost the previous Euro final to Italy (apart from the penalties. Besides that, Italy controlled the game) is because they simply not have a deeplying playmaker.
Southgate may tinker with playing Stones or TAA in the anchorman role, but neither of them are playmakers.
Mainoo looks too dynamic to be a deeplying playmaker. He'll thrive as a classic number 8.
A player who is now thriving at Brighton, Billy Gilmour, would walk into that England midfield. He's not flashy or glamorous or sexy but he's able to dictate and control the tempo of a match in a way that no English midfielder can.
Too bad he's Scottish. Yay!
We do lack that sort of profile, I agree.
It was a mistake to leave him out in the first place, I think Southgate probably thinks that. Correct decision to take him. A no-brainer really.
It could be that someone may pull out of the squad or isn't fully fit (but will still remain in the camp). I suspect it may have just been something at the back of his mind that he hadn't decided on yet and due to his performance at the weekend and conversations with other coaches meant they decided to call him up.
Looks like it.
One game later he is called up.
I’m glad he’s being very careful development wise in making these decisions.
If he called him up before he would have come in through the back door. He’s now been hauled in through the front door with all eyes and pressure on him.
Southgate is a turd of a manager.
This past weekend, watching United-Liverpool, Southgate exclaimed "oh, that's Mainoo?!"
I mean, fair fecks if that's it, but as @Pexbo's post shows, it kinda goes against what he'd explicitely stated about Mainoo last week. Feels like he's sort of making things up as he goes along.
Checks his nationality Oh awesome I can call him up!
He did kind of hint that it might happen.
He should have been in from the beginning. France called up Zaire-Emery straight away as a comparison. Would be great experience for him and aid in his development.
Cesc was a monster at 18. Already a fully formed, world class midfielder. Mainoo is a huge talent and already a very goog player, but he's nowhere near Cesc's level. He's more in line with the Gavi's and Camavinga's - great young player, good enough to start or at least get serious minutes, but not yet the sort of player you'd hand the reins of your midfield
@P-Nut my bad
I thought it was too soon for Mainoo (not based on ability, just thought long term there was no rush) but would be great for him to make his debut coming off the bench at Wembley against Brazil!
So funny that a plodding lump of a player like Lee Carsley is in charge of the u21s, good luck to him I guess, does seem like midfielders make the best coaches these days
Those quotes do look contradictory but I don't really think it will make a difference to Mainoo in terms of how he's been called up. It's quite common to see players getting called up outside of the squad announcement and I don't think it applies additional pressure.
It's desperation. Southgate desperately needs a midfielder with roughly that skillset - it's part of why Henderson keeps getting called up - and his performance against Liverpool was the kind that makes you take notice and consider that he might be ready for England as well
I expect both him and Henderson are going to get minutes in these games, if he does well and finishes the season strongly there's every chance he starts at the Euros
For me it bleeds into the same thing. Without Messi or Messi level fire power upfront the rest of the set up was affected. So the best thing possible was to set up to maximse the biggest strength which was midfield
For me "the how" and "for what" are the key. For me England strength's lie in their pace, and their final third creativity. Thus the need to have a solid defensive base, then a deep midfielder that can consistently find the players in the final third to do their thing IMO would maximise that stremgth.
Why I personally think TAA is the answer
is the role he currently plays for Pool. He is the one constantly finding Liverpool's danger men quickly and accurately in the final third. I also believe he has the tools to play out of a press and loves to be on the ball. Plus his defending is good enough for a second deep midfielder.
I can envisage England back 6 winning the ball deep. Its given to TAA and BANG the ball is at any of Bellingham, Saka, Foden etcs feet in the final third to do something and feed Kane. During every transition of play.
Yet if they are facing an opponent they can dominate the ball against. TAA's passing range from deep is like that of a 10. Add to that crossing if he gets into the right half space.
