[Dobbs]

I completely agree that it is all down to where the player is best suited. In some games like Chelsea where United cede possession and need pace up front to unsettle the defence, that is where Rashford is a big threat.

But in most United games, there won't be that type of space and his speed will be more useful in wide areas, like at West Ham where he won the game.

Yes but I think you've got the reason we want him up front wrong. It's not that the wing is seen as an inferior position. Nobody in English football was calling for Giggs or Bale to be played up front. We loved Rondo as a winger, many think he had his best seasons there. Nobody is asking for Hazard to play up top either.

It's simply that looking forward Rashfords skill set looks best suited to a centre forward position.

Nothing to do with positional stigma within the English game.

 

[top1whoisman]

 

[POF]

Yes but I think you've got the reason we want him up front wrong. It's not that the wing is seen as an inferior position. Nobody in English football was calling for Giggs or Bale to be played up front. We loved Rondo as a winger, many think he had his best seasons there. Nobody is asking for Hazard to play up top either.

It's simply that looking forward Rashfords skill set looks best suited to a centre forward position.

Nothing to do with positional stigma within the English game.

For you maybe, but there is a definite stigma there. You often hear "wasted out wide" but rarely "wasted up front".

In modern day football when most teams play with one central striker, it is rare that striker at an elite club is a young kid that lacks physicality.

 

[Dobbs]

For you maybe, but there is a definite stigma there. You often hear "wasted out wide" but rarely "wasted up front".

In modern day football when most teams play with one central striker, it is rare that striker at an elite club is a young kid that lacks physicality.

England has a long history of wingers being league player of the year. Three out of the last ten have been.

If it's said he's wasted out wide that's because the poster believes he's better centrally. It's not some bias against the wing position.

Rashford being ready for that role as a stater is another debate.

 

[Nighteyes]

You're definitely not the only one with the opinion that Rashford is/was "stuck out wide". I still find it bizarre. How good must Ronaldo, Neymar, Messi, Hazard, etc be? They somehow manage to be the top players in their leagues even being "stuck out wide".

Eh? Where have I said he's "stuck out wide"? I'm happy enough with him playing wide if we have a better striker albeit its quite blatantly obvious he's more effective when he's starting as a striker.

Your examples are bizarre and completely irrelevant even though you keep bringing it up.

 

[Rozay]

That's really not true. Even though we've created loads of chances this season most of them haven't fallen to Rashford as he hasn't played up top. For a better comparison we should look at Rashfords conversion rate last season which was ridiculously good when he was actually playing up top.

It is true. Rashford himself, regardless of whatever position he has been listed on the team sheet, has wasted a large percentage of his opportunities this season, much larger than he did last season. Which is fine of course, but it is what happened.

People always do this. If not challenged early, it will just be accepted as fact that Rashford simply didn't score for months due to him not having goalscoring opportunities, so he can't be compared to Mbappé for example, who plays upfront for an attacking team.

Firstly, WE are an attacking team. On his conversion rate from what I've seen, Mbappé would have more goals than Rashford if he had played instead in THIS United team. He simply seems to take a higher portion of his chances, which has nothing to do with who he plays for. United have had games where hey have had over 30 shots on goal and not scored this season. How many do you think Monaco have per game? 90?

Our forwards, Rashford included, have been guilty of profligacy this season. I'm a fan, and am not attacking him for this, but I also won't deny it and imply that he has had an impressive chance conversion based on some imaginary circumstance of him getting no scoring opportunities due to being mismanaged. It is also baseless to say that he would emulate Mbappé had he been at Monaco instead, as Mbappé has his record due to taking more of his chances than Rashford does. Mbappé would have probably scored against Middlesborough away, for example, if he had all of Rashford's chances.

Both are top talents, it consistent finishing is certainly a weakness in Rashford's game that he needs to work on in order to reach the very top. I think he will, as he's technically brilliant.

 

[Nighteyes]

It is true.

No it isn't. You may want to keep repeating it but it isn't actually true. Not that Rashford hasn't missed chances or Mbappe doesn't have a better conversion rate this season but its definitely not been a case of Rashford missing a score of chances as you seem to be implying.

In fact I just had a look at stats for the league which has Rashford only missing 4 big chances this season which seems about right give or take.

 

[POF]

England has a long history of wingers being league player of the year. Three out of the last ten have been.

If it's said he's wasted out wide that's because the poster believes he's better centrally. It's not some bias against the wing position.

Rashford being ready for that role as a stater is another debate.

