They didn’t and they weren’t
7
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 3
- Goals
- 0
- Assists
- 0
- Yellow cards
- 1
If you mean a midfield of Casemiro/Mount/Bruno then I hope not because that midfield will get cut through like hot butter.
I think as a squad signing he's a good signing, providing he can stay fit. I'm not a fan of either on the wings as well however, I think if Rasmus is playing then you can get away with it. I'm interested in how we deploy Mount this season. Already in the 4 2 2 2, any control we seem to have in games happen when he's on the pitch. Which I think is down to his energy and also he picks up decent positions to do 1-2s. He's nowhere near Bruno's creative level (although its fair to say a fit Mount is a good finisher) however, he seems to facilitate the overall performance of the team better (based on pre-season and the first couple games) hence why when we take him off we just lose all sense of control. It would be interesting to see a fully fit Mount in a midfield with Kobbie and Case to see if there is any change to our control of games.
You will not find one Chelsea fan who regrets him going and wants him back.
There’s plenty of this very forum…
I'd be interested in option three too but that would require dropping Bruno which ETH will never do. I think the reason Mount does well in the 4-2-2-2 is because he understands that his role is to play link man and provide pressure on to the opponents.
You make good points. Mainoo is young and his endurance and intelligent use of energy will increase. Hojlund I thought pressed well the times I saw him. Bruno I agree needs to improve this aspect. Irrespective this is where we need to go and players who can't do it will have to leave.
We can't go back to Oleball. Counter attack means you can't live with Liverpool, Arsenal or City so you're scrabbling for fourth place every season at best. So Mount will turn out to be a good buy in the long run.
Yeah, I agree. I think that was the reason we brought in Mount but with the intention that he can play that pressing/link up role as a 10 but also as an 8 (which I think a fit mount can do). What EtH has as a challenge/problem is to get the heavily individualistic players like Bruno/Rashford/Garnacho to focus on facilitating the shape and performance of the team over indivual creativeness/attacks. Which would mean having periods where we just play boring possession football in the opposition's half but at least allows us to get up the pitch, get in position and get our breath back.
That's right. Mount was Arteta and Klopp's number one priority because he lacks quality. They probably went out looking for additions to the team thinking "hmm, what player runs around a lot but is shit? We need to weaken our team going forward!".
Mainoo is 19. When he improves his stamina and physicality, he will be able to run more and press better than he does now, even if he right now is very good defensively until he tires.
As for the bolded part, come back to Earth. There are two midfielders in PL that can dominate the midfield with the ball and that is Rodri and Gundogan. Ødegaard to a degree, but he is quite inconsistent with it. Kovacic can also be that player, but also inconsistent. And you also want them to be relentless pressers and win the ball back quickly? Now, who is that midfielder that does both? I just need one example.
Liverpool managed 3rd place in the PL, only 9 points behind City and scoring 86 goals with a midfield of Endo, MacAllister and Szoboszlai but you're trying to tell me that Mount - the key player in Chelsea's CL winning year lacks quality and just has no place in our team?
This just oozes agenda, and your following post on the next page proves that.
Strange ramble and not really a clear train of throught. You can dominate a midfield with technical players and press well as a cohesive unit, especially in a zonal press. Not sure why you think it takes one player to control a midfield either.
You use Liverpool and Arsenal as an example, who gives a shit? They're different teams with better players, coaches and technical ability across the team. Mount doesn't start for either of those teams anyway, so it's not the gotcha that you think it is. An opinion isn't an agenda, and my opinion is he's nowhere near the quality, especially that far up the pitch, and when he wasn't what we needed up, or in the middle of the pitch anyway.
Would we be better switching Mount and Rashford in this 4-2-2-2 structure? I’d prefer to see Mount do the donkey work tracking back (although he does look worryingly slow whenever he does track back). We could then just give Rashford the one off-ball job of pressing without him being worried about having to cover back as well.
This is 100% pure fiction. Number one priority
I read that he may be injured again. Hope nothing serious and he can start against Liverpool.
Oozes agenda if you ask me.This is 100% pure fiction. Number one priority
This is 100% pure fiction. Number one priority
I mean there are multiple sources that state it. Even Ornstein said Arteta wanted Mount before Havertz, but ultimately Mount turned them down because he wanted United. But I guess Ornstein isn't credible enough? Maybe some more laughing emojis will help your case @mu4c_20le
If you think Mount doesn't start before Szoboszlai, then yes, it is an agenda. Klopp specifically wanted Mount but wound up with Szoboszlai. Gotcha.
Last post of the day, anyway. Agree to disagree.
ETH said the reason he was substituted yesterday was because he had a problem,.
Genuinly can not remember one thing he did in yesterdays match. Feels like he was just a spectator.
No idea why we bought him.
No idea why we bought him.
It was probably his best half in a united shirt!
If he’s to prove his worth here he should really be looking to replace Mctominay’s goal contribution of last season here, all while also being generally better at football. They effectively occupy the same role, and he cost us 55m and is on huge wages. He should be giving similar output, and also making chances, which of course Scott was incapable of in that advanced midfield role.
And yet still it’s hard to say anything beyond “he pressed well and kept it tidy”.
Actually like him as a player but the only reason Chelsea parted ways is they knew he was crocked. He was a big player for Chelsea 3 seasons back and a fan favourite, yet they couldn't wait to get shot.
I agree. He did nothing noteworthy with the ball
Which just epitomizes how poor a signing he's been for us
Some of the bile being posted here is ridiculous
I agree but we did look much worse when he came off so that's saying something.
