Ramsdale is on 63.5%
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/316858/Show/Aaron-Ramsdale
Raya is 61.7%
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/276366/Show/David-Raya
AN outfield player, especially midfielder like DM has more influence on "keeping the ball".
GK or ST
- Thread starter AshRK
- Start date
Ramsdale is on 63.5%
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/316858/Show/Aaron-Ramsdale
Raya is 61.7%
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/276366/Show/David-Raya
AN outfield player, especially midfielder like DM has more influence on "keeping the ball".
We don't have any problems getting the ball into the final third, its only that we run out of ideas once we get there. That has feck all to do with the keeper as our midfielders, wingers and #10 are more than capable of getting the ball up the pitch. They just don't know what to do once they get there because the likes of Weghorst is their only option for crosses. A striker like Kane would be a game changer in this regard.
The same logic with keeper, we aren’t going to challenge the title anyway without upgrading our keeper because our keeper is hoofing the ball means we are only hoping for 50:50 or individual moment brilliance rather than the system. Hence adjusting the budget to sign both striker and keeper that fits the manager profile will improve us more than signing Kane but relying on DDG to hoof the ball.
I wouldn’t take them either. I also wouldn’t take Martinez. But they are far better than DDG in claiming crosses which DDG is weak at.
But we have problem in getting the quality ball into final third which shows the xG is still lower than Brighton. ETH specifically mentioned about our build up play needs to be better in order for us to improve our away game. Our away record has been the problem this season. 27.63 xG in away, while 36.60 xG in home. Far difference.
We actually don't, and even if we did, it wouldn't be the keepers responsibility to bail us out in that regard, especially in lieu of no proper striker to get the ball to. The build up play issue is largely down to not having a target to aim for in the box, inconsistencies between Antony and Sancho all year, and the likes of Martial not performing up to standard.
Fair enough. Your standard for Gk is really high, man
We actually did because xG reflects to the quality chances we create. If the chances we create is lower then the xG value is also lower because the chances weren’t expected to be goal.
It wouldn’t but it would be keeper responsibility to start the build up that lead to that. Hence why both keeper and striker should be equally prioritised.
Not mine because mine will be depending on who’s the manager is, it’s what ten Hag shown at Ajax. He demands his players to play from the back in a progressive way.Fair enough. Your standard for Gk is really high, man
If our manager is Mourinho then Martinez is more more than enough to play the Mourinho way.
These are meaningless stats. Just use your eyes to qualitatively see that we that our fundemental problem is we run out of ideas after our build up play near the opposition box. That has absolutely zero to do with our goalkeeper.
Ignoring the stats and based on what I watched, I can only say we are struggling to play from the back because our keeper likes to hoof the ball and lot of our chances tend to be from long shots.
To improve it, keeper and striker should be prioritised equally. In addition, new RB and new midfield.
If we're still this wasteful but slightly improve our goal tally into next season, we're not guaranteed top 4. Liverpool has shown, in form, they can run us close at the end of this season. If this form is a norm for next season, we maybe in trouble for top 4 with slight improvement, as we have Chelsea who has the squad and no Europe to give us a challenge for top 4 too.
Right profile is one thing. Quality is ultimately necessary. Best available ball playing GK may not be highest level GK. So upgrading on DDG now doesn't necessarily mean long term insured. Just look at Antony or Dalot. They're definitely the right profile. Better having them (Antony) than nothing, but doesn't mean they are performing in key player level. AWB still can replace Dalot as starter.
Let's agree to disagree here about which is higher in priority list.
Yes, because analytics often don't pass the eye test. Look at our past 10 or so games, where we have scored all of collective 6 goals. That wasn't De Gea's fault. It was because we couldn't put the ball in the back of the net in the opposing third.
Fair enough. Would you argue that the inability of our front line to score a goal or create chances against Bournemouth is attributable to horror play (presumably yet again) by De Gea or perhaps -- admittedly a crazy idea -- poor performances by Sancho, Martial and Antony themselves?
Based on the past 10 games, we are struggling to play from the back, because DDG hoof the ball or couldn’t retain possession, as a result, we struggled to control the the game against Sevilla, Brighton and west ham, and also the Spurs 2nd half.
I wouldn’t blame DDG for Sancho, martial and Antony being poor today. Hence why I never say keeper but not upgrading striker is enough. It should be both keeper and striker equally prioritised.
Easily a solid number 9 is the priority if the budget is limited. We don’t look like scoring more often than we look like conceding .
Our pocesssoin isn't based around De Gea's distribution, its based on Bruno, Casemiro, Antony Ericksen and the like gradually moving the ball up the pitch. Therefore blaming De Gea for our lack of goals is utterly absurd, especially when we don't have a proper striker to score them.
