He he
You're not blaming Carrick for the defeat, or the fact we never had Hargreaves available.
Phew!
Hargreaves vs. Carrick, Feadingseagulls vs. Noodle, Chief (Bayern Fan!) vs. Logic
- Thread starter anything about now
- Start date
- Status
He he
You're not blaming Carrick for the defeat, or the fact we never had Hargreaves available.
Phew!
No I'm not, I'm just stating the facts. Vidic wasn't fit. We didn't have a right back on the pitch. That defenseive unit had not played together before.
We would still have lost.
That's true. But the Everton game took a lot out of us, more that the Pompey match.
Yes. But that that is not what I'm debating. It isn't what you said either is it?
You said Hargreaves isn't fractionally as good as Gattuso.
Do you not know what that means?
He isn't.
Gattuso is amazing at what he does, and arguably the best in the world. Hargreaves isn't.
I'm actually amazed at people belittling our midfield of last season just to try to score some points in a Hargreaves vs Carrick debate. We produced the best football this club has seen in many years (which is saying something considering the players we have had at our disposal), and the midfield played a huge role in that.
In fact, this debate has nothing to do with Hargreaves or Carrick any more, it's turned into a discussion about the importance of (so-called) defensive midfielders. It seems to me that Karma and the Chief have decided that defensive midfielders are needed to succeed in europe (fair enough), and since Hargreaves is the closest we have to fitting that bill he is automatically labeled as important for the success of the team. The truth is that he has yet to prove himself (at united!), and that he must improve before he can be labeled as necessary.
Going back to the Milan game and using that as an example of how a defensive midfielder (Hargreaves) is needed is silly, simply because we did not play our strongest team and we were in the middle of a bad period. We've lost several games this season with Hargreaves on the pitch, and to opponents of far lesser quality than the eventual champions league winners.
In fact, this debate has nothing to do with Hargreaves or Carrick any more, it's turned into a discussion about the importance of (so-called) defensive midfielders. It seems to me that Karma and the Chief have decided that defensive midfielders are needed to succeed in europe (fair enough), and since Hargreaves is the closest we have to fitting that bill he is automatically labeled as important for the success of the team. The truth is that he has yet to prove himself (at united!), and that he must improve before he can be labeled as necessary.
Going back to the Milan game and using that as an example of how a defensive midfielder (Hargreaves) is needed is silly, simply because we did not play our strongest team and we were in the middle of a bad period. We've lost several games this season with Hargreaves on the pitch, and to opponents of far lesser quality than the eventual champions league winners.
You are still being as senseless as you were the first day you posted on Hargreaves. Why don't you return to this debate when you actually can think straight? We don't have a single midfield who is getting into the starting line up on regular basis currently. Not to mention when we faced Milan at the San Siro, Vidic wasn't injured, just not math fit. But don't let that get into the way of your usual, ill informed anti- Hargreaves rhetoric.Yeah that's why Hargreaves, surrounded by a vastly inferior Bayern side, with wingers as fullback at one point, totally dominated Milan home and away , only going out due to poor finishing, while we with vastly superior players struggled through out? and we are the feck wits right?
what an intelligent statement. You must think your like Plato
Scholes, Carrick and Anderson arent regular starters either. If its the final of the CL and all our midfielders are fit, Hargreaves is a certain starter but then again most of you are better judges of players than SAF.
And you have pulled down your trousers and bent over for Carrick?
Is there a point in commenting about the poster? If you have anything sensible to say about football on the thread topic, do so or feck off.
i did fecktard. take you own advice! that if meelan had thier second back 4 in there and hargreaves UNITED would have ran them out of OT in a heartbeat. and unlike you , i don't think hargreaves would have chg'd a thing.
you have a man crush on him don't you?
good post there.
Is that the same game where Bayern got beat by Milan 2-0 in Germany and knocked out of the CL last season?
Athletically yes. He is probably superior to Gattuso. Technically I don't know. Positionally? Apples and oranges.
Athleticism cancels out technical ability if you didn't know. Speed kills. Hargreaves has it. He has lots of it. If he makes a mistake he can recover. Can Carrick? Never might, Carrick doesn't try. He just sits back and leaves everyone exposed against superior opposition.
