What he said.
Tackles Lost/ Tackles Won/Fouls Conceded
Carrick 10/54/9
Hargreaves 12/56/14
Hargreaves vs. Carrick, Feadingseagulls vs. Noodle, Chief (Bayern Fan!) vs. Logic
- Thread starter anything about now
- Start date
- Status
What he said.
Tackles Lost/ Tackles Won/Fouls Conceded
Carrick 10/54/9
Hargreaves 12/56/14
I am.
The information tells me that he has roughly the same passing stats as Makelele and Masharano, 2 players that are often called bad passers.
Infact, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I could have sworn the Chief went on a rant ages ago, saying what a poor footballer Makelele is, well, the stats show he's about the same as Hargreaves.
Now your just being obtuse. Do you really think that Makelele and Mascherano are bad passers? nevermind Hargreaves who is slightly better than them at passing.
I know your not stupid enough think that the job of a holding midfileder is to win the ball then give it back straight away with a hollywood pass..?
I know your not stupid enough think that the job of a holding midfileder is to win the ball then give it back straight away with a hollywood pass..?
Don't know. Don't watch the enough. But the general consensus seems to be that they are.
I never said it was.
If your referring to an earlier post where I said about him playing Hollywood passes, controlling a match etc, I was being sarcastic. Of course I'd never expect him to do that. He's simply not good enough.
He simply doesnt try. Why would he win the ball back to play a low percentage pass and give it straight away? People dont understand the limitations set on a holding midfielder.
The consensus is obviously wrong, they hardly give the ball away stats show this, as you said earlier it doesnt mean they are better than Fabregas, Carrick, ect. at passing but you must understand that they play a very economical high percentage game for the good of the team and to add balance.
Makelele's not a bad passer at all, but he in general passes on the attacking responsibility to someone else. Good player, plays within himself though, and as a result barely plays at all these days.
Mascherano's a pretty average passer of the ball, anything approaching a difficult pass he fecks up. He doesn't spend half an hour on the fecking thing though, which Hargreaves has a tendency to.
Mascherano's a pretty average passer of the ball, anything approaching a difficult pass he fecks up. He doesn't spend half an hour on the fecking thing though, which Hargreaves has a tendency to.
Mascherano's passing isn't bad and it can't all be that bad if Hargreaves' passing stats are similar to that of 2 holding midfielders in the league.
Makelele doesnt play because he cant play 3 times a week or maybe even 2? this is why he barely plays, cant hold it against him though because he was a terrific player.
Stats show Hargreaves has better passing than both Makelele and Mascherano. The one thing which was hard to see in his time at Bayern is the amount of time he takes on the ball, to him this is normal, the pace is much slower on the continant. The first few games he played for us were shocking in terms of releasing the ball quickly but he has steadily got better as expected.
Hmmm good points re the speed of the PL in comparison to German football. But TBH I thought his best game for us was still his debut.
How about winning the ball then using it to release a team mate into an attacking position, Carricks accuracy is almost as good as Hargreaves, but the attacks created column shows the difference for the team
Attacks created
Carrick 27
Hargreaves 6
Anderson 18
Thats why we are so much more of a threat with Carrick, he gets it he lets the team play, Hargreaves slows us down.
feck that. If Hargreaves was a better passer than Mascherano he'd be Michael Carrick.
The stats tell you how accurate his attempted passes are, thats all.
It doesnt cater for the fact that Mascherano has a much better range and vision and will try far more threatening passes than Hargreaves and oftentimes Makelele.
Only by idiots.
I included those two as the best players in league, currently playing the position we signed Hargreaves to play. And he is a more accurate passer than they are. Makalele is a phenomenal defensive midfielder. The best there is. His powers are on the wane, to be fair, but the Chief's well wrong if he thinks Makalele is a poor footballer.
The Fabregas/Anderson/Gerrard stats was just to give some perspective.
At the end of the day, you tried to imply that Hargreaves is a hit and miss passer of the football. I proved that you're wrong on this. Maybe you need to take this into account, the next time you're slagging him off? Dunno why you need to refer to the Chief's opinion on Makalele, surely you have an opinion of your own?
Well, that's your opinion, clearly. I happen to disagree. My opinion is supported by the fact that none of his managers have deemed his range of passing as good enough to play in a midfield two. He ie only ever picked to play as one of three in the engine-room.
Doesn't mean he isn't a decent player, mind, only that he has a clearly defined role in the team. A role that doesn't include trying to be creative. Just like Owen Hargreaves.
Well thats just pure speculation why dont you find the long passing stats to back up your non-existant arguement based on Caflaw.
EDIT: The stats are on complete pass's not "attempted".
Good post.
There is a difference between passing the ball, for the sake of passing, and passing the ball to instigate an attack.
Yes. Carrick is a more creative player than Hargreaves. With a better range or passing. That's pretty obvious, even without resorting to stats.
But Hargreaves is quicker, more aggressive and has a better engine. Which is why they should complement each other very well. In the same way that Pirlo and Gattuso work so well together.
One of this season's great mysteries is why we've played so few games with Carrick and Hargreaves anchoring a 4231, with Scholes or Anderson in a more advanced role. The only game I can remember when we did this was the derby at Eastlands, when we put in an unbelievably dominant midfield performance (just a shame we were shite up front)
IMO Carick should start every game. But I can certainly see a role for Hargreaves too.
What does that post prove exactly?, Hargreaves is less of an attacking threat, who doesnt know this? Compare him with players who play the same role.
Hargreaves is a holding midfielder, Carrick is a deep lying playmaker.
