Fellaini Vs McTominay

The problem with Fellaini at United (or any top club) would be that everything he was so deadlly at with Everton is more or less useless at a club with a more sophisticated way of playing and greater expectation around what the fans expect to see. When we played him in a proper midfield role he was okay, he wasn't horrendous but what's the point in being 6ft10, all elbows and awkwardness and a regular goalscorer if quality is delivered into the box if you're then picking up the ball from a centre half for the majority of the game. That makes him redundant. The times we got him into the box, mainly from set pieces etc then he would show what he was good at, but we were never orientated to crosses from full back areas like Everton were with Coleman and Baines etc, and we never got him high enough regularly enough. It didn't make any sense, basically.

McTominay is not as good as Fellaini could be when used correctly. McTominay has a nice habit of scoring goals, but Fellaini was a genuine regular threat in the box and I don't think either are that good as deep midfield players so I'd call it even in that respect.
 
clarkydaz said:
Well Isnt that the contradiction? He isnt flying into crunching 50/50s, or in peoples faces every game. He jockeys and jogs around the peripheral of the game. He is over 6ft so people assume he is some grinder. Fellaini all day, which says it all for me
Click to expand...
Yeah fellaini had that old school mentality, he even looked like a player you’d see in a clip from a 1968-1970s game.
 
its a 5/10 v 5.5/10 situation either way. If I stuck my neck out and had to choose one, probably Fellaini. He had slightly more presence on the pitch.
 
Fellaini should be more of a cult hero than he is really, gave his all despite being a really limited player and he was truly undefendable on that back stick cross when he isolated the full back. Plus threw his weight around and had phenomenal hair.
 
Fellaini was just a different version of Shane Long and those type of footballers. Hard workers that are a nuisance but not really good at football or good much tactically besides playing the underdog. Desperate football. Put them in the Championship and they look the same as in the Premier League, just slightly more efficient.

What makes Fellaini stand out is his size and his technique compared to other players his size. That was good. Compared to average footballers he wasn't very good, he was just big.
 
Fellaini became a integral part for LVG and Jose.

That's how bad things got.
 
I absolutely hated Fellaini, felt like his signing was indicative of our decline, and the fact we overpaid for him.

Give me McT over Fellaini any day.
 
Fellaini was practically useless in a deeper midfield role. His passing was pretty horrendous, his mobility was cumbersome and because of that his timing of his tackles was usually way off.
Put up top though and he was effective, more so when the ball was lumped aimlessly into the box where he could utilise his main strengths ie chest control and heading.

But in general I dont understand the love for him really.
 
Fellaini was better than McT has been for us so far. I’d say McT might still have another couple of notches he can go up. Not sure if it will happen here because he needs games.

He needs to be wiser, calmer, more aware and more street smart. If this will ever come to him it will be through playing matches with good players. Trouble is, our good players will keep him out of the team.
 
Shit Vs Shit.
And you have Rabiot who you need. For free.
 
Fellaini was the more effective player.
Being a regular for the best Belgium side in recent history should make it pretty obvious that the guy was more than just a decent footballer.
 
The only comparison between McTominay and Fellaini is that both were played out of position in the #6 for way too long. While Fellaini is quite possibly the best player I have ever seen with his back to goal, that's all he had. McT can at least put a shift in and finish
 
Rossa said:
Unfortunately, especially for McTominay but also the rest of us, Fellaini was a better, more rounded player. His chest control was arguably the best in the world. His close control was better than McTominay's, not to say it was great, and Feallaini was much more of a physical threat than McTominay. He also worked harder, and although McTominay may be a little faster, neither is/was quick enough. McTominay is better at long range passing, but both were poor at short passing and making themselves available for the ball - McTominay is the greatest Houdini in modern football.
Click to expand...

Pretty much spot on. I'd say Fellaini showed for the ball a more when playing as a DM and had a tidier short passing game, whilst McTominay also has the occasional driving run into space in his locker.
 
Ahh the chest control master. Legend has it his first ever chest touch was a tackle and a pass all in one.
 
I’m no Fellaini fanboi but it’s Fellaini every day over McTominay. A long post could be written comparing the two but the bottom line is that Fellaini was a dominating presence whereas McTominay has no presence on the pitch whatsoever. And yes, I am fully aware of McTominay’s recent brace which may well have saved ETH from the sack.
 
UTD_Since_1978 said:
Couldn't stand Fellaini to be honest with you, all elbows & nowt else, wasn't he?

Everybody seems to love him because he scored a goal in UEL SF.
Click to expand...
No me neither should never have been at a club like United. Mind you neither should McTomminey, he’s woeful the vast majority of the time.
 
Fellaini. He's pretty underrated during his stint here. Me and my united supporting mates now jokingly always refer him as F God. He's better than McT for sure. I think he would be a very good 8 in the system ETH trying us to play now.
 
I think the disappointment surrounding his arrival and the 2013 transfer window as a whole tainted his reputation somewhat. In my opinion, his time here is underrated and he was far more useful to us than McTominay has ever been.
 
Skills said:
Tbf, I don't think Fellaini scored too many from set pieces too. It's just the chaos he caused by being there which added to the threat.
Click to expand...

Fellaini has much more control in the air, hence can lay up, or score, near the goal. McTom is more like a B-Graded RVN that can score at 18Y+ once in a while. From a Plan B (last 20min) perspective, Fellaini is much more useful. That was also his problem, he was much useless during the 1st 70min. Exception was probably on Mourhino's 2nd season (?), when our defenders were like a leaking roof. Mourhino deployed Fellaini in front of the back 4 to shield the defence and result improved. So Fellaini was like a lamp post box-2-box MF, functional but ugly if you want fluid build up.

Meanwhile McTom can be a water-boy throughout the 90min.
 
Both heavily derided but both under appreciated for my money. Neither the most aesthetically pleasing perhaps but I like a world of contrasts in football. Internationals staples for both their national teams and looked upon as leaders or to create a spark, both have had big game moments they can point to.

I’m not saying they were perfect or even close but I think their weaknesses and styles maybe made them easier targets than most. I definitely think their technical deficiencies are overblown and I’ve seen both, especially Scott play some very good passes. Both look better in balanced midfields though, which we have struggled with since Ferguson to be honest. Maybe that’s why both are appreciated more away from the club.

As squad players both were fine for me and while it’s fine to look to be more progressive, ie better ball players, ultimately they have to perform too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.