[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Do folks still hate him so?

 

[Sultan]

Peter Crouch would have been a decent buy had LvG wanted options.

LvG is confusing players and fans with his tactics.

 

[Escobar]

It is so painful to watch when we just lump balls forward and hope Fellaini chests them down. That's surely not what we want to see. He's a waste upfront imo and we dont play well. Play him in midfield if we need steel but not upfront. I thought he didnt play well overall either even though he was involved in the goals

 

[Adam-Utd]

I don't see whats wrong with it honestly. Why limit yourself to 1 style of play, when you can have Fellaini become a battering ram too?. Him winning headers in the box and holding the ball up works in certain situations, and tonight it did.

LVG had 2 options to play tonight, try neat fancy quick short passes to cut through a team, or try to get behind their defense and score cut backs/crosses. At present I feel we suit the 2nd option better.

The main thing was apart from the 1st minute we looked comfortable all game, and Fellaini helped us with that.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

It is so painful to watch when we just lump balls forward and hope Fellaini chests them down. That's surely not what we want to see. He's a waste upfront imo and we dont play well. Play him in midfield if we need steel but not upfront. I thought he didnt play well overall either even though he was involved in the goals

It is/would be... but that's not what we were doing yesterday.

 

[NK86]

Credit where it's due to Van Gaal. He sure knows how to troll us fans. Drop Herrera and Falcao, then play Fellaini as a striker and Rooney in central midfield. When the summer transfer window closed you couldn't have imagined a more effective pisstake than that little combo.

I didn't watch the match but is that how it panned out? What is LVG's problem with Rooney as a striker? If he was not satisfied with our midfiled options, he should have tried for a player this January. Continuously playing our best striker in midfield while playing actual midfielders as strikers (Di Maria, Fellaini) is more baffling than anything Moyes tried here, and that includes that dreadful Fulham game.

 

[NK86]

At least, It will give West Ham something more to chew about dealing with potential tactic of Fellaini as no. 10.

Moyes already knew that which is where he utilized Fellaini. When Fellaini started performing well for us in midfield, I hoped he had turned a corner with us and we would see his best abilities in midfield where he can use his strength and height but for some reason LVG is insisting on using him upfront and us pinging balls down his throat all match long.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

He played a part in our first two goals. We have struggled really bad to cut through teams who sit deep and stay compact narrow. He allowed us to combat that and it worked. He was bringing down balls with ease. Sure, you can complain all you want about it not being the ideal style but if the other team is going to give the open space on the wings and try to cram the box then you have to do what you have to do to break through them. Fellaini allowed us to do that today.

I think that's a good assessment. It's difficult to pass your way through a team that parks the bus, as Arsenal have found many times. Which is where you need a plan B. Cambridge can pack the box as much as they want but it won't help if we have someone in there who will dominate in the air and decent delivery from the flanks. If anything, Van Gaal deserves credit for being tactically flexible enough to take a very different approach to the first leg.

 

[Escobar]

It is/would be... but that's not what we were doing yesterday.

We had plenty of crosses / long balls pumped forward with him being a target. IMO he's lost upfront, he doesnt have the right movement or skills do to so. He's not creative enough either. I prefer to play the ball on the ground and have Fellaini in midfield where he's better

 

[Blue always red]

We had plenty of crosses / long balls pumped forward with him being a target. IMO he's lost upfront, he doesnt have the right movement or skills do to so. He's not creative enough either. I prefer to play the ball on the ground and have Fellaini in midfield where he's better

Agreed, Fellaini is surpisingly good at turning with the ball, given his size. The most balanced midfield I have seen this season was Fellaini - Herrera and Blind. I can't remember what game it was in, but we looked very solid.

 

[Sultan]

I think that's a good assessment. It's difficult to pass your way through a team that parks the bus, as Arsenal have found many times. Which is where you need a plan B. Cambridge can pack the box as much as they want but it won't help if we have someone in there who will dominate in the air and decent delivery from the flanks. If anything, Van Gaal deserves credit for being tactically flexible enough to take a very different approach to the first leg.

I don't get the idea if plan B was his approach. If the idea was to get Fellaini into the game with his height and heading ability as much as possible then play with proper wingers and full backs who can actually cross the ball. We had no wingers and played with Rojo who is not a regular left-back, who lacks crossing ability and McNair who is hardly a regular right back (although admittedly he was actually one of our best players).

 

[Revan]

Do folks still hate him so?

No, but for Fellaini to be useful, we will need to play a game with a lot of crosses. Similar to how teams managed by Pulis do. Which at times we're doing. And for that Fellaini is useful (like yesterday when 2 of the goals came after he pinned down a cross).

