Yeah, I said as much earlier on in the the thread and also that I thought it was a nothing argument, but he just got upset and started hurling insults around.
8
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 54
- Goals
- 11
- Assists
- 11
- Yellow cards
- 7
- Red cards
- 1
- Status
Yeah, I said as much earlier on in the the thread and also that I thought it was a nothing argument, but he just got upset and started hurling insults around.
Despite Tuesday's game, I would love to see him get a consistent run as our #10.
Is that an app or website you use for those player positions on a map graphics?
The ones I've posted in this thread are from fourfourtwo statzone, I think Squawka also has heat maps but the match zone thing isn't working for me.
Thanks
Where did I hurl insults around, honestly, you're on a wind up aren't you?... There are some cameras here and some guys are gonna rush in and tell me how hilarious it is that I got rused, that it is all part of some caf initiation humiliation ritual?
The argument is pretty simple, when Van Gaal talks about balance he wants his left and right forward to be mirrored (ie as the diagrams explained pretty much in the same spot on opposite flank, Mata is well back in most of them bar the Liverpool and Newcastle one). Back in NL max's post about LVG's tactics he talked about how the two wide players are to be direct and attack the goals in both the channel and inside. There is evidence there that Mata has not been doing that effectively at all. Also he has more passes backwards this season than forwards and I honestly can recall maybe twice where he drove directly at his fullback (or past) and cutting to the area for a shot, Swansea to force a low save from Krul and against Tottenham where he had a couple of quick shots into a defender and wide of the goal.
This was all explained many pages back. If you look at the below, even the fact that his influence says how far forward he is, look how many touches he has in the grey area basically where his position as a right forward is.
Yeah they aren't working for me either, I thought my browser had a problem or something and their ios app is absolute garbage.
I think this is your problem; you expect him to mirror the positions of an out an out winger in Depay/Young. There is no way in hell that Van Gaal expects Mata to mirror the player on the opposite flank. Mata is never going to "attack the goals both the channel and inside", he is only ever going to come inside to influence play and of course he's never "drove directly at his fullback"... He isn't a winger.
Mata is always going to be 10 yards further inside than his opposite number, he's usually going to be 5-10 yards deeper as he'll drop into midfield to influence play. He's never going to beat a fullback and he's never going to attack the channel. Unless Van Gaal is a blithering idiot, which his record suggests he isn't, then he won't be expecting Mata to do any of the things you say he should be doing. I'd love to see a City fan criticising Silva (when he's on the left) for not doing the things you're lambasting Mata for...
You could criticise Mata for being a bit slow/loose in possession; you could criticise him for not being incisive enough; you could criticise him for not imposing himself enough, however the things you are criticising him for are bizarre. It's like criticising Schweinsteiger for not dribbling past players several times a game.
But, as I have replied to you a few times now thats a rather silly criteria to judge him on. In LVG's ideal world he may not like a player like Mata, but expecting Mata to get wide take on a full back and isolate them is just ridiculous its not his game and he's clearly not being asked to play there. You can tell that from the various graphs and maps average positions that you've posted in here yourself.
As I've said before, I have no problem whatsoever with people thinking that we'd be better off playing with a more direct, traditional winger over Mata, if thats your opinion then fine, I have no problem whatsoever with people thinking that Mata's not plying particularly well this season, if you think that then fine.
What I do I have a problem with is fundamentally misunderstanding the role Mata is being asked to play in this team and then criticising him for not fulfilling criteria that he's not being expected to fulfil.
Lads, jesus lets forget this. I can't keep going through it over and over again. I say right inside forward and you instantly explain back to me what a winger does and why he doesn't do it, that has happened a couple of times now. I'm not trying to say he must be a winger. I'm saying he should keep his shape and attack with the ball while in the final third and not turn back and inside and pass it off and hang about. Have some dynamism in the role he is playing at inside forward. (Not winger) He needs to mirror what Depay's doing because Van Gaal has said in the past his wide players are to be direct and put pressure on their marker to stretch the play for the 9 and for the 10 to run in advance of the 9. That dire experiment with Depay and Januzaj.
He's at 10 now anyway so I hope he stays there so we don't have to revisit this again, forget about it.
He's at 10 now anyway so I hope he stays there so we don't have to revisit this again, forget about it.
It's because you're making the fallacious argument that he is expected to be a winger because he is playing on the right.
I suspect from your last few sentence you actually fall in the camp 'I don't like seeing Mata playing from the right, I think we'd be better suited with a more traditional winger' which is fine, but just say that. Expecting Mata to change his game and do what you're asking just isn't going to happen, partly because Mata isn't that sort of player and partly because he's not being asked to.
Lol, "winger" now you are on the wum. Well played.
Yes I know you're calling it an inside right, it doesn't change the fact that you're fundamentally criticising Mata for not performing the traditional roles of a winger.
