[stevoc]

Before his latest injury he warranted a spot.

Schneiderlin started hiding in games(which I think I such worse than anything Fellaini has done) and Herrera's passing was so sloppy that he couldn't complain about being dropped.

Fellaini was at least doing the simple stuff correctly.

Carrick gets away with it for me. Easily the most talented midfielder and at his age I'm not expecting great things. His performances though are so limp. His whole demeanor during the pre KO captaincy stuff is borderline embarrassing.

I disagree mate he's been awful all season for me, all four of those players listed are simply better footballers.

And all four should be in the starting line up at CM before Fellaini on the basis that none of them need 3-4 touches to get the ball under control, and they can all pass the ball much better. You say Herrera's passing was sloppy well yeah at times it can be, but even on his worst day it's still better than Fellaini's.

Also all 4 have the added bonus of not being walking red cards waiting to happen.

As i posted earlier this season with Fellaini starting we have won 35% of our games and 55% without him starting. Thats not a coincidence, we are a better side when he doesn't play.

 

[Dobbs]

I disagree mate he's been awful all season for me, all four of those players listed are simply better footballers.

And all four should be in the starting line up at CM before Fellaini on the basis that none of them need 3-4 touches to get the ball under control, and they can all pass the ball much better. You say Herrera's passing was sloppy well yeah at times it can be, but even on his worst day it's still better than Fellaini's.

Also all 4 have the added bonus of not being walking red cards waiting to happen.

As i posted earlier this season with Fellaini starting we have won 35% of our games and 55% without him starting. Thats not a coincidence, we are a better side when he doesn't play.

I do agree that he's been awful. I'm in danger here of sounding like a fan.

 

[Mike09]

Well to be fair mate i asked you if they were incorrect i never said they were, another poster @Roboc7 pointed out to you that they were incorrect i have no idea if they were right. Seeing as you said you were correcting other peoples stats i just thought i'd offer you the chance to check your own stats. And correct them if they were wrong.

I'm getting confused here mate, let's make it clear. Did he say mine incorrect? I didn't get any reply from him and told me that it was incorrect. I did say mine is the correct one.

Now that i've had a look at what you posted, to be honest it doesn't make much sense. You seem to discount losses where he came on as a sub. Yet also discount losses where he was subbed off. Am i right?

If he started the game and we lost then he contributed to that loss. Saying a game should be counted as 0-0 or 1-0 because goals were conceded after he was subbed is a bit silly really.

If you read the whole stuff in that post alone, I have already explained the detail and it should answer all your doubt and question why I discount losses when he came on as a sub.
Of course the games against Arsenal 3-0 which he came on in second half, the game has already lost before he came, we were 3-0 down before he came on remember? Games again Swansea and etc which he only came on less than 20 mins I didn't count them because it's to judge if he's getting involve of our losing game if he only played less than 20 mins that's why I only count the game where he played as a starter or more than 45 minutes. And to be fair I don't just discount the losses but also the wins such as 3-0 victory against Everton I exclude Fellaini from the list because he only played less than 20th mins and we already won the game at first half anyway.
And if you look at again the winning, draw and losing ratio that I mentioned, I used 2 scenario where if Fellaini stayed on the pitch against Chelsea we would have secure that 3 points and another scenario which the fact that the game ended 1-1. I showed the evidence and to be fair it was correct and fair.

My stats were solely about the games Fellaini started including cup games which is why there is more games, to be honest it was nothing to do with your conversation with iKeano, i posted asking a general question and you replied to me and you seem to have gotten the impression i had entered your conversation with the other poster.

As for my stats having no proof, come on mate don't be ridiculous anyone can check them in 5 minutes. Heres a link to all our results this season click on each game for the starting line up.

http://www.stretfordend.co.uk/seasons/season2016.html

Heres the stats again, please check them if you like. Or don't i don't care anymore if i'm honest.



Games where Fellaini started:

P-17
W-6
D-5
L-6

Games where Fellaini did not start:

P-29
W-16
D-7
L-6

Our win ratio is 55% without Fellaini starting & 35% in games he starts. Which is pretty damning really, had he started all our league games this season we would most likely be in the bottom half of the table.