I hope that we go away (far, far away) from that style of football. Saying that, there might be games when we need to play like that. And in those games, Fellaini would be very useful (that is why I changed my opinion on him from 'sell immediately' to 'probably keep him for the matches we need physicality and heigh').

But, many of United fans want to see United play better as a team. And for that, neither Rooney nor Fellaini should play in midfield. Herrera makes the team tick better than both of them. Rooney is a brilliant striker/No. 10 and should play there, while Fellaini should play when we need physicality, height or when we're chasing a goal and the other team has parked the bus. But not if we want to play free-flowing ball, which I think is what we should aim for.

 

[Revan]

I don't get the idea if plan B was his approach. If the idea was to get Fellaini into the game with his height and heading ability as much as possible then play with proper wingers and full backs who can actually cross the ball. We had no wingers and played with Rojo who is not a regular left-back, who lacks crossing ability and McNair who is hardly a regular right back (although admittedly he was actually one of our best players).

I think that he is (currently) better at crossing than Shaw. I also think that we made very good crossing yesterday (which was kind of unusual for us).

So, I think that was exactly the plan, and it worked considering that the first two goals came from crosses aimed at Fellaini.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

We had plenty of crosses / long balls pumped forward with him being a target. IMO he's lost upfront, he doesnt have the right movement or skills do to so. He's not creative enough either. I prefer to play the ball on the ground and have Fellaini in midfield where he's better

Nah, apart from the first 5-10 minutes, which were a bit crap - we generally passed the ball around and looked to work it out wide before getting it into the box - it wasn't a case of pumping long balls forward at all. The problem was that too often we crossed from way too deep - and crossing from deep is seldom as effective as crossing from closer to the box... when we actually worked the ball to the byline we looked dangerous.

There's nothing wrong with crossing the ball (unless you're doing it ad nauseam when it's clearly not working) but you have to be smart about it, and when we were smart about it yesterday, we threatened.

 

[Kostur]

It is/would be... but that's not what we were doing yesterday.

Yea it's pretty strange reading this thread again. I wasn't content with him being played as a striker and laughed my ass off but I think that yesterday's tactic defended itself, comfortable 3-0 win and total control after first 15 minutes or so. We hardly lumped the ball and I don't think we've been crossing all that much more than we would be if Falcao was playing instead of him.

 

[Sultan]

I think that he is (currently) better at crossing than Shaw. I also think that we made very good crossing yesterday (which was kind of unusual for us).

So, I think that was exactly the plan, and it worked considering that the first two goals came from crosses aimed at Fellaini.

With respect I don't see Rojo being the better crosser. How many goals came from crosses from actual full backs?

 

[Sultan]

One goal came from RvP's clever play in the area. The other came from a corner, and the 3rd from a shot outside the area.

No direct goals came from wide areas.

 

[DanNistelrooy]

He's definitely got a role to play in the squad but I can't stand seeing him up top in place of Rooney which then means Herrera only gets 20 minutes here and there.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Yea it's pretty strange reading this thread again. I wasn't content with him being played as a striker and laughed my ass off but I think that yesterday's tactic defended itself, comfortable 3-0 win and total control after first 15 minutes or so. We hardly lumped the ball and I don't think we've been crossing all that much more than we would be if Falcao was playing instead of him.

Aye - I mean, most of our attacks started in the attacking third anyway (the number of times our pressing - which was very good - did in Cambridge, and them gifting us the ball high up the pitch was quite amusing) - and even when they didn't, we had a free run up until quite far past the half-way line pretty much, so it's not like we even were in the right areas of the pitch to hoof it long.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I don't get the idea if plan B was his approach. If the idea was to get Fellaini into the game with his height and heading ability as much as possible then play with proper wingers and full backs who can actually cross the ball. We had no wingers and played with Rojo who is not a regular left-back, who lacks crossing ability and McNair who is hardly a regular right back (although admittedly he was actually one of our best players).

Who are they, though? Shaw has shown that his biggest weakness is crossing. Valencia's delivery was awful in the first leg and Young wasn't fit enough to start the game. He could have maybe started Rafael but, as it turned out, the bloke he did pick at RB was arguably our best player. So again, credit where it's due.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

One goal came from RvP's clever play in the area. The other came from a corner, and the 3rd from a shot outside the area.

No direct goals came from wide areas.

The opener did.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

One goal came from RvP's clever play in the area. The other came from a corner, and the 3rd from a shot outside the area.

No direct goals came from wide areas.

That's the same goal.