You don't need to dominate possession to win games but without goals you sure as hell won't
That’s because ETH knows de gea cannot be relied on and he has to work on what he’s currently have. If we want to play from the back then we must upgrade the keeper hence why ETH doesn’t just mention the problem is goals but he also specifically mentioned we need to be better in playing from the back because that’s his principal.
Can imagine the meeting.
So Erik, we scored less than Fulham, Brentford and Brighton. A sore thumb among the top six. Just a few more than Leicester who are going down. Less than last season. Unfortunately we're incompetent fools and the funds are tight. We can buy you one player to solve this issue, a brand new goalkeeper!
Heh.
So Erik, we scored less than Fulham, Brentford and Brighton. A sore thumb among the top six. Just a few more than Leicester who are going down. Less than last season. Unfortunately we're incompetent fools and the funds are tight. We can buy you one player to solve this issue, a brand new goalkeeper!
Heh.
Definitely ST over GK. We really need a true number 9 that can constantly put the ball into the net. Of course our attackers have to improve the final ball in order to take advantage of it. Currently both are not happening at a consistent basis and that is a major issue if you want to challenge for title or even stay at top 4. If our budget is limited, just spend all on one world class no 9 instead of getting few above average players. We need to focus on the key position that is going to improve us significantly. I can't bear watching weghorst and martial leading our line as starters for another season.
Striker, Midfielder then may be a GK
Getting a top quality striker in is much more important than replacing De Gea at this moment. We should be looking at addressing both issues at the same time however.
Yeah that would be my order
With a better centre forward, we'd have been 10-15 points better off this season. That might not have taken us to the title but would have made the last few weeks a lot easier.
The keeper is probably a bigger priority long term but probably not an absolute necessity this summer. I'd argue that signing a younger keeper might be the best option as, at the very least, we need a second choice.
The keeper is probably a bigger priority long term but probably not an absolute necessity this summer. I'd argue that signing a younger keeper might be the best option as, at the very least, we need a second choice.
Attacks always starting from the back in modern football is such a modern cliche. We've scored as much as Leicester and conceded less than Arsenal, but somehow a better goalkeeper would solve that problem. ST is a priority by some ridiculous distance.
I think De Gea has one more good season in him. Yes, he makes mistakes and is not great with the ball, but he did have 17 clean sheets this season. Keeping DG will allow us to concentrate on a getting a striker (or 2), cm and maybe a right back.
I would say the order of priorities is:
Striker
Midfielder
Goalkeeper
Second striker (if Martial leaves)
Second midfielder / center back
Right back
We probably need a right winger too, but we cannot expect to get one after spending close to 200M in Sancho and Antony. Maybe give Garnacho and Diallo a go there next season.
Striker
Midfielder
Goalkeeper
Second striker (if Martial leaves)
Second midfielder / center back
Right back
We probably need a right winger too, but we cannot expect to get one after spending close to 200M in Sancho and Antony. Maybe give Garnacho and Diallo a go there next season.
You do realize that the primary reason for passing out from the back, and not hoofing it long, is to maintain possession, instead of needlessly giving it away 30 times every game? Which we do, when de Gea hoofs it.
If maintaining possession is a cliché... Tell that to all the teams who are better than us and dominate games more than we do.
How do they do it?
Number 1 rule: Don't give away possession!
Wow, such a "cliché" that is.
This is exactly why de Gea is one of our main problems. With him in the team, it seems clear we are losing upwards of 10-15% possession in each game. No wonder we struggle to kill off games and control them.
We have had these exact same problems with some excellent strikers in our team.
We never score enough, and concede more than necessary, every single season 10 years on the trot.
Most important fix for both these problems?
1. Get a goalkeeper who doesn't give away possession 30 times each game.
2. Second most important fix: Get rid of or at least bench players who constantly give away possession or aren't press resistant. This includes Rashford, Wan-Bissaka, Fred, and often times Bruno.
3. Third and final fix: Add one or two killer strikers.
In that order.
Last edited:
Agree with this.
I also agree we absolutely need a striker but we absolutely need a goalkeeper who can help the outfield players dominate the ball and hence score more goals. The four teams who have scored the most goals in the league are those teams who play the game in the opponent's half. And they can do that due to the players at the back being comfortable on the ball, which includes their goalkeeper, and hence they flood the final third with 8 or 9 players who provide overload potential on the ball, aswell as the possibility of pressing the opponent high.
I know this won't register with a dated mindset but my post below from a different thread gives a bit more detail.
I agree here even though I think the tone is a bit more absolute than it needs to be
I mean, the overall consensus seems to be that Goalkeeper and Midfielders are seen as important by the majority but some think that the striker is the most important. Which is fair enough - the premise of the thread is pick either one, alright, we did and had some fun. But as soon as we have to go out on the transfer market, the need for striker, goalkeeper and midfielder(s) needs to result in us not splashing the budget on one single player, probably no matter how good he is.