You didn't post the link to be fair, so it's not my fault if I said your stats has no evidence and proof. And it will take more than 5 minutes to check them mate. And I did say something similar before that a team like us with and without Fellaini are should be expected to win the games with minimum 60% possibility against the likes of FC Midtjyland, FC Bragge, some of our cup and FA cup matches (well you know what teams I am talking about). While the original poster was talking about league games only because it's more for a consistency and all 19 other teams in the league this season could give us 50-50 odd of results. And I did make a proof that when Fellaini is playing or no it didn't make any different in the league.

 

[Roboc7]

But some of the games we lost, he didn't actually play either. The fact whether he played or no, we did get the same result and performance. Inconsistent, poor results and poor playing style. The point is it's not right to boo your own player.

It could just be the way your stats were presented but it is clear that we don't win much when he plays and results are better without him, it doesn't mean we always win or always play well but there is a clear difference in he doesn't play. And it's nots uprising if you look at this personal stats since he signed they are really poor, he is averaging less than three goals, less than one assist and he doesn't create many chances either.

His stats are bad, his performances are bad and he doesn't improve the team in any way other than defending set pieces, there is no need to boo him but I also think people are making too much of it. Better players than fellaini who gave more to the club have been booed and it's only been a few jeers, ironic cheers and boos on a couple of occasions so I can't imagine he is too bothered.

 

[Dobbs]

It could just be the way your stats were presented but it is clear that we don't win much when he plays and results are better without him, it doesn't mean we always win or always play well but there is a clear difference in he doesn't play. And it's nots uprising if you look at this personal stats since he signed they are really poor, he is averaging less than three goals, less than one assist and he doesn't create many chances either.

His stars are bad, his performances are bad and he doesn't improve the team in any way other than defending set pieces, there is no need to boo him but I also think people are making too much of it. Better players than fellaini who gave more to the club have been booed and it's only been a few jeers, ironic cheers and boos on a couple of occasions so I can't imagine he is too bothered.

His form and the negative effect he has on the team is undeniable.

From signing him to how we play him the whole situation has been a mess and most of it's not his fault.

Trying to explain his position under LvG is like trying to explain the Matrix ending. Nobody really knows and anybody who says they can is fibbing to look clever.

 

[stevoc]

If you read the whole stuff in that post alone, I have already explained the detail and it should answer all your doubt and question why I discount losses when he came on as a sub.
Of course the games against Arsenal 3-0 which he came on in second half, the game has already lost before he came, we were 3-0 down before he came on remember? Games again Swansea and etc which he only came on less than 20 mins I didn't count them because it's to judge if he's getting involve of our losing game if he only played less than 20 mins that's why I only count the game where he played as a starter or more than 45 minutes. And to be fair I don't just discount the losses but also the wins such as 3-0 victory against Everton I exclude Fellaini from the list because he only played less than 20th mins and we already won the game at first half anyway.
And if you look at again the winning, draw and losing ratio that I mentioned, I used 2 scenario where if Fellaini stayed on the pitch against Chelsea we would have secure that 3 points and another scenario which the fact that the game ended 1-1. I showed the evidence and to be fair it was correct and fair.

Fair enough mate, i just found the way you presented it a bit confusing. That might have been down to me though. The likes of the 3-0 against Arsenal is fine the game was effectively over before he came on. I wasn't referring to the likes of that.

But the likes of the Southampton and Chelsea games where he went off theres no way of knowing that we wouldn't concede those late goals with Fellaini still on the pitch. It's possible we could have conceded more with him on who knows. Plus those were both very low scoring games who's to say him starting and playing most of them didn't cause us to only score one goal on both games, after all we don't often play well when Fellaini starts. Theres just way too many variables to take into account. Which is why i thought it was fair on him to just include the games he started regardless of substitutions.

You didn't post the link to be fair, so it's not my fault if I said your stats has no evidence and proof. And it will take more than 5 minutes to check them mate. And I did say something similar before that a team like us with and without Fellaini are should be expected to win the games with minimum 60% possibility against the likes of FC Midtjyland, FC Bragge, some of our cup and FA cup matches (well you know what teams I am talking about). While the original poster was talking about league games only because it's more for a consistency and all 19 other teams in the league this season could give us 50-50 odd of results.