The first goal from a Di Maria cross from the byline.

The chance that led to the corner for the 2nd goal was also an attack that developed from a wide area.

 

[Sultan]

Di Maria wasn't playing as a winger.

 

[Revan]

One goal came from RvP's clever play in the area. The other came from a corner, and the 3rd from a shot outside the area.

No direct goals came from wide areas.

Well, the Mata goal came after Fellaini pinned down a cross and then later the ball went to Mata. The second one came from Di Maria cross which reached Fellaini, whose shot got blocked and went to RVP.

About Shaw-Rojo, I think that Rojo is the better crosser though there is not much into that. He made a few good crosses yesterday IMO.

On general point though, I agree with you and I don't like much this approach of pinning a lot of crosses to Fellaini. It won't work against teams that do not allow us to keep the ball for 70% of the time, or against teams which are better than us at that aspect (and a lot of teams in EPL are taller and stronger than United).

It just can be a good alternative at times when the plan A isn't working. But shouldn't be used as plan A (which we are doing under LVG, in fact that seems to be almost the only way of attack).

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Di Maria wasn't playing as a winger.

Well no, but he was the wide points of the diamond, so there was onus on him to put in crosses - as there was with Rooney (who, as an aside, spent a lot of the game on the far touchline... especially in the first half).

 

[charleysurf]

Well, the Mata goal came after Fellaini pinned down a cross and then later the ball went to Mata. The second one came from Di Maria cross which reached Fellaini, whose shot got blocked and went to RVP.

About Shaw-Rojo, I think that Rojo is the better crosser though there is not much into that. He made a few good crosses yesterday IMO.

On general point though, I agree with you and I don't like much this approach of pinning a lot of crosses to Fellaini. It won't work against teams that do not allow us to keep the ball for 70% of the time, or against teams which are better than us at that aspect (and a lot of teams in EPL are taller and stronger than United).

It just can be a good alternative at times when the plan A isn't working. But shouldn't be used as plan A (which we are doing under LVG, in fact that seems to be almost the only way of attack).

So pretty much every game United's only way of attack is pinging balls to Fellaini in the penalty box?

No. That's ridiculous even by RedCafe standards.

 

[Sultan]

How many touches do we need to go back to prove a point?

What I'm trying to say is Fellaini playing as a striker with heading ability as a reasoning then play with wingers and full backs.

Di Maria, and Januzaj could have played as wingers.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

How many touches do we need to go back to prove a point?

What I'm trying to say is Fellaini playing as a striker with heading ability as a reasoning then play with wingers and full backs.

Di Maria, and Januzaj could have played as wingers.

I don't really get your point, Sults. Surely you saw the dozens of crosses we kept pumping into the box? Irrespective of the formation we played (which was fairly fluid IMO) we clearly used the width of the pitch very well and put a lot of decent crosses into the box.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

How many touches do we need to go back to prove a point?

What I'm trying to say is Fellaini playing as a striker with heading ability as a reasoning then play with wingers and full backs.

Di Maria, and Januzaj could have played as wingers.

They could have done - but we still had more than adequate width in the system we played with yesterday. Yes, The width would have been stronger with more natural wingers on the pitch, but it's not like it wasn't there. It was Rooney and Di Maria's job to provide it, along with McNair (who had a very good game) and Rojo.

 

[Sultan]

Well no, but he was the wide points of the diamond, so there was onus on him to put in crosses - as there was with Rooney (who, as an aside, spent a lot of the game on the far touchline... especially in the first half).

LvG is overcomplicating the game, and we're trying to justify yesterday's approach. Basically, we could have blown away Cambridge with simplicity despite him playing people out of their natural positions. Watching United play football has become a bore for me personally for the first time in more than 4 decades despite having a fantastic squad.

 

[Jev]

He had an impact yesterday but I didn't like the style. We should be able to beat Cambridge 3-0 with guile and skill rather than resorting to kicking it high for the big man. It's a bit depressing that this is what we resort to against such inferior opposition with Mata, Rooney, RvP and Di Maria in the team.

And to play Rooney on the right wing because you need to make room for Fellaini in attack, is quite frankly insulting. Wonder how long he'll put up with it.

 

[Sultan]

Cambridge were too poor (understandably) to counter our formation. I don't get why we see the formation last night being some sort of tactical genius from LvG. Looking back on the match last night even the commenters were confused with our tactics.

 

[Sultan]

He had an impact yesterday but I didn't like the style. We should be able to beat Cambridge 3-0 with guile and skill rather than resorting to kicking it high for the big man. It's a bit depressing that this is what we resort to against such inferior opposition with Mata, Rooney, RvP and Di Maria in the team.