Adnan: Very good post you linked to.
NZT-One: It was a bit absolute, to counter the absolutism in this thread that our main problem is the lack of a striker.
Our lack of a striker is a big issue, but a passive goalkeeper makes us even worse in every area of the pitch, both offensively and defensively. Some (many) simply don't or don't want to understand this, or exactly why and how City are so dominant.
It's impossible to reach the levels of City's sustained heights without a new goalkeeper. A striker is very important, but not as crucial. A team that can hold possession as much as City, will find ways to score without a striker.
Heck, City won the bloody league without a striker. They never needed Haaland, and they scored the same amount of goals last season without him. They score roughly 100 goals every season. Haaland didn't add to that tally. He just took more goals from his teammates. Albeit, he did it in a brilliant manner. And he did improve them, but not anywhere near how much they improved by dropping Bravo for Ederson.
And yet, so many people don't understand what it is that makes City so dominant. It's all possession-based, and maintaining high pressing lines.
And that's simply impossible with de Gea in goal. It's not impossible without a new striker, but it certainly improves us.
If people think we're going to win the league with de Gea in goal, they're in for a rude awakening. That would effectively mean we would have to keep on playing counter attacking football. That's just not going to cut it over 38 games. It might win us the odd cup or two, where luck and form is heavily influential. But, over a full league season, we need consistency at the highest level. And nothing is more consistent than having control of the ball, instead of hoofing it. And nothing is more efficient than playing in your opponents box, by pressing them up the pitch.
Calling this a cliché, means you simply don't understand the tactical importance of possession and gegenpressing.
It's like the people who want us to just play the "United way". Yeah, that's going to work out well. Let's beat City by devolving our game back to the '90s. Geez, wonder why none of top teams around the world haven't thought of that? Wonder why all of the top teams have more possession than us? There are a dozen stats out there to analyze, but nothing is more consistent as a correlation to success than these:
1. Amount of possession
2. Amount of completed passes
Those are two of the most indicative factors and measures of success.
With De Gea in goal, we will never improve enough in those areas. And in fact, ever since he joined, we've been bad at both.
A striker can't fix those issues. They need to be fixed from the back first, because that's where it all starts. That's where we have the ball before even attempting to create a chance. It's so logical, it's almost laughable to see so many completely ignore this, thinking a striker is the most important fix. It simply isn't.
But it it's surely important. And so is the fact that our most beloved players like Rashford -- and to a lesser extent Bruno -- are gigantic ball wasters. They simply kill our chances of retaining possession. And no, their goals and assist do not make up for this, simply because we score and create just as much without them. The goals just get more evenly distributed.
Fix those issues first, and adding a striker will make us contenders to challenge even City, on a consistent and yearlt basis. Not just in a one-off game where we strike luck on the counter.
Add a striker first, and they will have a graveyard shift compared to how effective it would be with a goalkeeper and outfield players who can retain possession. It would improve us, but not massively. Just how Cavani, Zlatan, or Ronaldo didn't really improve us.
De Gea is the main problem in our team, bar none. If you disagree, you simply do not understand how or why possession and high lines is crucial, and the biggest correlation to success, like City, and like all the damn teams across Europe who are better than us.
Sorry, it's a bit harsh. But it's the truth.
That's why Pep is Pep, and City are so damn good, because he knows and understands this. They don't tolerate players who can't keep possession and aren't press resistant.
NZT-One: It was a bit absolute, to counter the absolutism in this thread that our main problem is the lack of a striker.
Our lack of a striker is a big issue, but a passive goalkeeper makes us even worse in every area of the pitch, both offensively and defensively. Some (many) simply don't or don't want to understand this, or exactly why and how City are so dominant.
It's impossible to reach the levels of City's sustained heights without a new goalkeeper. A striker is very important, but not as crucial. A team that can hold possession as much as City, will find ways to score without a striker.
Heck, City won the bloody league without a striker. They never needed Haaland, and they scored the same amount of goals last season without him. They score roughly 100 goals every season. Haaland didn't add to that tally. He just took more goals from his teammates. Albeit, he did it in a brilliant manner. And he did improve them, but not anywhere near how much they improved by dropping Bravo for Ederson.
And yet, so many people don't understand what it is that makes City so dominant. It's all possession-based, and maintaining high pressing lines.
And that's simply impossible with de Gea in goal. It's not impossible without a new striker, but it certainly improves us.
If people think we're going to win the league with de Gea in goal, they're in for a rude awakening. That would effectively mean we would have to keep on playing counter attacking football. That's just not going to cut it over 38 games. It might win us the odd cup or two, where luck and form is heavily influential. But, over a full league season, we need consistency at the highest level. And nothing is more consistent than having control of the ball, instead of hoofing it. And nothing is more efficient than playing in your opponents box, by pressing them up the pitch.