I'm not talking about a classical winger. It's when a forward player who has a well rounded game is played in a wide position it is seen by many as a waste of his talent. If the player can play the role intelligently then it gives flexibility to play wide and be the second striker.

Take someone like Rooney as another example. He was the poster boy for being "played out of position". You'll have people claim his best position was a 10, 9, 8 or even 6 but playing him wide was sacrilege. He wasn't a good target man and he didn't have the game management skills to operate in a playmaking role. I think a wide forward in a 4-3-3 was his best role but he (and many others) saw it as a huge sacrifice.

Then look at players like Neymar, Messi or Ronaldinho. World class elite level number 10s, all playing in wide positions. Or Etoo, Henry, David Villa, goal scorers playing in wide roles.

Playing wide often means being able to give that player less defensive responsibility and gives him more freedom than a deeper central role. But not in England.

Eh? Where have I said he's "stuck out wide"? I'm happy enough with him playing wide if we have a better striker albeit its quite blatantly obvious he's more effective when he's starting as a striker.

Your examples are bizarre and completely irrelevant even though you keep bringing it up.

Here.

I sort of agree and disagree. Confidence is key absolutely but I'd argue goal scoring is also an habit. Being stuck out wide he wasn't really getting into too many scoring positions and thus wasn't at the end of too many chances and thus confidence drained as a result. So while I agree that that the position you play is irrelevant in itself I'd argue that self belief and confidence wasn't high because he wasn't being playing up top.

 

[Dobbs]

I'm not talking about a classical winger. It's when a forward player who has a well rounded game is played in a wide position it is seen by many as a waste of his talent. If the player can play the role intelligently then it gives flexibility to play wide and be the second striker.

Take someone like Rooney as another example. He was the poster boy for being "played out of position". You'll have people claim his best position was a 10, 9, 8 or even 6 but playing him wide was sacrilege. He wasn't a good target man and he didn't have the game management skills to operate in a playmaking role. I think a wide forward in a 4-3-3 was his best role but he (and many others) saw it as a huge sacrifice.

Then look at players like Neymar, Messi or Ronaldinho. World class elite level number 10s, all playing in wide positions. Or Etoo, Henry, David Villa, goal scorers playing in wide roles.

Playing wide often means being able to give that player less defensive responsibility and gives him more freedom than a deeper central role. But not in England.

But Rashford plays like a traditional winger.

I really don't buy that English football has this very specific issue with wide forwards.

 

[M Bison]

Not his finest outing, calm after the storm perhaps!

 

[thegregster]

Rashers still caused them problems. A good outlet on the break.

 

[Devil may care]

Liked his confidence in snapping off that quick shot that might have caught Heaton out.

 

[Fracture90]

He was causing them problems that little time he spent on the pitch, warmup for Citeh on Thursday!

Martial and Rashers in attacking due!

Make it happen Jose!

 

[arnie_ni]

That third goal is unreal

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Last game, it's worrying when he took that knock after his first touch.

Hopefully it's not an injury.

Rested, and did okay after he comes on, threatened Burnley with his pace, drive and dribbles.

 

[Womp]

Last game, it's worrying when he took that knock after his first touch.

Hopefully it's not an injury.

Rested, and did okay after he comes on, threatened Burnley with his pace, drive and dribbles.

He was sprinting around fine, think it was just a little cramp that he managed to run off.

 

[MadMike]

He was causing them problems that little time he spent on the pitch, warmup for Citeh on Thursday!

Martial and Rashers in attacking due!

Make it happen Jose!

I expect Jose to play a duo up front like he did in both recent games against Chelsea and Rashford is certainly (and deservedly) going to be one of them.

I still think Lingard is going to get the nod ahead of Martial for the other spot because he links up well with Rashford and works tirelessly, despite his limitations as a forward player. If the game is still drawn after 60'+ minutes, I expect Martial to come on for Lingard to provide more of a threat and more direct running against tired legs. That's my 2p.

 

[Sylar]

Id like to see Rashford and Martial used as a front two. Especially if Pogba is in midfield allowed to find them as the runners. Would be quite interesting to see how they would link up.

 

[Brightonian]

I expect Jose to play a duo up front like he did in both recent games against Chelsea and Rashford is certainly (and deservedly) going to be one of them.

I still think Lingard is going to get the nod ahead of Martial for the other spot because he links up well with Rashford and works tirelessly, despite his limitations as a forward player. If the game is still drawn after 60'+ minutes, I expect Martial to come on for Lingard to provide more of a threat and more direct running against tired legs. That's my 2p.

Agreed, and that's probably what I'd do. The sexiest option (Rashford-Martial) isn't always the right one. Even if his attitude is good and he works hard, Martial is never going to cover anywhere near as much ground as Lingard does, both in terms of pressing when we're off the ball and making runs when we're on it. But he could be a match-winning sub.

 

[Fracture90]

I expect Jose to play a duo up front like he did in both recent games against Chelsea and Rashford is certainly (and deservedly) going to be one of them.

I still think Lingard is going to get the nod ahead of Martial for the other spot because he links up well with Rashford and works tirelessly, despite his limitations as a forward player. If the game is still drawn after 60'+ minutes, I expect Martial to come on for Lingard to provide more of a threat and more direct running against tired legs. That's my 2p.

Gotta agree with you. Even though I think Rashford would do great playing of Martial due to Martial,s better close control and ability to hold onto the ball, I agree Lingard will get the advantage due to his workrate.

 

[Prodigal7]

Hate it when people say things like this...If a striker gets 5/6 chances in a game what's he supposed to do, score every chance? Not even Ronaldo or Messi do that...He scored the winner, that's enough.

Covert more than 1 if the chances are good enough. I also hate it when if someone manages to score, the rest of the 90 minutes becomes totally irrelevant and they suddenly played fantastically. It's like an inverse version of fickle fans that over criticize and seems really prevalent here especially with homegrown players.
If Rashford plays like that regularly for us and has that kind of conversion rate we would not be a CL team. He can and will step it up as time goes on but people lose objectivity so easily when someone scores.

 

[POF]

But Rashford plays like a traditional winger.

I really don't buy that English football has this very specific issue with wide forwards.

Is him playing like a traditional winger due to instruction or lack of tactical intelligence? He plays there in a 4-3-3. That's a forward role, not a traditional winger/wide midfield player.

Anyway, I think I'm going off topic so I will leave it there.

I expect Jose to play a duo up front like he did in both recent games against Chelsea and Rashford is certainly (and deservedly) going to be one of them.

I still think Lingard is going to get the nod ahead of Martial for the other spot because he links up well with Rashford and works tirelessly, despite his limitations as a forward player. If the game is still drawn after 60'+ minutes, I expect Martial to come on for Lingard to provide more of a threat and more direct running against tired legs. That's my 2p.

I don't think he will play 2 up front. That seemed specific for Chelsea's formation. A narrow back 4 to pick up Chelsea's front 3 and then man to man 4v4 in midfield. That just happened to leave 2 forwards.

They will go 4-3-3 to match up City in a similar way. My guess is a front 3 of Mkhitaryan, Rashford and Lingard with Martial off the bench. I think they will play Lingard deeper on the left and try to isolate Rashford vs Kompany in the space behind Navas.

 

[MadMike]

I don't think he will play 2 up front. That seemed specific for Chelsea's formation. A narrow back 4 to pick up Chelsea's front 3 and then man to man 4v4 in midfield. That just happened to leave 2 forwards.

Yeah, that's not how we played against Chelsea. Darmian played far more centrally as a 3rd CB next to Rojo and Bailly, with Young and Valencia being the wing backs. Fellaini, Pog and Herrera were in central midfield. That's a 3-5-2 or 5-3-2 formation, depending on whether you count the wing backs as defence or midfield. It was never a 4-4-2

 

[POF]

Yeah, that's not how we played against Chelsea. Darmian played far more centrally as a 3rd CB next to Rojo and Bailly, with Young and Valencia being the wing backs. Fellaini, Pog and Herrera were in central midfield. That's a 3-5-2 or 5-3-2 formation, depending on whether you count the wing backs as defence or midfield. It was never a 4-4-2

It was a back 4 vs Chelsea. Herrera played "right back", man to man on Hazard just like Jones did at the Bridge. Darmian narrow left back man to man on Pedro just like he did at Stamford Bridge. Bailly and Rojo 2vs1 on Costa.

 

[Dobbs]

Is him playing like a traditional winger due to instruction or lack of tactical intelligence? He plays there in a 4-3-3. That's a forward role, not a traditional winger/wide midfield player.

Anyway, I think I'm going off topic so I will leave it there.

It's all a bit jumbled. Why would English football have a problem with Rashford playing like a traditional winger if by your own admittance English football celebrates wingers? Don't really get that but there you go.