You really are in dire need of a brain.Uhmm, did you watch the game? Or are you just a Hargreaves = Judas irrational Canadian.
Get over yourself.
This thread is a fecking joke.
Our players are not machines, they cant stop every goal.
Our players are not machines, they cant stop every goal.
I seriously can't be bothered.
I will say one thing though. I will base my assessment on Hargreaves on what he's done this season while playing for Manchester United. I couldn't give a flying feck about some great matches he's had in the past. I'll judge him over the course of this season, not the odd great performance sometime in the past. And so far this season, I've seen him fail to, using all his fantastic athletic qualities like agility, balance, body control, pace, acceleration, stamina, neutralize some Average Premiership players.
Maybe that's because it's because he's not fully fit yet, maybe it's not. I don't know. Lets just hope he gets better and goes on to be very successful at United, otherwise, we have wasted a good deal of money.
Caftards expect Hargreaves to stop every goal. Even if we dont concede a goal, he gets slated for supposedly allowing Fulham to dominate us
I haven;t. Hargreaves clearly matched Gattuso over two legs. That is not debatable is it? Doesn't make him as good a player either. Or Keane who kicked Zidane and co's butts in that famous semi-final would be on Zidane's level. Or Phil Neville who twice over powered Vieira would be on Vieira's level.
Great post.
Caftards expect Hargreaves to stop every goal. Even if we dont concede a goal, he gets slated for supposedly allowing Fulham to dominate us
I must have missed something, who said that ?
Brains can nuke them both.
Yes, I did watch the game, that's why I was so surprised at how poor he was in that game. All Bayern needed was a draw, a 0-0 or even a 1-1 would've taken them to the semi's, but they couldn't even do that at home despite having the messiah hargreavs, who apparently would've won us that game in san Siro.
I agree. I don't see people supporting Hargreaves saying "Carrick is shit, if you like football and you like Carrick you have a hole in your soul" "Carrick is anti football" "Carrick is no good".
Yet the Hargreaves bashers are. They despise Hargreaves.
What I see are people defending Hargreaves as being useful. Useful for MANY MANY reasons.
We have a guy who is athletically gifted enough to take on truly world class players.
We have a guy who is good enough to get games for us and not hurt us.
We have a guy who is good enough to get games for us and thus spread the workload of an entire season out more so that when we go to the San Siro our midfield isn't totally fecking knackered because we are in a title race and Milan isn't.
We have a guy who is very good at taking free kicks.
We have a guy who is hard working, loyal, intelligent and dedicated.
We have a guy who doesn't give up and will play to win even when we are a man down.
I think there are probably hundreds of professional teams out there that would absolutely love to have someone with those characteristics.
Instead we have a bunch of short sighted feckwits, and I am being polite here, who will rail on him. Insult him. Bash him. When he does something that they can't possibly belittle, they prop him up with one hand while they yank the chair away with the other by saying shit like "Oh he takes good free kicks I guess but they aren't really all that threatening!" One in four is pretty fecking threatening.
Its pathetic that some of our supporters slate Hargreaves no matter what he does. They slag him off even when he doesnt play like against Newcastle.
We were 2-0 up and playing in first gear. The players were just keeping Fulham at arms length and saving their energy for Tuesday.
I've never said that. If you think he was poor, then I think you probably just want to see flashy play and goals. I think they are going to make the nets bigger in the NHL next season and put neon lights everywhere.
You should get season tickets for your local NHL team. Then you can drool all over yourself as the average score line is 44-48. Then every 8th second when a goal isn't being scored you can daze at the neon lights "ooo pretty!".
You wish. They were not protected from the pressure Milan thrust on us for 90 minutes at all! Due to Carricks' weaknesses and simply being poor on the day. No surprise those two crumbled like they did at OT. If Van der sar hadn't played so well we could have let in 6.
What was his scoring record for Bayern. 4 goals in 150 games? Scary.