I didn't post that link originally no sorry, but i didn't think i really needed to. Theres loads of various sites where stats can be checked to make sure they're right.

To be honest against lesser sides in the cups i would honestly want us to be at the point where we are winning 70-80% of those games like we used to.

And I did make a proof that when Fellaini is playing or no it didn't make any different in the league.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one mate sorry. Bit of a difference here with and without him, our win ratio in league games where he starts is even lower than in all comps when he starts.

Now for the league games he started it's: P-10, W-3, D-3, L-4. Win ratio 30%

For the league games he didn't start it's: P-19, W-10, D-5, L-4. Win ratio 52%

 

[Mike09]

Fair enough mate, i just found the way you presented it a bit confusing. That might have been down to me though. The likes of the 3-0 against Arsenal is fine the game was effectively over before he came on. I wasn't referring to the likes of that.

But the likes of the Southampton and Chelsea games where he went off theres no way of knowing that we wouldn't concede those late goals with Fellaini still on the pitch. It's possible we could have conceded more with him on who knows. Plus those were both very low scoring games who's to say him starting and playing most of them didn't cause us to only score one goal on both games, after all we don't often play well when Fellaini starts. Theres just way too many variables to take into account. Which is why i thought it was fair on him to just include the games he started regardless of substitutions.



I didn't post that link originally no sorry, but i didn't think i really needed to. Theres loads of various sites where stats can be checked to make sure they're right.

To be honest against lesser sides in the cups i would honestly want us to be at the point where we are winning 70-80% of those games like we used to.



I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one mate sorry. Bit of a difference here with and without him, our win ratio in league games where he starts is even lower than in all comps when he starts.

Now for the league games he started it's: P-10, W-3, D-3, L-4. Win ratio 30%

For the league games he didn't start it's: P-19, W-10, D-5, L-4. Win ratio 52%

So what makes you think it's fair to include Southampton game when he didn't play more than 45 minutes because I did say the fair condition should him playing as a starter or more than 45 minutes.
Sure there is no way guarantee we won't concede that's why I used two different scenario, and to be fair our conceded goals against Chelsea was also coming from Schneiderlin (Not blaming a single player only here) who replaced Fellaini at that time. But you can't include the game vs Southampton as he didn't play more 45 minutes. He didn't get enough time to make an impact in that match which is unfair if we include him as one of the reason we lost is because Fellaini started the game.

Back again to yours one I don't think it's fair to put Southampton game in that list. Should be P-9, W-3, D-3, L3 (1.33 points per game with Fellaini) (And I still included 1-1 draw vs Chelsea since he played more than 45 minutes even though we conceded when he was off).
I made a mistake for the won, we won 10x as I forgot Watford game is our victory. Should be P-/20 W-10, D-5, L-5 (1.75 points per game without Fellaini).
I still don't see it as a much different if we have Fellaini or no on the pitch. Either he is still on the pitch or no we would still has the same average of loss and draw but more won average but that's because we played more that twice of games without Fellaini.

 

[stevoc]

So what makes you think it's fair to include Southampton game when he didn't play more than 45 minutes because I did say the fair condition should him playing as a starter or more than 45 minutes.
Sure there is no way guarantee we won't concede that's why I used two different scenario, and to be fair our conceded goals against Chelsea was also coming from Schneiderlin (Not blaming a single player only here) who replaced Fellaini at that time. But you can't include the game vs Southampton as he didn't play more 45 minutes. He didn't get enough time to make an impact in that match which is unfair if we include him as one of the reason we lost is because Fellaini started the game.

Well to be honest mate if you start a match and play half of it. And in that half the team plays shit and doesn't score, then in my book you contributed to that loss just as much as anyone else in the team. So i think it's fair game when adding up Fellaini's stats to include that as a loss. I don't see how we don't include it.

I still don't see it as a much different if we have Fellaini or no on the pitch. Either he is still on the pitch or no we would still has the same average of loss and draw

But think about it mate we lost 4 out of 19 without Fellaini 21% loss ratio and lost 4 out of 10 with him in the side 40% loss ratio. So effectively we lose twice as many games when he's in the side.

but more won average but that's because we played more that twice of games without Fellaini.