So, now that we’ve established that he isn’t a winger of any sort, I have a question.
He doesn’t take on fullback, he doesn’t stay on the right, he doesn’t influence the play. What he does is drift all over the pitch, and makes a lot of sideway and back passes. Could somebody explain to me what his role in the team is?
People saying he’s our most productive player. He is also greatly responsible for the number of goals from open play we have scored (4 in 5 games), as he is the player with most freedom.
That’s not directed at him, I just don’t think that the way we’re using him right now is beneficial for the team. I’m pretty sure he was deployed much more of a forward last year and it suited him well.
He doesn’t take on fullback, he doesn’t stay on the right, he doesn’t influence the play. What he does is drift all over the pitch, and makes a lot of sideway and back passes. Could somebody explain to me what his role in the team is?
People saying he’s our most productive player. He is also greatly responsible for the number of goals from open play we have scored (4 in 5 games), as he is the player with most freedom.
That’s not directed at him, I just don’t think that the way we’re using him right now is beneficial for the team. I’m pretty sure he was deployed much more of a forward last year and it suited him well.
Aye, he seems to have a lot of license to drift about this year, certainly more than he had at any point last year, I think.
Which really raises the question of how unhappy LVG actually is with some of the things Mata has been criticised for. I mean people criticise Mata for sideways passing and being very cautious in possession, comparing him unfavourably to players like Herrera and even Januzaj while he was in the #10 role. Yet Herrera struggles to get into the team, Januzaj has been shipped off to another country and Mata is a nailed on starter given extra freedom.
I suspect that LVG's vision of what Mata should be doing is quite different from a lot of the caf's.
Which really raises the question of how unhappy LVG actually is with some of the things Mata has been criticised for. I mean people criticise Mata for sideways passing and being very cautious in possession, comparing him unfavourably to players like Herrera and even Januzaj while he was in the #10 role. Yet Herrera struggles to get into the team, Januzaj has been shipped off to another country and Mata is a nailed on starter given extra freedom.
I suspect that LVG's vision of what Mata should be doing is quite different from a lot of the caf's.
Agree with this a fair bit. People were muppety mad when Mata signed for us but he's just been so.. bland, for me. He's good, you can't say he isn't, but he lacks bravery, balls, the mentality to grip games and make something happen. The comparison with Schweinsteiger is apt, and probably why their standing in the game is so far apart. When we signed Mata I expected that player who used to run us ragged. Mata used to be a pain, twisting and turning and making our players look silly. We've see seen a different Mata at United. One that you can't deny is fairly good but can rarely ever say is great. I find myself preferring Herrera to him. They offer very similar things but Herrera has more dive and heart than Mata IMO.
We signed Mata to be one of the big different makers in the premier league. He has been far from that.
Never rated him particularly highly, didn't want him when we got him, and preferred Kagawa! Having said this, I don't see what other options we have in the squad that would be an improvement. He does add creativity and is decent with recycling possession. If we can get an exciting right winger, I'm sure he'll be demoted but until then I suspect he'll continue in the position, scoring the odd goal, forging the occasional final pass, but never really looking like the right fit.
It's more than one game though and that can't be ignored. He was given a chance under Mourinho as a #10 in an organised system and he failed to adapt. Mourinho then put him on the right where he was less detrimental to the team, but he wanted out. Van Gaal gave him a chance at the start of last season, and once again in an organised system he failed to make a positive impact. His season started when he scored the winning goal against Crystal Palace, having come on as a sub, and was played on the right for the rest of the season after that.
The more you watch Mata, the more you realise that he's not a top class #10 for any top side because his skill-set limits his overall impact. So many ridiculous reasons are used to support the claim that he should be playing there, such as Chelsea winning the Champions League in 11/12, yet that Chelsea side was absolutely horrendous defensively and Mata went missing on so many occasions. He's probably the easiest player to shut down in our team because all you have to do is pressure him from behind and that results in him running towards his own half. Which is exactly what Mourinho did at Stamford Bridge last season. People expect him to effect a game as a #10 but he's not going to do that because the conditions aren't available for him to do so, and for us to give him those conditions would be disastrous.
Let's just take him for what he is now. A good option to have on the right, but we can definitely make an upgrade if one becomes available, and I maintain my position from the start of last season that he's a squad player at best.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes! Yes! Let the philosophy flow through you.
This is my problem, as everyone seems to be saying its LVG who is stifling him, but I noticed it under Moyes too.
Anyway he is still one of our most productive players tbh, and I like him a lot, but I really do want him to kick on
He has his own youtube channel 
He has his own youtube channel
Talk about cutting corners. 3-4-3 with loads playing out of position
Talk about cutting corners. 3-4-3 with loads playing out of position
Ronaldo and Giggs in CM, Scholes and Beckham on the wings
Don't get me started about the defence
That is a mental line up. He'd be a terrible manager, but really good at FIFA.
