Its difficult to read so much bullshit in a post and actually deem it serious.
Mason Mount's Many Misfortunes (please don't make another waste of money post)
- Thread starter horsechoker
- Start date
Young player who barely played professional football and would be lucky if they can play regular professional football compared with the player who has made it at top level, won lot of trophies playing as first team player and also winning one of PL top 4-5 clubs player of the year but reasoning is same?
The reasoning is same if you also believe, you can run and kick the ball so you can be compared to professional player because they also run and kick football. Logically both are doing the same thing, kicking the ball and can run.
None of Mount, Bruno, Casemiro are good at shielding the ball under pressure, dribbling past opponents in the midfield, controlling (slowing down if needed) tempo of the game. None of them are reliable passers with high volume of accurate passes under pressure. Also, two of the three are lightweight players who get physically bullied easily. We can't control the midfield with this trio.
Just an illustration:
Passing completion %:
Rice - 87% [last year, it was xhaka who was 86%]
Odegaard - 81%
Havertz - 82% [last year, it was partey who was 88%]
(average 85%)
rodri - 91% (who got higher volume of passes)
KDB - 72%
Gundogan - 87%
(average 83%)
Tchouaméni - 93%
Modric - 88%
Kroos - 91%
(average 91%)
Liverpool who also plays transition football 22-23
Fabinho - 88%
Henderson - 84%
Thiago - 87%
(average 86%)
In contrast:
Casemiro - 78%
Bruno - 74%
Mount - 76% (Eriksen - 82%)
(average 76%)
(FYI, Scholes and Carrick both had passing accuracy of 90+% in their PL careers. Roy Keane was 89%.)
Don't underestimate the 10% gap - the ball is almost twice likely to loose to the opponents when it comes to our midfield compared with other strong teams.
It is okay to have a "creator" to have a low passing accuracy. But never imagine all three midfielders with 7x% passing accuracy who all love to release the ball quickly from their feet, a chaotic midfield is certainty.
Last edited:
Because Havertz has been a blazing success.
Your reaction is similar to those fans attacking users claiming De Gea was no good fit for Man Utd in De Gea performance threads last year.
I understand that, usually a thread on a Man Utd player is filled with fanboys of that particular players. Also, Man Utd fanbase has more a "trust the management, don't question! Just shut up and support" loyal mentality than fanbases of many strong teams
Just out of interest, why do you have Liverpool's midfield from last year?
Why not this year's stats?
Yes you're right, after two games played they should write off this £55m, Champions League winning midfielder. If only you were in charge!
"Let's judge a player with their CV" is such a Woodward thing
Darmain - starting XI of Italy, Serie A best XI for 2 seasons
Rojo - World Cup 2014 finalist and best XI
Mata - World Cup winner, UCL winner, Euro winner, Chelsea player of the season x2
Di Maria - UCL winner and final player of the match
Schweinsteiger - Germany vice-captain, World Cup winner, UCL winner
Falcao - third best player in La Liga for a year
Depay - Eredivisie top scorer, Dutch starting XI
let's give them a few years, the team will tick with those CVs!
You've just spewed a lot of rubbish that's all.
Mount does have skillets that compliment Bruno and Casemiro.
You tried to say Mata won the champions league as though it was some differentiator. Mount did too.
You also tried to be sly and show stats only from last season where he and the entire Chelsea team sucked. You didn't caveat his 86% pass completion in seasons prior because that doesn't suit your narrative.
You talk like you're absolutely certain hes a flop and it's therefore fine to label as such before hes bedded in. You ignore that top managers all wanted him and maybe they know more about him suiting a system better than you do.
Hey, do you remember which Scout promoted you?
Are you using ChatGPT and asking it to write hysterical nonsense on Mount?
Last edited:
Perhaps the reverse is true? I didn't differentiate Mata from Mount, but instead draw something parallel
People use "Mount was Chelsea POTY x2 + Champions league winner" to defend him and ask us not to write him off
Ironically Mata was also "Chelsea POTY x2 + Champions league winner" but everyone agrees that he wasn't really a success for our team in his 9 years with us, it is not a differentiator
sounds like the Mount-in-ers here are the people who are really hysterical? I back up with stats and reasoning, and all Mount-in-ers here just resort to:
1. CV-creeps: "He is UCL winner! Chelsea player of the year x2!" (Woodward regens)
2. strawman - "let' not judge with 2 games" (while people don't just form opinions with 2 games)
3. mocking and cheap sarcasm - "so the club should hire you!" (so there is no point to have this forum where laymen discuss about football)
People used that to argue how you shouldn't rule a player out blindly. Mata failing to work out doesn't mean that's generally the norm.
Your logic is literally " Mount wasn't very good last year and Mata didn't work out for us so feck him".
The other stuff about him on paper not suiting Bruno and Casemiro is questionable to say the least. His passing percentage is actually impressive when hes in a system that is clicking, and that too he was in advanced areas not deep.
His ball carrying and pressing is among the best in the league, he is versatile across various positions and he was hunted by at least two other top managers whilst being fought for by his current one to stay.
After all this you don't think "maybe they know better and maybe I should wait and see".
Instead you say "feck anyone who says wait and see. Hes shit. Last year he was shit. So he's shit. I don't care about before then. I won't wait. Mata didn't work out so this guy probably won't".
This is why I think you spewed some rubbish.
What is this narrative that Mata didn't work out for us? He was a crucial team member especially during LVGs team when we arguably tasted the most success. He wasnt world class but a solid first team player. That's what we are expecting Mount to give to us also.
