How you get injured after a week of rest ? FFS
10
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 56
- Goals
- 30
- Assists
- 9
- Yellow cards
- 2
- Status
Maybe that maniac ETH forced them to do some training after they had Monday and Tuesday off. He is very unreasonable like that.
Hope he gets 30 goals for the season.
Worst part about all of the injuries United have got this season has been the timing of them.
This Rashford one the latest hopefully at worse its just the Wolves game he has to sit out.
This Rashford one the latest hopefully at worse its just the Wolves game he has to sit out.
Hope ETH is playing mind games though I don’t know what should be the point of it 
We have to be fine, even if we have to be without Rashford until the end of season.
How long he out?
Wondering the same
Weird as he's been in the training pics and videos
During his hot spell it looked like he could hit 35-40 goals, but in true Rashford style his form jumps off a cliff and the rest of his season is ruined by injuries.
Same thing happened in 19/20 and 20/21.
Same thing happened in 19/20 and 20/21.
Badly need our other attackers to have a good day tomorrow.
Sounds like some freak injury to happen maybe outside of training grounds, you know footballers have real lives too and anything can happen...kicked a chair accidentally in kitchen or whatever. It is something that is sometimes easy to forget when talking about footballers.
I wonder what would be his best position in Fergie's team? SS? Winger?
Mind games. He'll start.
I'd say it depends what era you are talking about. While I don't rate Rashford very much at all as the sole striker, I do think he would be very good in a two man strikeforce. So he'd play upfront with somebody else in Fergie's first couple of great teams, but later on he'd be used the same way he is now.
First couple great teams. First, with Cantona I don't think it would work, as he'd be a striker then. 2nd one with that 99'? He doesn't fit any of Yorke or Cole profile.
Same way as? I don't think Fergie's had 4-2-3-1. The closest I can think of as in CR position, which is incredible that it could actually work. That team was basically Ronaldo plus 10 others.
Last edited:
Not fussed if he starts. He won't get any space against Wolves low block.
Time to think of something else
Time to think of something else
During the last ten so years under Fergie the formation was much closer to a 4231 or 433, with one striker playing as the main guy upfront and somebody else playing noticeably deeper and using their workrate and playmaking abilities to help the midfield as much as the attack. Rashford doesn't suit either of those roles, and at that point his role would have been more like Ronaldo's was from 06/07 forward where he was a wide attacker (so basically the same as Rashford is being played now).
Most team play with a low block against UTD. Might as well sell him then.
Yeah, not like he scored a superb goal to break down their low block last time he played them or anything.
Wouldn't bother me.
1 away with about five games left (four after today)
If he doesn't that 30 mark post fergie is a curse
Denied a second by harsh VAR call too. And all coming on as a sub.
Ronaldo was wide attacker for only 3 years with United. Before that he was a true winger. I don't remember us much with 4-3-3. Since then, we have Valencia, Young and Nani as true wingers, with Rooney and Chicarito up front.
THen there was Berba- Rooney.
Hope he'll be back for Bournemouth and can raise his form again. We need that badly for last 4 games of the season.
Hopefully he's back, but if not - Garnacho please. Playing Sancho from the start has the potential to be very costly.
This is going to be really unpopular but we seem to score more goals without him.
Don't think it's unpopular more so not true. Today was just another very typical United performance, squandered chance after chance just Wolves had nothing going forward and thankfully no defensive error meant we secured the 3 points.
Many people don't rate him that much. Myself included.
I appreciate what he brings to us, something that isn't exactly easy to come by i,e 20 plus goals a season which is valueable however he's a bit of a headless chicken,loves to mess up so much of our attacks,and is greedy. Thinks he's much better than he is.
Probably the same posters who said we create more chances and are a better side without Bruno.
???? Surely thats easy to check statically and know that if is wrong?
One underwhelming win without Rashford against a very poor Wolves team, in which all our starting forwards were quite wasteful, and like clockwork we get the ‘aren’t we much better without Rashford’ posts. He’s clearly been out of form recently, but then the whole team has been.
Just shows that all those votes to dump him last season didn’t come out of nowhere.
Just shows that all those votes to dump him last season didn’t come out of nowhere.
He has essentially missed 6 matches this season. Three were comfortable 2-0 wins against Sheriff, Wolves and Forest (where we missed loads of chances). The others were a 1-0 defeat to Sociedad, a 2-2 draw with Sevilla and a 0-0 draw with Newcastle (although he played a few minutes in this one).
That’s not to mention that he twice had to rescue us by coming on at halftime to turn a loss into a win against Nikosia and a draw into a win away at Wolves.
Basically, he’s generally only missed relatively easy matches where, if he played in them, he’d have probably scored.
Well I only started looking at it during that period he was injured, because we started scoring more. I am not sure where to go to check.
What period he was injured? He essentially missed three matches recently and two of them were the absolute horror show against Sevilla. You can’t seriously be suggesting that those matches indicate we do better without him?
If you think we are a better team with Sancho over Rashford then football isn't the right sport for you. Rashford would have scored yesterday. Wolves were there for the taking all day.
Sancho just doesn't do anything.
What games are you talking about? I remember us struggling
Unpopular opinion but we definitely play a better team game without Rashford who for some reason hates closing in on players or track back, but then he is the obvious goal scorer. I find the rhythm of the game a lot better when he doesn't play.
Here's a question, if spurs are ready for a straight swap Kane for Rashford, would you?
Here's a question, if spurs are ready for a straight swap Kane for Rashford, would you?
Is unpopular opinion code for I'm just going to say something completely false? Assuming your statement id based off of yesterdays game where we played the exact same way as we have been for the majority of the last few months. We play well for 20 minutes, let them into the game for a bit, create a few chances that we typically miss, take a few longshots. Fortunately for us there was no defensive errors to cost us this week but the game was no different with or without Rashford.
As for Kane for Rashford, yeah i would you're getting guaranteed goals with Kane consistently as proven year after year. Would mean we would have saved a huge chunk of change too for other positions that need upgrading on.
Any further info on his current injury?
- Status