Great post. Exactly the way I view Mata.
There are a few misconceptions about Mata, in my opinion:
1) Mourinho only sold him because he couldn't defend.
Not true. Not only was he not very useful defensively, but he was/is also not brilliant at relieving pressure via dribbling up the field. In the toughest games (when Chelsea counter-attack) you need a real ball carrier, who can gain yards for the team. Mata can't do this that effectively. Willian is superior in this regard, as is Hazard, obviously. They are great out-balls for a counter-attacking side.
You can bet that if Mata's only issue was defending, Mourinho would compensate for that, because he scores so much. But the reality was/is that his goals and assists don't compensate enough. Not for a serious team.
2) '10' is his best position. Playing him there makes him much better.
Not true. If anything, playing centrally (in a possession team, more so) means that he is more tightly marked. And as he lacks the turning, dribbling, strength and shielding to deal with the tight marking - he would not loo better centrally. About the only benefit is that he'd get into more scoring positions. But his overall play would probably be worse.
3) He'd be better if only he had runners.
It doesn't matter how good the runners are if Mata is unable to keep the ball in his possession in pressured areas for any good length of time. He's not going to be spraying inch perfect first-time passes into the runners' path constantly. At some point he'll be required to evade the tight marking and create the space to slide people in. There's this weird idea that great movement takes away the need for players to actually dribble, turn, shield, hold the ball... But it doesn't work like that. Movement isn't what makes Silva do his thing. It's his ability to dribble/turn/wriggle into those pockets where he can encourage runs and release players.
Surely you have to ask yourself why Mata was apparently one of the best three or four players in England (and as good as - if not better than - Silva) yet didn't get a proper spot for Spain (who have the runners he apparently lacks). He didn't even play at false 9 - Silva did, and Mata's a better finisher!
4) He was great at Chelsea because they had (a) a solid midfield and/or runners
No. He was great there because they played counter-attacking football to a greater extent (or at least it wasn't possession play), and they didn't ask him to defend or really do anything he found difficult. Most top teams would ask him to do these things; he wouldn't be able to, so he'd get benched.
Mata is good at certain things. Certain important things. But unfortunately some of the things he's not good at are that significant that they stop him being truly great. He just doesn't get into the first team at a proper top European side. Not a top countering team for the reasons in point 1. And not a top possession team for the reasons in point 2 & 3.
1) Mourinho only sold him because he couldn't defend.
Not true. Not only was he not very useful defensively, but he was/is also not brilliant at relieving pressure via dribbling up the field. In the toughest games (when Chelsea counter-attack) you need a real ball carrier, who can gain yards for the team. Mata can't do this that effectively. Willian is superior in this regard, as is Hazard, obviously. They are great out-balls for a counter-attacking side.
You can bet that if Mata's only issue was defending, Mourinho would compensate for that, because he scores so much. But the reality was/is that his goals and assists don't compensate enough. Not for a serious team.
2) '10' is his best position. Playing him there makes him much better.
Not true. If anything, playing centrally (in a possession team, more so) means that he is more tightly marked. And as he lacks the turning, dribbling, strength and shielding to deal with the tight marking - he would not loo better centrally. About the only benefit is that he'd get into more scoring positions. But his overall play would probably be worse.
3) He'd be better if only he had runners.
It doesn't matter how good the runners are if Mata is unable to keep the ball in his possession in pressured areas for any good length of time. He's not going to be spraying inch perfect first-time passes into the runners' path constantly. At some point he'll be required to evade the tight marking and create the space to slide people in. There's this weird idea that great movement takes away the need for players to actually dribble, turn, shield, hold the ball... But it doesn't work like that. Movement isn't what makes Silva do his thing. It's his ability to dribble/turn/wriggle into those pockets where he can encourage runs and release players.
Surely you have to ask yourself why Mata was apparently one of the best three or four players in England (and as good as - if not better than - Silva) yet didn't get a proper spot for Spain (who have the runners he apparently lacks). He didn't even play at false 9 - Silva did, and Mata's a better finisher!
4) He was great at Chelsea because they had (a) a solid midfield and/or runners
No. He was great there because they played counter-attacking football to a greater extent (or at least it wasn't possession play), and they didn't ask him to defend or really do anything he found difficult. Most top teams would ask him to do these things; he wouldn't be able to, so he'd get benched.
Mata is good at certain things. Certain important things. But unfortunately some of the things he's not good at are that significant that they stop him being truly great. He just doesn't get into the first team at a proper top European side. Not a top countering team for the reasons in point 1. And not a top possession team for the reasons in point 2 & 3.
Last edited:
This is a very strong argument that may very well be correct.
However, I would prefer to give him a decent run of games in what is nominally his best position before deciding that you are right.
As is your argument is based on a) your own personal assessment of the player's capabilities, b) a few games at the start of last season in a malfunctioning team and malfunctioning system, c) half a season before that in malfunctioning team under a manager who was totally out of his depth and d) one season under a different team, club and manager whose entire approach to the game has been regularly criticised on this forum.
So while you may well be right to say he can't perform as the #10 for us, I would prefer to see him given a run of games for us in this system so we can establish for once and for all if this is really the case. I certainly don't see the harm in giving it a go given that we don't have any other obviously outstanding alternatives in the #10 role and Mata hasn't exactly been wowing people in his current position. Even if we didn't improve it's hard to imagine we could be significantly worse either, so why not try?
As for Mata only being a squad player, that might well be the case if we actually had genuine alternatives to compete with him for his position. As is his competition is Young and Valencia, which means he will be first choice for the foreseeable future.
@Speak Is it really a good idea to use selection for the international team as a way to assess a player's ability? We've seen plenty of our players receive less than the recognition they deserve at international level without us assuming they couldn't perform for us, Carrick being the obvious example in recent years.
Anyway, it's hardly unbelievable that the manager just rated Silva more despite Mata's quality performances. Silva is a brilliant player after all. That doesn't necessarily reflect Mata's ability to play as a #10 for us.
Anyway, it's hardly unbelievable that the manager just rated Silva more despite Mata's quality performances. Silva is a brilliant player after all. That doesn't necessarily reflect Mata's ability to play as a #10 for us.
It would have been much easier to just write "I think Mata is pretty average". Your whole post seems to dress your opinion up as a series of facts, but these are all opinions made on the basis of you thinking he's average (you say "not true" several times as if you've proven something, when in actual fact you go on to give your negative opinion as to why he's average or why his qualities should be underplayed). In a few examples you have used the facts of his career and worked backwards to reach a "factual" conclusion, which is actually just you opinion. Examples include: Mourinho sold him (fact) because he isn't brilliant at dribbling/carrying the ball and that's Mourinho's preference (your opinion). Mourinho sold him (fact) not only because he is poor at defending as Mourinho would compensate for that (your opinion). He was great at Chelsea (fact) because they played counter attacking football to a greater extent and he had no defensive responsibilities (your opinion).
Anyone could do this with any player. "David Silva - he's a great player. Not true. How many goals has he scored throughout his career as an attacker". Most fans tend to look at all the excellent things their best players do contribute to the team, rather than the things they don't contribute or things they aren't expected to contribute. In Mata's case it's quite easy: a quick look at his direct contributions to our goal tally will show you why he's one of our best players.
That's fair enough, you're right. It's not the best way to prove anything.
I do disagree with your opinion and if you just put forward your opinion then that'd be fair enough. I've debated others on here about his qualities and weaknesses and would have probably done the same again.
However I took issue with the way you posted, stating that other people have "misconceptions" and that certain opinions of what he brings to the team were "not true".
It was the arrogant nature and condescending tone of the post that I took issue with, not the content (albeit that I disagree with the content).
I actually put 'in my opinion' on the very first line. Literally stating that everything after (even the fact that there were misconceptions) was just my opinion.
But anyway, fair enough if it came across like that. I can sometimes come across that way, which I need to work on.
Don't worry I'm sure they'll be a future post where you criticise Mata and I'll probably come across badly in reply!
Think it's unfair to judge him on one game as a 10, but it's not like people weren't saying the same last season. I mean, for a game we dominated, he didn't really seem to control the game for us.
I'm very positive LVG will make this 46m euro man start producing for us. The money we brought him in for was a bit inflated by todays market and also that we were in a shit situation on the last day. He's been up and down lately but I'm sure Mata's time will come. He's got too much quality to fail. Simple as that.
Mata, you should be able to do this. Silva also had a tough period and managed to pull through. I think you should try to find some inspiration in that guy. I really like him as a player and for the money we paid he will have a lot to live up to. Other teams paid a lot for their players and eventually it worked out well. Bale and Ronaldo are two recent examples. I'm just concerned we have to dig too deep into our wallett whenever we want to do big business.
Mata, you should be able to do this. Silva also had a tough period and managed to pull through. I think you should try to find some inspiration in that guy. I really like him as a player and for the money we paid he will have a lot to live up to. Other teams paid a lot for their players and eventually it worked out well. Bale and Ronaldo are two recent examples. I'm just concerned we have to dig too deep into our wallett whenever we want to do big business.
Last edited:
He is more productive than most of our players.
Can you edit your post so that you'll insult a bunch of posters while you're at it? That way your post would truly be worthy of a ban.
Majestic.
@Amethyst @Annihilate Now! United Hour: Rant of the week, sewn up. Signed sealed and delivered.
Majestic.
@Amethyst @Annihilate Now! United Hour: Rant of the week, sewn up. Signed sealed and delivered.
- Status