 

[PedroMendez]

I don’t rate him anywhere near as highly as the caf does. I don’t think that he is well rounded enough to lead the lines. He has the pace to get behind defenders and he can score all sorts of goals. He is also pretty decent with the ball on his feet. That said I think he lacks the quality to play with has back towards the goal or to bring other players into the scene. All of that means that he is a great option both as sub or as squad player, but I have my doubts that he has the quality to be effective on a weekly basis. I hope he sticks around and proves me wrong.

 

[podurban2]

I don’t rate him anywhere near as highly as the caf does. I don’t think that he is well rounded enough to lead the lines. He has the pace to get behind defenders and he can score all sorts of goals. He is also pretty decent with the ball on his feet. That said I think he lacks the quality to play with has back towards the goal or to bring other players into the scene. All of that means that he is a great option both as sub or as squad player, but I have my doubts that he has the quality to be effective on a weekly basis. I hope he sticks around and proves me wrong.

He is 19, you don't think he can improve those attributes? How many 19 year olds have been that well-rounded?

 

[Unlikely lad]

I don’t rate him anywhere near as highly as the caf does. I don’t think that he is well rounded enough to lead the lines. He has the pace to get behind defenders and he can score all sorts of goals. He is also pretty decent with the ball on his feet. That said I think he lacks the quality to play with has back towards the goal or to bring other players into the scene. All of that means that he is a great option both as sub or as squad player, but I have my doubts that he has the quality to be effective on a weekly basis. I hope he sticks around and proves me wrong.

I agree with your assessment, but his ability to lead the line and bring others into play is definitely something that can be developed in a 19 year old.

The thing is, should we afford him this time? He will inevitably be frustrating before he hits 22-23. It's a shame that strikers just don't have the time to develop their game at top clubs, who was the last proper striker we had that came through our ranks?

 

[WoodysWallet]

It's true that he will struggle leading the line on his own. That's why he needs a Lingard or possibly Martial around him creating pockets to run into.

Our style of play changes with Rashford as a central striker. You can't expect us to play direct to a target man, because he's not got those attributes needed at the moment.

The Chelsea and Burnley games have given us a glimpse of the United of old, and I can see Mourinho embracing this style in the future.

 

[NM]

I agree with your assessment, but his ability to lead the line and bring others into play is definitely something that can be developed in a 19 year old.

The thing is, should we afford him this time? He will inevitably be frustrating before he hits 22-23. It's a shame that strikers just don't have the time to develop their game at top clubs, who was the last proper striker we had that came through our ranks?

Can't believe this is a question. We will give him time to develop for 1-2 more years. At 22-23 is when he should become the main striker. That's why we are going to buy one this summer

 

[Unlikely lad]

Can't believe this is a question. We will give him time to develop for 1-2 more years. At 22-23 is when he should become the main striker. That's why we are going to buy one this summer

What I meant is that he won't be starting week-in, week-out as a striker, which would be the ideal situation for his development. Not many of the top strikers around had to make do with being back up or having to play on the wings when they were 19-22

 

[RedCurry]

The boy looks as professional as it can get at 19 years of age. No fancy haircuts, colorful boots, absurd signature celebrations, scandals etc. He'll chase back and put in a slide tackle near the corner flag if he has to for the team. He just looks focused on this job. Along with that he looks like he's got bags of ability and just sort of needs to piece it all together.

I m okay with giving him time and patience.

 

[Runner]

The boy looks as professional as it can get at 19 years of age. No fancy haircuts, colorful boots, absurd signature celebrations, scandals etc. He'll chase back and put in a slide tackle near the corner flag if he has to for the team. He just looks focused on this job. Along with that he looks like he's got bags of ability and just sort of needs to piece it all together.

I m okay with giving him time and patience.

Same here, which is why i don't understand why people go overboard when he missed that 1on1. He's a young kid still learning his game and he's got a long way to go. Enjoy the ups and downs i say!

 

[el3mel]

Interesting exclusive interview with Rashford at the Telegraph:

 

[Adisa]

We are so fecked if he's injured.

 

[Sammyjunn]

Some mature plays of him, the guy is good..

 

[Cheesy]

Doing well at picking the ball up out wide and cutting in, he's clearly better centrally though.

 

[SkeppyRed]

That flick that made Otamendi look a prat was glorious. What a player!

 

[Rossa]

If refs don't improve, players like Rashford will be ruined at a young age. They foul him hard because they know he will outrun him. An early yellow, well deserved, to Otamendi would force them to think twice and let Rashford play football. Useless refereeing

 

[FromTheBench]

He has not been 100% since that stretch he had.