We played him on the right for the majority of his United career. The whole signing was us trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, the reason we signed him was because the atmosphere under Moyes was so dire. Of course he had his moments because he was still a quality player but he wasn’t a fraction of the player he was at Chelsea for us.
Mount-iners, CV creeps 
It's like Twitter clowns have taken over caf.
It's like Twitter clowns have taken over caf.
He is decent at ball carrying but saying he is best in the league is far fetched. I have watched his Chelsea games for a couple years, he did make some dribbles in final third but I can't recall him making a long ball carrying run through defenders like how FDJ or Kovacic did.
Mount-iners, CV creeps
It's like Twitter clowns have taken over caf.
it is not very fair to think repeatedly spewing substitutes for profanities and making cheap sarcastic mocks like "so you are better than ETH or Murtough and the club should hire you" being less clownish, just because "don't judge and give expensive/established players time" is a right thing to say on caf?
It seems like EtH (and a good few other very good managers) were very keen on Mount, so I'll take that as a reason to give the lad more than 10 matches to determine his fate at United.
I can't see from their respective premier league careers why Mount can't at least be a more energetic, less defensively uselss version of Eriksen. It will be a change for him and the first two matches the coaching clearly didn't have that role in mind (he was further up than Bruno) but he's clearly an intelligent player who can adapt - that's proven across his career.
It makes more sense to just about everyone (except EtH, who is the one who matters) that putting him and Bruno so advanced and abandoning Casemiro won't work. Especially when Casemiro also seems to want to get into the box. But that's on the coaching staff imo. Mount will do what he's told.
How about we let him come in, get a run in the team and then bring out the pitchforks? Worth noting in the Spurs game his defensive actions really should have yielded at least 2 first half goals if we had anyone who can finish a chance...
I can't see from their respective premier league careers why Mount can't at least be a more energetic, less defensively uselss version of Eriksen. It will be a change for him and the first two matches the coaching clearly didn't have that role in mind (he was further up than Bruno) but he's clearly an intelligent player who can adapt - that's proven across his career.
It makes more sense to just about everyone (except EtH, who is the one who matters) that putting him and Bruno so advanced and abandoning Casemiro won't work. Especially when Casemiro also seems to want to get into the box. But that's on the coaching staff imo. Mount will do what he's told.
How about we let him come in, get a run in the team and then bring out the pitchforks? Worth noting in the Spurs game his defensive actions really should have yielded at least 2 first half goals if we had anyone who can finish a chance...
It's only fair caf's woodward should be called out
Tbf bit harsh, posters have mare in one or two threads, that's common.
Because he was not deployed in a FdJ or Kovacic role. However there are times he dropped deep and drove the ball up, and he's more than capable of doing it regularly.
What was it you called anyone who said he's a good player? Mount-iners?
I've had a mare in 70. All bants.It's only fair caf's woodward should be called out
Tbf bit harsh, posters have mare in one or two threads, that's common.
It's only fair caf's woodward should be called out
Tbf bit harsh, posters have mare in one or two threads, that's common.
That last part is a myth IMO. We always saw highlights during his Chelsea time and he was obviously quality player on the ball. But his overall performances for us were similar to Chelsea. I remember seeing stats on his goals and assists and they were broadly similar.
Could you expand on this please? What are those skills?
Ball retention, high work rate, ball carrying, extremely good at pressing and positionally astute.
He's also very quick on recycling the ball and receiving on the half turn which helps players like Casemiro.
The difference is, Arsenal always play Partey at right back, who plays a hybrid DM/RB role for them. Which means they often have midfield pair of Rice and Partey behind Odegaard and Havertz.
It is impressive how Mount has slotted seamlessly into the scapegoat role.
Thanks!
That is high praise indeed. Kind of agree with most, apart from positionally astute. He seems at times so invested in his pressing runs he forgets about the consequence when he gets bypassed.
I don´t agree however that he compliments the other so well.
First 2 games did not show a great fit at all, and that looked to me like the very same Mason we have seen last couple of years. He ran his socks off and provided energy to the team, but the midfield still felt more open and vulnerable than ever.
Apart from the first 4 chaotic minutes against Forest i would say we looked a touch more in control, and barely gave Forest anything to work with. And that was with Eriksen instead of Mount in midfield. Eriksen is too slow and lightweight defensively to be a great fit either but my thought is that it is that kind of player we need more than anything. A clever player with good feet, good vision, good weight of pass, good understanding of the game, and hopefully stronger defensively on top.
Personally wouldn´t mind seeing Mount played further up the pitch at times to give us better pressing from the front, god knows players like Rashford, Martial, Sancho can be a bit laidback and timid.
It's not 2 games though is it? No one rated Mount at Chelsea, rating him now just because he's put a United shirt on is weirder.
So all the things you'd expect from a midfielder with two legs?
If Amrabat deal happen he is benching Mount without pressure.
Yeah, I very much expect Amrabat to start ahead of the injured Mount.
Injured or not he still benching that clown.
I don't think Mount was bad for the first half vs Spurs.
The entire team was tripe against Wolves and I don't see that as a mount issue. I also see no value whatsoever in evaluating from two games.
Not quite. Some midfielders excel more at screening the ball. Some excel at the creative side. Some are box to box workborses but don't offer anything creative
Midfielders aren't all the same. You know that.
I do know that, but essentially saying "effort and running" are what Mount brings are the bare minimum for a team like United.