I favour such a set up because I believe it isn't too massive a shift from how Southgate sets up already with 6 defensively solid players. Yet it finally incorporates into the side a weapon England has till now been unable to use at any recent tournament. The creative ability & passing range a TAA possesses.
He's been doing exactly what he did on Sunday pretty much every time he's been played (maybe apart from the Newcastle game). It's just another example of Southgate being generally speaking clueless. But whatever, good for Kobbie.
Top lad!
Think of everything he can learn from Jordan Henderson
You the person who originallly posted this:
[Maybe Spain selecting Alonso had more to do with him being a world class player and less to do with Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets being unable to operate as trio outside of Barca.]
In reply to me implying Spain instead of playing 4-3-3 with Barca's magic triangle, added Xabi Alonso to the mix, to make the team tactically better able to win. Over replicating the exact 4-3-3 set up of Barca with the best midfield 3 on earth at the time.
THATs what I'm talking about!
That reply to me seemed you did not believe it was tactical & was SIMPLY because Alonso was world class. Plus that I was arguing the Barca magic triangle couldn't function away from Barca, which was clearly not my argument at any juncture.....
Feel free to correct that point of confusion.
I already strongly disagreed with the above earlier because
a) my argument wasn't the magic triangle "couldn't function outside barca". That's the straw man.
My argument was the TEAM did not have a starting defence nor starting attack used to playing with THAT midfield! Thus Spain would be unable to replicate Barca's exact success set up like the Barca 4-3-3.
The self same way if England dared play Bellingham, Rice and Foden as a midfield trio, the set up would not achieve success thanks to both the defence and attack having zero clues how to play behind, nor ahead of such a midfield tactically.
b) having 'a bunch teamates" isn't the same thing as having the identical know how in the set up. Spain's first choice defence and attack was nothing like what Barca was using in 2010. Even with a few Barca teamates sprinkled in the XI.
Almost certainly that is the case although if he had been paying attention over the last couple of months he’d have realised he’s capable of that sort of performance already.
Good decision made in the end!
I do believe that selecting Alonso has more to do with how brilliant he was as a player rather than than Barca's trio not being effective without their teammates. I think that trio would have excelled for Spain. Obviously, they were even better with Alonso because Alonso is brilliant and they're tactically flexible.
"My argument was the TEAM did not have a starting defence nor starting attack used to playing with THAT midfield! Thus Spain would be unable to replicate Barca's exact success set up like the Barca 4-3-3."
No national team has a starting defence or starting attack used to playing with any club midfield. That's redundant.
No national team can replicate Barca's exact set up. Also redundant.
Using that logic, Alonso wouldn't have been able to replicate his club form for Spain as he had only Casillas and Ramos that were used to playing with him each week.
If you think Foden / Rice / Bellingham wouldn't work for England, that's cool - I'm sure loads of people would agree with you. But citing the Spain Manager selecting Alonso and playing Iniesta coming in off the wing to support that point of view is a particularly weak argument.
I'm looking forward to seeing him play.
Did someone have to point out to Southgate that Mainoo is actually English?
Struggling to get my head around what changes over the space of one game that's so drastic you effectively re-name your squad after already naming it.
I'm torn. He deserves it but I don't want both us and England ending up leaning heavily on him when he's 18.
Also comparisons with Fabregas are silly. You can't judge how good an 18 year old will be by comparing them to other players when they were 18. Rooney was a better player than Ronaldo at those ages. Frederico Macheda was a better player than Harry Kane...Januzaj was better than Mo Salah....doesn't really work does it?
Struggling to get my head around what changes over the space of one game that's so drastic you effectively re-name your squad after already naming it.
I'm torn. He deserves it but I don't want both us and England ending up leaning heavily on him when he's 18.
Also comparisons with Fabregas are silly. You can't judge how good an 18 year old will be by comparing them to other players when they were 18. Rooney was a better player than Ronaldo at those ages. Frederico Macheda was a better player than Harry Kane...Januzaj was better than Mo Salah....doesn't really work does it?
Fuel for banter twitter