Thats not how percentages work though. We didn't just win more games because we played more games. It's a percentage of those games, so even if you halved it to 10 games Eg. P-10, W-5, D3, L-2 our win ratio would still be over 50% without him compared to 30% with him in the side.

Do you see where i'm coming from now mate?

 

[Mike09]

Well to be honest mate if you start a match and play half of it. And in that half the team plays shit and doesn't score, then in my book you contributed to that loss just as much as anyone else in the team. So i think it's fair game when adding up Fellaini's stats to include that as a loss. I don't see how we don't include it.



But think about it mate we lost 4 out of 19 without Fellaini 21% loss ratio and lost 4 out of 10 with him in the side 40% loss ratio. So effectively we lose twice as many games when he's in the side.



Thats not how percentages work though. We didn't just win more games because we played more games. It's a percentage of those games, so even if you halved it to 10 games Eg. P-10, W-5, D3, L-2 our win ratio would still be over 50% without him compared to 30% with him in the side.

Do you see where i'm coming from now mate?

This is why I've been saying this before yours can't be called as a stats mate. It's not specific and no detail on it. It's the exact same thing with what those Sky Sport's stats which is what people called them as pointless. People might think how can Smalling is considered as one of the best centre back in the league this season if United have been playing poor and conceded a lot, but they ignore the fact that it's not Smalling's fault for all of those issue. People called Smalling had a poor game against Arsenal 3-0 defeat but fact is he played well and was our best player in that game but people called him poor because of the score and ignoring the contribution he made and the fact of why we conceded.

You can't judge or blame players when he didn't involve on the pitch at all even in a slightest percentage for the caused of conceded goals or our loss, Fellaini was in a 0% involved for the conceded and loss in both Southampton and Chelsea. This is basically about when Fellaini played or when Fellaini didn't play. When Fellaini played did we conceded goal against Chelsea? We were leading 1-0 mate, but when Fellaini was off we conceded! And you are ignoring this thing. Did he play when we conceded? Is it his fault that we lost 3 points in that game?
When Fellaini played against Southampton, we were 0-0 at half time and I am actually surprised he was off but stayed on the pitch against Liverpool (Europa) and WHU (FA). I thought he had a good first half but poor games against Liverpool and WHU. Did he play when we conceded? Is it his fault that we conceded and lost that game?

We lost 3 games when Fellaini was playing and won 3 games and could have won 4 games when he was playing. You are keep blaming the result of Southampton and Chelsea as it was his fault that we conceded when he wasn't even on the pitch, how fair is that?. And it's not like we played better when he was off against Southampton and Chelsea anyway!

 

[stevoc]

This is why I've been saying this before yours can't be called as a stats mate. It's not specific and no detail on it. It's the exact same thing with what those Sky Sport's stats which is what people called them as pointless.

Stats are stats are stats mate. They generally don't have detail or include the context. They are statistics. Those stats are factually correct, in simple terms what they tell us is that when Fellaini starts we win less and lose way more. And when he doesn't start we win more game and lose less.

Everything else you keep talking about and referring to as detail is all subjective. You see it one way but i see it another. But stats are basically facts they are in not really subjective one way or another. They can be skewed yes, but i think i am being fair on Fellaini by only counting games in which he started. I have seen others include games where he only came on as a sub for 10-15 minutes as a loss in Fellaini's stats, now that is unfair.

You can't judge or blame players when he didn't involve on the pitch at all even in a slightest percentage for the caused of conceded goals or our loss, Fellaini was in a 0% involved for the conceded and loss in both Southampton and Chelsea. This is basically about when Fellaini played or when Fellaini didn't play. When Fellaini played did we conceded goal against Chelsea? We were leading 1-0 mate, but when Fellaini was off we conceded! And you are ignoring this thing. Did he play when we conceded? Is it his fault that we lost 3 points in that game?
When Fellaini played against Southampton, we were 0-0 at half time and I am actually surprised he was off but stayed on the pitch against Liverpool (Europa) and WHU (FA). I thought he had a good first half but poor games against Liverpool and WHU. Did he play when we conceded? Is it his fault that we conceded and lost that game?