Change press for intercept and this is exactly what people used to write about Carrick back in the day. Although they are very different, players like Carrick and Mount will always be under appreciated by the fans because the lack of Hollywood moments in their game but they are loved by managers because they make the whole team play better. This has been very visible in our 2 games this season when Mount have been subbed off and we have instatly looked like a worse team. Besides his pressing and off the ball movement the main thing Mount does well is that he looks to move the ball to another player with only 1 or 2 touches. This is a very valuable trait if you want to play with quick transitions like we are trying to do and there has been a clear lack of players in our attack who are able to play like that.
He makes it much much harder for the opposition to have the ball. The minute he came off they had a field day with rashford jogging about.
it seems like they wanted him to stay to then sold him. Hence a 1 year contract extension.
Well.. not until some sucker offered them money that was hard to refuse.
https://www.goal.com/en-us/news/exp...t-offer-manchester-united/blt44634d912147bf3d
WHY DID MOUNT LEAVE? Mount and Chelsea were locked in negotiations over a new contract after the club's new owners, led by Todd Boehly, completed their takeover last year. However, The Athletic reports that both parties were confident an agreement could be reached until January, when Chelsea withdrew their latest contract offer and warned the player he would be sold in the summer if he did not sign a deal.
The Blues argued that the 24-year-old's disappointing performances in 2022-23 meant he did not deserve to be paid more than his fellow academy graduate Reece James, who had recently committed to a new contract. In February, they offered a £200,000 ($254,000) weekly wage and a £70m ($88.9m) release clause, but it would only have extended his stay for another 12 months. Frustrated, Mount began looking at other options and Chelsea's higher-ups took that as a sign he did not want to stay.
Last edited:
I mean we started with five midfielders, when you take one out you instantly lose an extra man in the middle. Bruno helps in the middle even when he plays as a false 9
There are other players deserving of being slagged off before Mount. I agree: he was not needed. But he's here and he's a sight better than many who steal a living here week in and week out.
You can tell from this thread who’s actually watching the game instead of just spewing stats and basing their opinions off highlights.
He has more cooking show appearances than goal contributions from what I understand … but I don’t see the tv shows over there, so I will have to take that one on faith.
Mount is the same situation as Gallagher, except with Mount we started having Rice and his people tell us that if we didn’t give Mount the contract “he deserved” then Rice would take Chelsea out of consideration. They were teaming up to manipulate, which didn’t go over well for either player.
Mount was played on the wing …. Which didn’t particularly work. He was supposed to play as an 8 but he drifts too far forward and leaves gaps, and he’s also mediocre in challenges or when pressed. When played as a 10 he lacks creativity.
He CAN play all those positions. Even played wingback in two games. But he wanted a contract that paid him on par with Reece James, and he wanted assurances on his position/importance within the team.
Gallagher had similar issues: we wanted him as a squad player two years ago. But he wanted assurances over playing time/starts and he wanted a prime pay package., not the 130-150 per week they felt he warranted.
People are MUCH less sentimental about Mount though. He was a bit of a knob (allegedly) There were rumors of him downing of tools, and then things like his pre taped goodbye message.
But mostly the issue was the same one United fans are dealing with now: “Where does he play?” It is hard to answer, and that was a problem.
We are in the same place that sensible people already knew we were in. He's a very good footballer but maybe doesn't have a position in the starting 11 right now. It's a shame because I think we are seeing that it he gets some games consecutively you will start to see how good he is.
I disagree with the comments saying he is just a good presser and nothing beyond that, I watched make runs into the flanks/half spaces, pull players with him and is very tidy with the ball, and he can cross too, I hope he is given continued starts for the time being while Hojlund is injured and see if he can develop a rhythm, there with Bruno and our wingers, there is a good player in there and I said early in the thread that I hope EtH unleashes him and he comes good this season, he is only 25 and can get better with time.
He lacks the skills and creativity to play as an attacking midfielder in a big team like united (as a starter) , sure can be a squad player, but a squad player on gigantic wages a huge transfer fee and an iconic shirt number is stupid.
Assuming Ugarte finalised and fit enough to start we should play him with Casimero and Mainoo especially against Liverpool. I would start Fernades or Zirkzee up top and Amad right and Garnacho left assuming match fit otherwise Rashford. In the community shield, we played some of our best attacking football with Casimero around the box linking with Amad and Bruno. Mainoo needs to be further up the park also. Mount can come off the bench to maintain energy levels and Collyer also.
I can't see the issue with Mount at all. I don't understand the criticism, beyond his injuries and availability. I rate him very highly and he will show that this season. He's hardworking, presses and his use of the ball is very good.
It feels sometimes as if people find it hard to come off the bandwagon when it comes to criticism of some players. Much of the criticism of Mount these last 48 hours feels like joining in rather than assessing how he played.
It feels sometimes as if people find it hard to come off the bandwagon when it comes to criticism of some players. Much of the criticism of Mount these last 48 hours feels like joining in rather than assessing how he played.
I'd use him more as a wide option. He won't retain a spot in midfield if Ugarte comes in and the current wingers aren't reliable for varying reasons.
Well, it's hard to ignore the fact he was signed for a significant fee and on huge wages. That package should get us a player that can win us games and gets significant numbers of goals and assists as well as being good off the ball.
As it is he is mostly just good off the ball and we signed him off the back of having a bad spell of injuries which have continued at united.
Most of our fans wanted a ball playing 8 last year and we got mount who doesn't have a natural home in the team