And to play Rooney on the right wing because you need to make room for Fellaini in attack, is quite frankly insulting. Wonder how long he'll put up with it.

Absolutely!

 

[Walrus]

Yea it's pretty strange reading this thread again. I wasn't content with him being played as a striker and laughed my ass off but I think that yesterday's tactic defended itself, comfortable 3-0 win and total control after first 15 minutes or so. We hardly lumped the ball and I don't think we've been crossing all that much more than we would be if Falcao was playing instead of him.

This was roughly my assessment as well. It really was nothing like some of last season's games where we swung in endless crosses and looked hopeless. We worked the ball well and and attacked through the middle and down the flanks. Having Fellaini up front meant Cambridge could not simply sit back and let us cross the ball, so forced them to adapt.

 

[Kostur]

He had an impact yesterday but I didn't like the style. We should be able to beat Cambridge 3-0 with guile and skill rather than resorting to kicking it high for the big man. It's a bit depressing that this is what we resort to against such inferior opposition with Mata, Rooney, RvP and Di Maria in the team.

And to play Rooney on the right wing because you need to make room for Fellaini in attack, is quite frankly insulting. Wonder how long he'll put up with it.

Yea because Rooney is being played the whole fecking season in midfield / now on the right wing just in order to accomodate Fellaini.

Dear God.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

LvG is overcomplicating the game, and we're trying to justify yesterday's approach. Basically, we could have blown away Cambridge with simplicity despite him playing people out of their natural positions. Watching United play football has become a bore for me personally for the first time in more than 4 decades despite having a fantastic squad.

Yet we failed to in the drawn game at their place. Hence we tried a different approach.

 

[Jev]

Yea because Rooney is being played the whole fecking season in midfield / now on the right wing just in order to accomodate Fellaini.

Dear God.

He's being played in midfield the whole fecking season in order to accommodate someone, be it Fellaini, RvP, a young kid not yet ready for the first-team or a guy getting picked on reputation rather than merit.

And Di Maria. Forgot him.

 

[RoyoftheRavers]

I have no idea why people think he was some stoke type of player for Everton who scored because of his physicality. He played some real technical football there, had great passing and really good finishing for someone who isn't a forward.

On his day he's simply unstoppable. His main weakness that I've noticed of him in his Everton days is his consistency and just how he slumps in form when he's low on confidence.

I didn't use a Stoke analogy initially but, now that you mention it, I'd certainly say he's more of a Jonathan Walters or an Andy Carroll than a Cazorla or Fabregas. He is probably better technically than the two former but there is no doubting that physicality is his main asset.

Although they've had a disappointing first half to the season, Everton are a much more footballing side under Martinez than they were under Moyes. They use McCarthy and Barry to keep the ball with Barkley in a more advanced, attacking role - their attacks stem from possesion-based football. Under Moyes they were about getting it into the box and winning second balls (in the air or otherwise). Fellaini was the main physical threat for Everton using the approach.

I'm not having a go at Fellaini himself - he provides a useful alternative for United and, in the Premier League, you have to win ugly occasionally to challenge for titles. But I don't think he'll help the team to play the type of free-flowing football that is consistently needed over a season to win the league.

 

[Sultan]

Yet we failed to in the drawn game at their place. Hence we tried a different approach.

So he got the tactics wrong in the first game?

Personally I thought the first game was not won due to us being away from familiar surroundings, high winds, and a bad pitch. This was at Old Trafford on a beautiful evening. We should be able to win most games against such opposition. I personally don't think it was due to a different approach but simply having superior players.

 

[Shark]

I didn't use a Stoke analogy initially but, now that you mention it, I'd certainly say he's more of a Jonathan Walters or an Andy Carroll than a Cazorla or Fabregas. He is probably better technically than the two former but there is no doubting that physicality is his main asset.

Although they've had a disappointing first half to the season, Everton are a much more footballing side under Martinez than they were under Moyes. They use McCarthy and Barry to keep the ball with Barkley in a more advanced, attacking role - their attacks stem from possesion-based football. Under Moyes they were about getting it into the box and winning second balls (in the air or otherwise). Fellaini was the main physical threat for Everton using the approach.

I'm not having a go at Fellaini himself - he provides a useful alternative for United and, in the Premier League, you have to win ugly occasionally to challenge for titles. But I don't think he'll help the team to play the type of free-flowing football that is consistently needed over a season to win the league.

Why is Fellaini picked out as the player that's most unable to do that though? we've far worse players on the ball than him.