We lost 3 games when Fellaini was playing and won 3 games and could have won 4 games when he was playing. You are keep blaming the result of Southampton and Chelsea as it was his fault that we conceded when he wasn't even on the pitch, how fair is that?. And it's not like we played better when he was off against Southampton and Chelsea anyway!

You are completely missing the point mate. Whether he was on the pitch when goals were actually conceded or not is irrelevant. A match lasts 90 minutes against Chelsea he played 79 of those 90 minutes. We drew 1-1 we only scored one goal while Fellaini was on the pitch, had we scored 2 we would have won but we didn't and Fellaini played his part in that.

For the Southampton game he played in half of it when we were shit and didn't score, so he also contributed to that loss. By your logic if we had scored 3 goals after he went off would you still count it as a draw in Fellaini's stats?

Honestly mate to argue that you can only judge his performances and whether or not he has a detrimental effect on the team on full 90 minutes appearances is absolutely ridiculous.

Even without those two games his league stats are still damning, P-8, W-3, D-2, L-3 so the loss ratio only comes down slightly to 37.5% from 40%. It's clear no matter what way you want to try to skew these stats mate that he is a massive negative influence on our teams prospects of winning football games.

 

[Mike09]

Stats are stats are stats mate. They generally don't have detail or include the context. They are statistics. Those stats are factually correct, in simple terms what they tell us is that when Fellaini starts we win less and lose way more. And when he doesn't start we win more game and lose less.

Everything else you keep talking about and referring to as detail is all subjective. You see it one way but i see it another. But stats are basically facts they are in not really subjective one way or another. They can be skewed yes, but i think i am being fair on Fellaini by only counting games in which he started. I have seen others include games where he only came on as a sub for 10-15 minutes as a loss in Fellaini's stats, now that is unfair.

Yeah but it's a pointless stats just like Sky Sport one. What's the point showing the result but ignoring the fact what actually happened during the game and what the players do during that game. A good stats should be more detailed and specific so there is no mistake or misunderstood. You are including the list of where he has 0% involved on the pitch when we both lost the game and losing a point. And the point is what's the difference when he was playing or no. Against Chelsea and Southampton when he was playing and not we got two completely different result.

You are completely missing the point mate. Whether he was on the pitch when goals were actually conceded or not is irrelevant. A match lasts 90 minutes against Chelsea he played 79 of those 90 minutes. We drew 1-1 we only scored one goal while Fellaini was on the pitch, had we scored 2 we would have won but we didn't and Fellaini played his part in that.

For the Southampton game he played in half of it when we were shit and didn't score, so he also contributed to that loss. By your logic if we had scored 3 goals after he went off would you still count it as a draw in Fellaini's stats?

Honestly mate to argue that you can only judge his performances and whether or not he has a detrimental effect on the team on full 90 minutes appearances is absolutely ridiculous.

Even without those two games his league stats are still damning, P-8, W-3, D-2, L-3 so the loss ratio only comes down slightly to 37.5% from 40%. It's clear no matter what way you want to try to skew these stats mate that he is a massive negative influence on our teams prospects of winning football games.

The thing is you were talking about the stats whether it's true or no, you were against it because I exclude the Southampton game. And now let me tell you the original poster posted the stats by replying my post that said "With Fellaini and without Fellaini we are still playing bad" (Check it out on page 72). So the point is not just the result but we played the same thing (poor) against Southampton when he was playing or wasn't playing but got a different result.
And we played much better when Fellaini was on the pitch against Chelsea and worse when he wasn't playing against Chelsea and we got another different result when he was on and off the pitch. I haven't been missing the point mate, this is about what happened during the game when Fellaini was there or no. Result, performance any change and difference. Nothing different overall this season with or without Fellaini. 'Bad' that's all I can describe them.

 

[Morpheus 7]

Fellaini is a waste in midfield,if you have to play the thug put him up front. He isn't a good at passing, running, winning tackles or dictating play.When we play him in midfield, we may as well be a man down, we are always over run. I don't like to see him get booed off the pitch. With that said, I don't like him elbowing people in nearly every match either. He was never wanted here and is always the Moyes reminder. He was very important in getting top 4 last year, many people forget that. Probably because it seems pointless now. It's best for him and united to part ways at the end of the season. If you want to get angry, you need to direct it at Van Gaal for selecting him. It's not Fellaini's fault he's not been playing to his few strengths(position) and is put in the team. It's that deluded clown of a manager. A part of me dies when I see his name on the team sheet. Then seeing Schneiderlin on the bench beside Herrera and even Schweinsteiger...This season had been beyond a farce.

 

[ZDwyr]

The issue I have is that the criticism Fellaini gets is over the top. I understand that people don't like him and don't want him in the team, or they just think he isn't a good player. I just don't see how they can want him out of the team so badly as they think his replacements are any better. Herrera, Schneiderlin, Carrick and even Schweinsteiger in patches (but probably less so) have all struggled just as badly this season - in my opinion.

If Fellaini was being picked over a CM who was actually in good form then I could understand the frustration, but he really isn't. Whoever is in there gives a performance that usually ranges from 4-6 on a rating scale.

 

[Perrick Dubois]

Anyone else have to look this up? Typical frenchy, with your big and fancy words.

I am only French when I need to be.

Also, I think if this thread has taught us anything, it is that using "games won when X is in the side" is a horribly poor metric and explains absolutely sod all. By that kind of silly logic Daley Blind is the worst player to ever play for us and we can blame this entire season of shambolic results on him because he's not missed a game.

 

[kouroux]

I am only French when I need to be.

Also, I think if this thread has taught us anything, it is that using "games won when X is in the side" is a horribly poor metric and explains absolutely sod all. By that kind of silly logic Daley Blind is the worst player to ever play for us and we can blame this entire season of shambolic results on him because he's not missed a game.

Don't worry about the french criticism, it's a cheap jibe used only people disagree with you. We've been there.

 

[Ish]

The issue I have is that the criticism Fellaini gets is over the top. I understand that people don't like him and don't want him in the team, or they just think he isn't a good player. I just don't see how they can want him out of the team so badly as they think his replacements are any better. Herrera, Schneiderlin, Carrick and even Schweinsteiger in patches (but probably less so) have all struggled just as badly this season - in my opinion.

If Fellaini was being picked over a CM who was actually in good form then I could understand the frustration, but he really isn't. Whoever is in there gives a performance that usually ranges from 4-6 on a rating scale.

Essentially this. I think Fellaini is just theee symbolic space goat. Let me be clear. I'm not a fan of his and also don't want him in the side/don't think he's United quality but the criticism, in comparison to his peers, is a bit OTT.

I think a lot of our fans just see him as a metaphor which sums up our struggles. He's a Moyes signing (who most on here hate I think), which we overpaid for (due to Moyes again), who's not good enough for a title chasing team (unless he played for a Pulis type team who'd ever be challenging up there!) and at his best, he promotes a certain style of play which isn't easy on the eye. To top it all off, he's a freaking nasty/dirty player as well.

Then he still puts in criminally shit performances, albeit, in a position a manager is picking him in which isn't his best. I think I'd probably speak for a good few on here who'd much rather give Pereira & co. (youth) a chance at CM then. Watch them struggle - at least they'd have an excuse. (which wouldn't mean that they'd be immune to negative reviews/some even writing them off - but such is the nature of football fans).

 

[stevoc]

Yeah but it's a pointless stats just like Sky Sport one. What's the point showing the result but ignoring the fact what actually happened during the game and what the players do during that game. A good stats should be more detailed and specific so there is no mistake or misunderstood. You are including the list of where he has 0% involved on the pitch when we both lost the game and losing a point. And the point is what's the difference when he was playing or no. Against Chelsea and Southampton when he was playing and not we got two completely different result.

Seriously mate are you on a fecking wind up?

I just included the stats of the games without the Chelsea and Southampton results because you keep using it to defend him. And guess what we are still shit with him in the side. Did you miss that bit?

Here it is again, P-8, W-3, D-2, L-3 so the loss ratio only comes down slightly to 37.5% from 40%.

So what now, we lose 21% of games without him and 37.5% with him excluding matches you insist on being omitted for silly reasons. Even then when skewing the stats to make him look better it's still blatantly obvious the effect he has on our team. He's shit and he makes us even shitter than we already are.