Calling this a cliché, means you simply don't understand the tactical importance of possession and gegenpressing.
It's like the people who want us to just play the "United way". Yeah, that's going to work out well. Let's beat City by devolving our game back to the '90s. Geez, wonder why none of top teams around the world haven't thought of that? Wonder why all of the top teams have more possession than us? There are a dozen stats out there to analyze, but nothing is more consistent as a correlation to success than these:
1. Amount of possession
2. Amount of completed passes
Those are two of the most indicative factors and measures of success.
With De Gea in goal, we will never improve enough in those areas. And in fact, ever since he joined, we've been bad at both.
A striker can't fix those issues. They need to be fixed from the back first, because that's where it all starts. That's where we have the ball before even attempting to create a chance. It's so logical, it's almost laughable to see so many completely ignore this, thinking a striker is the most important fix. It simply isn't.
But it it's surely important. And so is the fact that our most beloved players like Rashford -- and to a lesser extent Bruno -- are gigantic ball wasters. They simply kill our chances of retaining possession. And no, their goals and assist do not make up for this, simply because we score and create just as much without them. The goals just get more evenly distributed.
Fix those issues first, and adding a striker will make us contenders to challenge even City, on a consistent and yearlt basis. Not just in a one-off game where we strike luck on the counter.
Add a striker first, and they will have a graveyard shift compared to how effective it would be with a goalkeeper and outfield players who can retain possession. It would improve us, but not massively. Just how Cavani, Zlatan, or Ronaldo didn't really improve us.
De Gea is the main problem in our team, bar none. If you disagree, you simply do not understand how or why possession and high lines is crucial, and the biggest correlation to success, like City, and like all the damn teams across Europe who are better than us.
Sorry, it's a bit harsh. But it's the truth.
That's why Pep is Pep, and City are so damn good, because he knows and understands this. They don't tolerate players who can't keep possession and aren't press resistant.
Last edited:
As much as I would like both, if I had to choose then I simply apply the old Fergie trick of looking at the league table. He always said 'The league doesn't lie...'
We've let in 41 goals. Thats better than Arsenal and Liverpool. In fact only Man City and Newcastle have let in fewer in the entire league.
However, looking at goals scored then we have only scored 52. To put that into perspective, Leicester, who are in a relegation battle, have only scored 3 less than us at 49.
So the answer is simple. We need a Striker.
We've let in 41 goals. Thats better than Arsenal and Liverpool. In fact only Man City and Newcastle have let in fewer in the entire league.
However, looking at goals scored then we have only scored 52. To put that into perspective, Leicester, who are in a relegation battle, have only scored 3 less than us at 49.
So the answer is simple. We need a Striker.
Fundamentally, I’d argue having a ball-playing goalkeeper would let us keep the ball more and play higher up the pitch, which would score more goals automatically.
How would we score more goals automatically when we don't have anyone to stick it in the net? You're still left with the same problem.
I don't disagree with you that we need a new GK (thats why I would rather have both) but realistically we can probably get away with De Gea for one more season. There's no way were getting away without a new striker for another season.
Rashford has papered over the cracks this season.
Who exactly would be scoring them?
It doesn't matter who scores them.
If we can recycle possession -- which we simply can't with de Gea -- we won't concede many chances, and we will create even more than we already are.
We'll score more, and concede less, even without a striker.
City and Liverpool haven't had a striker for years.
Changing the goalkeeper improves us in both ends.
A striker is needed too, but simply can't transform us more than if we were able to retain possession and control our games
Put a striker into a team that has not nearly enough possession to challenge teams like City?
We might score a few more goals, but we will still struggle like hell over the course of a season. Just like we did with world class strikers like Zlatan, Cavani and Ronaldo. We even struggled with van Persie -- who himself was brilliant -- but managed to win that one on pure will and determination, with some Fergie voodoo.
Put a striker into a team that controls the ball? Now, that's lethal.
How can you not see this? I genuinely would like to know how you're not getting it.
Last edited:
You could just go to Manutd.com and look for a list of our current players ^^ We scored goals this season, haven't we? Not enough maybe but we did. And we will continue to score. Not as many as with a good striker, at least the probability of that is quite high, but the more chances you create, the more goals you'll score.
I think it is quite tricky to distinguish how big of a transformative effect a certain addition might have on a team. Lets face it, this is not only connected to the position but also to the individual player and a few other factors as well. Therefor it is difficult for me to buy into the premise that a new GK will result in better output on both fronts per se. That is connected to so many other factors as well. But in the end, I think nobody can say for sure what is more important but what we all can agree on is that both are important and therefor should be brought in.
Pretty sure if United ends the window with no striker being bought, the backlash will be big as well so neglecting it, would give a bad impression too. Don't think it will happen anyway.
Last edited: