We need Fred more in shooting positions
I'll take "Things that Fred says himself, or to Bruno when he's standing over a free kick with him" for 10?
We need Fred more in shooting positions
I'll take "Things that Fred says himself, or to Bruno when he's standing over a free kick with him" for 10?
Did you not try to prove to me last week that passing stats are useless? I'm surprised therefore that you are now wondering what the stats are from yesterday.......
Seeing as how you asked however
Fred passes 81, completion rate 87%
Scott, passes 67(way less despite playing full 90) completion 90%
Bruno 84 passes completion rate 76%.
Far from Fred's best game yesterday but at least he wasnt anyonymous like some, Martial and Cavani I'm looking at both of you.
I though Bruno's performance was awful as he is meant to be our creative guy but we created zero and goal aside he was awful yet again. As Pogue said above, the problem yesterday was our three forwards, they were shocking to a man. Cavani had 16 passes with 66% completion rate, that's beyond pathetic in fairness.
Anyway, I thought Fred was poor yesterday but equally as poor as everyone else and nowhere near as poor as our front three.
It wasn't good enough, but it also wasn't a typical performance. It was probably his worst match since his terrible first season.Typical Fred performance. Question remains. Is it good enough?
Err, Carrick was absolutely a defensive player, and a very good one at that (better then any we have now). Basically a much better version (both creatively and defensively) of what Matic has been for us the last few years. The fact that we spent entire seasons with Carrick and Scholes as our midfield duo and we weren't constantly over-run says it all. He was someone who defended primarily with his positioning and intelligence rather than constant slide tackles and 'blood and thunder' though. Later on he played more with Fletcher (although that coincided with Carrick's worst run of form, not that I'm saying it was the cause), but he also went through Anderson, Giggs and probably Cleverley, sometimes in a two and sometimes in a three man midfield.maybe he would help but Carrick is not a defensive player, do you guys even remember? He usually played in 5 men midfield and 90% of times in the shade of aging Scholes. In Fletcher he had an absolute workhorse of a player who who tackled intercepted etc.
his only world class season came at 2013, otherwise people on this forum think he´s as good as gerrard or sth. I mean whatever. Anderson had legs and could run for ages, with Scholes he was the one to pull strings and controlled the game. With Giggs we played zombie football, too slow passing, with 5 men midfield, also let´s not forget Rooney was dropping deep a lot in his physical peak.It wasn't good enough, but it also wasn't a typical performance. It was probably his worst match since his terrible first season.
Err, Carrick was absolutely a defensive player, and a very good one at that (better then any we have now). Basically a much better version (both creatively and defensively) of what Matic has been for us the last few years. The fact that we spent entire seasons with Carrick and Scholes as our midfield duo and we weren't constantly over-run says it all. He was someone who defended primarily with his positioning and intelligence rather than constant slide tackles and 'blood and thunder' though. Later on he played more with Fletcher (although that coincided with Carrick's worst run of form, not that I'm saying it was the cause), but he also went through Anderson, Giggs and probably Cleverley, sometimes in a two and sometimes in a three man midfield.
It's amazing how a player who wasn't a good CDM was our main defensive midfielder in the most successful period in our clubs history, the one mainstay in a midfield that was constantly changing around him. Winning 5 PL's in 7 years (losing the other two by goal difference and one point) at a time widely believed to be the PL's strongest ever period, winning one CL and getting to another two finals. Was Carrick the main reason for all that? Of course not. But if our main midfielder for that period was as average as you seem to be making out it obviously wouldn't have happened.his only world class season came at 2013, otherwise people on this forum think he´s as good as gerrard or sth. I mean whatever. Anderson had legs and could run for ages, with Scholes he was the one to pull strings and controlled the game. With Giggs we played zombie football, too slow passing, with 5 men midfield, also let´s not forget Rooney was dropping deep a lot in his physical peak.
Yes I agree that Carrick wasn´t a hard tackler and intelligent player but he most certainly needed player with legs around him who could put in a tackle. BTW wewere often overrun in Europe even in 2008 it was a big battle. It certainly suited him for our team to sat deeper and paly on counters more often than not. Also he had the best CB pairing maybe past 20 years, with Erva in his peak too. I mean judging by your comments people still overrate him, and his defensive abilities. Otherwise he was a great player and very consistent one which was his best attribute but today even a type of player like him would come in handy. You certainly need an element of agreession and a lot of stamina.
You can´t have it all but football moved forward. The best teams in the world/ EPL past few years - sadly Klopp´s Liverpool and Guardiola´s City really don´t use a holding midfielder but energetic players who can cover ground and will ball all over the pitch. You see even a player like Thiago struggles at Liverpool. Their best football and most dominant came when they played Wijnuldum most often. Same with Kante at Chelsea and Fernandinho at City. I mean just feel free to go compare their defensive numbers and offensive ones as well, Fred is up there with the best players in that position but people don´t understand and moan about wanting Carrick to play passanger football again. It is enough to watch Matic stroll around to see our weakness.While there is not a one way to play football, football has moved on, and we are not in early 2000 or 2010s anymore to see which direction it goes.
For me I was always more a fan of Roy Keane and Fletcher rather than Carrick who for me is a clear downgrade, however I like players of that kind too, let´s say Xabi Alonso would be my favourit ebut compared to Carrick he provided much needed steel. But this shouldn´t be a Fred vs Carrick thread. Itis clear that we lack movement aggression and overal hungriness in most of the games, none of the players can press and unfortunately when the attacking players are out of form we struggle because of no real structure. We lack a system or structure so we know what to do if things are not going well not a DLP like Carrick who would add 10% more creativity at the expense of slowing donw tempo and open our defense even more. but here you go you will have people who will claim he was a good CDM, well he was good in 5 men midfield alongisde more defensive players and players with legs, and in front of two of the best CB past 30 years playing in a system which sat deep and played on quick counters most often than not..
That tactical line seems to be fading away from being effective last couple of years don´t you think? Obviously I am a much bigger fan of Bielsa than Mourinho but do I want our team to play like mad, not exactly. The balance is needed but without the added proactive aggression, and legs wedon´t get anywehere near the top. For that reason players like Fred, Kante, Wijnuldum are important more than Carrick because, Bruno, Pogba, Rashford... should be enough to roll over many teams in the right set up..
Good 2nd half and he got an assist
Terrific all-round performance, with a wonderful through ball for Rashford’s goal.
A lot of people claim he’s a bad passer but he’s not, he is however very erratic. Often plays quality balls through the lines and went one better tonight with that peach of a ball.
you can’t be a good passer if you are erratic.
Best game in ages.
That’s why I called him an erratic passer, meaning he can fluctuate from very good to awful. My problem is that many refuse to even acknowledge the good part.
every professional footballer is capable of passing the ball well. To be a good passer, you need to be consistent and reliable.
As I said earlier he played well tonight - and clearly happy when our players do well.
you can’t be a good passer if you are erratic.
I think this is just a semantic issue really, as we haven’t really disagreed about this.
yes you can if you actually take risks and force the play. When it doesn’t come off you run the risk of looking erratic. Whoever was comparing him to cleverly last week... mad if you’ve actually watched both players.
Debatable, without any further compariaons, Bruno is an erratic passer but a bloody good one at timea.every professional footballer is capable of passing the ball well. To be a good passer, you need to be consistent and reliable.
As I said earlier he played well tonight - and clearly happy when our players do well.
You're hardly classing Sociedad in the 'best teams' category?Fred's best games are always against the best teams since he's been here especially in Europe. Not bad for a so called shite player.....
Debatable, without any further compariaons, Bruno is an erratic passer but a bloody good one at timea.