The thing is you were talking about the stats whether it's true or no, you were against it because I exclude the Southampton game. And now let me tell you the original poster posted the stats by replying my post that said "With Fellaini and without Fellaini we are still playing bad" (Check it out on page 72). So the point is not just the result but we played the same thing (poor) against Southampton when he was playing or wasn't playing but got a different result.
And we played much better when Fellaini was on the pitch against Chelsea and worse when he wasn't playing against Chelsea and we got another different result when he was on and off the pitch. I haven't been missing the point mate, this is about what happened during the game when Fellaini was there or no. Result, performance any change and difference. Nothing different overall this season with or without Fellaini. 'Bad' that's all I can describe them.

Nah mate you are still missing the point or purposely ignoring it to be honest this is tedious beyond belief now.

You are focusing on two minor details and using it to try to argue that Fellaini isn't that detrimental to the team. News flash he was playing shit in both the Southampton and Chelsea games. He without a doubt hindered our play and as a result we only scored 1 goal over two matches. The score lines when he was taken off were in spite of his presence not because of it. We weren't beating Chelsea because Fellaini was in the team.

Which ever way you want to twist things theres no way around it he has been awful all season. And everytime he plays we are a worse team because of his presence. So you keep banging on about the Southampton loss and the Chelsea draw having nothing to do with him because he was taken off 10 minutes before the end like it even matters to the overall point. Or changes the fact this year Fellaini has been one of the worst players to pull on a United shirt in living memory if that makes you feel better.

 

[stevoc]

The issue I have is that the criticism Fellaini gets is over the top. I understand that people don't like him and don't want him in the team, or they just think he isn't a good player. I just don't see how they can want him out of the team so badly as they think his replacements are any better. Herrera, Schneiderlin, Carrick and even Schweinsteiger in patches (but probably less so) have all struggled just as badly this season - in my opinion.

If Fellaini was being picked over a CM who was actually in good form then I could understand the frustration, but he really isn't. Whoever is in there gives a performance that usually ranges from 4-6 on a rating scale.

No chance mate, none are pulling up trees. But come on all four are infinitely better midfielders and footballers in general than Fellaini. It's not even debatable.

This place is fecking nuts.

 

[Ji_Maria]

One of my favorite players last year, really turned a corner. This year has been woeful, but still grateful to him for scoring grucial goals for us last minute.

Should be moved on though, and he probably will fetch a good price given his heroics last season.

 

[ZDwyr]

No chance mate, none are pulling up trees. But come on all four are infinitely better midfielders and footballers in general than Fellaini. It's not even debatable.

This place is fecking nuts.

I'm not disputing that most of them aren't better footballers, Schweinsteiger for example is obviously a much better footballer than Fellaini, but I honestly don't see their form as being that different. Carrick can hardly move these days, Schneiderlin has matches where you don't even notice him (not in the good way) and Herrera has games where he constantly gives the ball away. Obviously Fellaini has matches where he makes similar kinds of mistakes. None of them have been overly impressive this season. People moan when Fellaini gets picked but honestly no one else has been any better?

Of course this is just my view, if you think the others have been noticeably better then that's fine. We just see different things.

 

[Walrus]

No chance mate, none are pulling up trees. But come on all four are infinitely better midfielders and footballers in general than Fellaini. It's not even debatable.

This place is fecking nuts.

You are right on that bit.

 

[dichinero]

I don't know why people are moaning that Fellaini is been slated here for being an awful footballer. United fans have ripped into better players for less. Cleverly, Anderson, John O'Shea, Fletcher, Gibson, Nani et al, despite being better players and contributed to the squad than Fellaini would ever do have been called so many names but I don't recollect many coming to their defence.

 

[stevoc]

I'm not disputing that most of them aren't better footballers, Schweinsteiger for example is obviously a much better footballer than Fellaini, but I honestly don't see their form as being that different. Carrick can hardly move these days, Schneiderlin has matches where you don't even notice him (not in the good way) and Herrera has games where he constantly gives the ball away. Obviously Fellaini has matches where he makes similar kinds of mistakes. None of them have been overly impressive this season. People moan when Fellaini gets picked but honestly no one else has been any better?