What a load of shite,the main problem most people have on this thread is that hargreaves was overpriced,is overrated beyond belief and offers feck all we didn't have already. We all support him and want the best for united and when he plays well we have the balls to praise him and admit it,its feckwits like r.i.t.r.c. that have kept this thread going
he was shit against Milan, non-fecking-existant on the field. he did take a few corner kicks in that game though, it has to be said.
you on the other hand, need to watch less NHL and more football.
he does by implying that if hargreaves was in the side the semi-final would have been different. as opposed to UNITED starting 3 2nd teamers at the back and an injured vidic.
and i'm not saying hargreaves isn't a good player he is, he's not great and he's not good enough yet to be a starter. maybe next year he will be maybe not. maybe if he's injury free he'll get a better start to the season. but at this period i'd have carrick in front of him. in other words i wouldn't have him start in place of carrick unless it was for a reason (injury or resting him).
I think carrick is a stronger all around midf and positionally plays a better game.
Not. It's real lousy, I'm afraid. He has just repeated the same old tired arguments an excuse you lot use in Carrick's favour when it comes to that Milan game and why you think Carrick is superior to Hargreaves and should start every game regardless of his form, to mention the myth that his presence" won us the league" .
Sensible response, one swallow doesn't make a summer and all that. Personally I think that Moose is a great free-kick taker, I'd have him ahead on Ronaldo every time. But on this occasion, it was clearly a defensive error - who in a wall ducks?
Anyway just got back from London having seen the mighty reds - Moose included - dispatch a truly awful Fulham side.
Was surprised to see him start, expected Carrick yesterday and then Moose against Lyon. Perhaps Fergie is going to try Carrick and Anderson against Lyon? Would be a sign he considers them the first choice partnership, but we'll have to wait and see.
Oh, and did anyone see the Observer stats for the best tacklers in the EPL this season today? Carrick was second.
I really disagree with this. I'm not going to debate it all out and waste half an hour, but i'd like it on record that this post is complete bullshit. We're more likely to concede with Hargreaves in the side, over Carrick.
No you're absolutely wrong and if you actually believe this Stevie Wonder has 20/20 vision.
There is a group of people here, would you like me to name them? That HATE him. Hate is kind. They don't support him. They cut him down no matter what. They will blame him for everything that happens.
Chief didn't start this thread. He didn't start the other 30 odd threads out there that are dedicated to nothing more than dragging Hargreaves through the mud.
Maybe if you read some of them I won't have to list the people out there who do not support him. Which would seem to contradict your "we all support him" belief.
Absolute bullshit.
I've said many a time that I like Hargreaves and hope he succeeds.
Criticising his performances does not constitute despising someone.
I await an apology
The Carrick/Scholes partnership was the difference between us finishing a distant second (as we'd done the season before) and us winning the League. Few people would dispute that.
More like saying that Fergie is the master tinkerman. Mr Horses for courses.
I'm nearly speechlessTrue to an extent but the majority of the pro carrick posters still support hargreaves. There is haters everywhere.As for 'they will blame him for everything that happens' look no further than chief's views on carrick
Sensible response, one swallow doesn't make a summer and all that. Personally I think that Moose is a great free-kick taker, I'd have him ahead on Ronaldo every time. But on this occasion, it was clearly a defensive error - who in a wall ducks?
Anyway just got back from London having seen the mighty reds - Moose included - dispatch a truly awful Fulham side.
Was surprised to see him start, expected Carrick yesterday and then Moose against Lyon. Perhaps Fergie is going to try Carrick and Anderson against Lyon? Would be a sign he considers them the first choice partnership, but we'll have to wait and see.
Oh, and did anyone see the Observer stats for the best tacklers in the EPL this season today? Carrick was second.
But Carrick does not poses the agility, balance, body control, pace, acceleration and stamina that Hargreaves does, to be able to tackle.
Exactly.
I don't hate Hargreaves. Not in the slightest. I doubt he will, but I hope he turns it round at starts showing some kind of form that an £18 million player should.
As I say, criticising someone's performances does not mean that you hate or despise them.
Carrick isnt a bad athlete, anyone saw him in full flight, hes fast.
- Status