He is hit and miss with his passing. You just have to actually watch matches to see that. It has nothing to do with stats because he could play 100 passes 3 yards with a 98% accuracy, but if he tries one 8 yards he could have a 5% accuracy.
He takes too long and his piroets before passing are a huge waste of time and an eyesore that are only detrimental to our attacks.
If you honestly think Hargreaves is a better passer than Mascherano you obviously have no idea what kind of player Mascherano has become. He's now of the same mold as a Keane or Vieira, not just protecting the defence but being involved in a lot of attacking moves.
The same way Flamini is not just a player who breaks up attacks but contributes to his own team's attacks with good passing and (a lot more so than Mascherano) the odd league goal from open play.
Because of this, he's good in a 442. Hargreaves is not.
He's playing for Liverpool in a 2 right now and has recently been their best central midfielder (Gerrard released to play behind Torres because of this)
I'm not really going to get an un-biased opinion on Mascherano from you, now am I? Apparently you've been "a fan of his for years" (whereas I've only ever been a fan of MUFC) I guess i'll have to stick with what the stats show.
Answer me this, though. How many games has Mascherano played this season in a 442? Cause he has never done this for Argentina.
Your contradicting yourself. If someone has 80% and the other has 85% then how can the one who has 85% give the ball away more?
So Mascherano is in the same mold as Keane and Viera? OK. I dont expect Hargreaves to be.
Bullshit. Gerrard is a central midfielder. He gets forward a lot but you're out of your tiny mind if you think he's suddenly metamorphosed into a specialist striker.
Most of Hargreaves passes are pretty pointless. They never actually get us anywhere. And that's why he can't play in a 2 man midfield, because he is too limited.
Liverpool dont even play a 4-4-2. They play 4-2-3-1 with Alonso and Mascherano as the holding midfielders and Gerrard off Torres. He may have played in a 4-4-2 for little spells when Liverpool are chasing the game.
Argentina play with 3 at the back.
How many premiership teams do that?
And international football is another thing entirely. To add to that, its just been this season that Mascherano has improved his overall footballing ability or rather, unlocked his potential footballing ability. It's always been there but he's often played within himself due to his holding role.
It has been just the past 3 or 4 months where Mascherano has found this form. Until then his role was much more limited.
In a 4-4-2 you can't be that kind of player. It doesnt work.
All the best combative midfielders offered something going forwards.
So Hargreaves doesnt offer us enough going forward through the middle? Then tell me what are Scholes, Rooney, Tevez, Anderson, Carrick and Giggs doing?
Tel you what, mate, ever feel like you're banging your head on a brick wall?
These cnuts will believe whatever they want to, so long as it fits with their pre-conceived notions. Logic doesn't even come into it. Nutters
Thats where he's been playing recently
Like Scholes played behind Van Nistelrooy.He's still playing a fecking holding role!!
Thats where he's been playing recently
Stephen Gerrard is a central midfielder.
And that's the role he plays for Liverpool.
And this thread is a fecking mad-house.
And I've just remembered why I promised myself never to darken it's doors again.
And I'm outta here.
Play nice, chaps
I'm not contradicting myself at all. The two values were clearly independant, hence why there were in fact 2 values and not one
Yes, albeit only recently, Mascherano has taken the charge forward and instigated play at times. The same way Flamini can and Essien always has.
The same way Keane and Vieira used to.
Its not Hargeaves job to be in the final third creating setting up attacks thats not his job thats what Scholes, Rooney, Tevez, Anderson, Carrick and Giggs are doing. He should never rarly go ahead of the ball
Stephen Gerrard is a central midfielder.
And that's the role he plays for Liverpool.
And this thread is a fecking mad-house.
And I've just remembered why I promised myself never to darken it's doors again.
And I'm outta here.
Play nice, chaps
I'll join you for a cognac
Stephen Gerrard is a central midfielder.
And that's the role he plays for Liverpool.
And this thread is a fecking mad-house.
And I've just remembered why I promised myself never to darken it's doors again.
And I'm outta here.
Play nice, chaps
Paul Scholes was a central midfielder, it didnt stop him playing off of Van Nistelrooy and scoring and setting up a bunch of goals from in that hole.
That's where Gerrard has been playing recently with the return of Alonso to play alongside Mascherano.
Gerrard has been left free behind Torres, which has resulted with Torres' fantastic form.
You clearly haven't seen Liverpool play recently, which is fair enough. Pretending otherwise though would be a fascade.
I never said it was his job to create something.
Then why the feck are you complaining that he offers nothing going forward?
No, he's simply playing as a central midfielder now. I've seen him often breaking way ahead of the half way line to play a few passes in behind the defence, to have a strike at goal (like with his goal he scored last week).
I certainly don't call a player who does that a holding midfielder.
You clearly haven't seen him play for a long time, so give it up.
Watch the Carrick goal against City. It was Hargreaves that plays a first time ball for Scholes to flick it into space.
It was Hargreaves who played a one-two and his run on the right wing led to our goal scoring corner against Liverpool.
This is becoming a pointless debate because your hatred for Hargreaves is obvious and you refuse to see anything good that he does.
Last post..
In a attacking midfielders role in there 4-2-3-1 system, not as a striker which you have clearly said.
I'm not.
I'm complaining that he is a limited player who, when he has the ball, slows us down, goes on endless runs up back alleys, and can only play 5 yard passes. Not to mention his defensive flaws.
Basically, he is not well round enough to fit into a United midfield, unless we play 3 in the centre, but that means we can only play 1 upfront.
- Status