Of course this is just my view, if you think the others have been noticeably better then that's fine. We just see different things.

Evidently mate. All of them are better footballers. Even on their worst days all four of those players, Carrick and Schweinsteiger especially are still better passers of the ball and have a better first touch than Fellaini on his best day. On that basis alone all four should be picked in Midfield ahead of Fellaini.

I mean we are supposed to be a passing possession based side and we play a guy in CM who can't pass for shit because he's good at headed clearances. It's madness.

 

[stevoc]

You are right on that bit.

Yeah but i would hazard a guess we have different views on why though.

 

[Walrus]

Yeah but i would hazard a guess we have different views on why though.

Oh yes

 

[Di Maria's angel]

No chance mate, none are pulling up trees. But come on all four are infinitely better midfielders and footballers in general than Fellaini. It's not even debatable.

This place is fecking nuts.

Who cares if they're better? They've been woeful for us all season. I'd say Fellaini has been better than Carrick and Morgan, and is on par with BFS who's been garbage all season. In fact, I can't even put Herrera in front of him who's been poor for most of this season as well.

All in all, our CM's have under-performed all season, hence why we're 6th in the league.

 

[Man of Leisure]

I am only French when I need to be.

What does that even mean?

Don't worry about the french criticism, it's a cheap jibe used only people disagree with you. We've been there.

Jeez, your sarcasm meter down? You frenchies sure are touchy. @Rooney in Paris

 

[stevoc]

Who cares if they're better? They've been woeful for us all season. I'd say Fellaini has been better than Carrick and Morgan, and is on par with BFS who's been garbage all season. In fact, I can't even put Herrera in front of him who's been poor for most of this season as well.

All in all, our CM's have under-performed all season, hence why we're 6th in the league.

I do. Fellaini better than Carrick yeah ok.

 

[Di Maria's angel]

I do. Fellaini better than Carrick yeah ok.

Carrick has been a spineless coward this season. I'd much rather see Fellaini than Carrick, this season.

 

[Walrus]

I do. Fellaini better than Carrick yeah ok.

As far as I can see, nobody actually said Fellaini was a better player than our other midfielders, but rather that his performances have arguably been better (and certainly no worse) than theirs.

 

[dichinero]

Who cares if they're better? They've been woeful for us all season. I'd say Fellaini has been better than Carrick and Morgan, and is on par with BFS who's been garbage all season. In fact, I can't even put Herrera in front of him who's been poor for most of this season as well.

All in all, our CM's have under-performed all season, hence why we're 6th in the league.

You are joking right?

 

[Witchking]

If Fellaini starts or plays against Liverpool, i have no hope of United getting anything from the game.

 

[Di Maria's angel]

You are joking right?

No.

 

[Boycott]

In three years he's rarely dominated as he did at Everton and for Belgium. He was never good enough to build a team around for Manchester United. But with the instability he got chances and failed time and again. His time is up and the phasing out should start now.

 

[stevoc]

As far as I can see, nobody actually said Fellaini was a better player than our other midfielders, but rather that his performances have arguably been better (and certainly no worse) than theirs.

To even say Fellaini's performances have been better as a central midfielder than other players who can actually fecking pass is for me ridiculous.

He has been much worse in my opinion. And the stats seem to back that up.

 

[stevoc]

Carrick has been a spineless coward this season. I'd much rather see Fellaini than Carrick, this season.

Well needless to say i disagree with everything you have said i would rather have any other midfielder from our squad in CM before i would have Fellaini in there, and probably a few other players are aren't even midfielders as well.

He brings very little to the table outside of defensive headers and we are a worse team when he plays.

You are entitled to your own opinion of course.

 

[kouroux]

What does that even mean?

Jeez, your sarcasm meter down? You frenchies sure are touchy. @Rooney in Paris

Oh mon Dieu, yours seems to be fecked up too.

 

[Man of Leisure]

Oh mon Dieu, yours seems to be fecked up too.

Au contraire, mon ami malodorante.

 

[kouroux]

Au contraire, mon ami malodorante.

Malodorant btw

 

[Man of Leisure]

Damn Google Translate.