Nasri To City - Done Deal!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Allforone said:
Where would Nasri fit in with us? we dont play 4-3-3/4-5-1 much at all now we have the Rooney and Hernandez front line blossoming, hes not a player who plays in a 2 man midfield, the way we use our wide players id definitely prefer Nani and Valencia over him to, i think that story is a pile of excrement.

We need a high class central midfield player, thats not Nasri, we need a Modric.
Click to expand...

First off, we will not get Nasri. Some journalist noticed that Nasri have not yet signed a contract with Arsenal, and decided to make a story out of it.

But Nasri is as talented as Modric. He is hard-working and definitely has the potential to do the job Modric has done for Spurs. There is no reason for him not being able to play in a two man midfield. Tbh, he is a more natural central midfielder than he is a wide player. Luka Modric would have been a perfect buy three years ago. Today, Nasri would.
 
Very, very good player and obviously would feature in our side.
 
Not a believable story, but if it was.. it'd be great to have him here, those who say he'd struggle to get into our side, don't know what they're talking about. He's more than capable of playing centrally and given alot of responsibility is capable of running games from midfield and he'd be very useful on either flank, especially the left.
 
Ekeke said:
Modric :lol: Come on, Nasri is far better. But we wont be signing him
Click to expand...

Not for what we need he isnt at all, for once i actually agree with Ali, Nasri is not what we need at all, hes not a winger in the mould of a Nani or Valencia who suit our wing play, hes not a Scholes type midfield player who runs the game from central, hes nowhere near as good as Rooney drifting in the hole off the front, basically you need to play a very free system that allows him to come off the left flank.

Modric is a top class central midfield player, everything we are lacking, Nasri is not, to get the best out of Nasri wed have to drop one of Nani or Valencia or remove Rooney from his best position, basically balls to that.
 
x42bn6 said:
I think Modrić is more of what we need, but it's not like we're going to get either...
Click to expand...

Definitely more of what we need a high class midfield creator, and from what ive seen he dosnt shrivel and hide during the big games, Modric actually shines in them, ive seen Nasri influence about 2 big games since he came over here...to give him his due though he looks wonderful against the likes of Stoke at home.

Still i agree, we wont get either, fortunately in 1 case and unfortunately in the other.
 
Allforone said:
Not for what we need he isnt at all, for once i actually agree with Ali, Nasri is not what we need at all, hes not a winger in the mould of a Nani or Valencia who suit our wing play, hes not a Scholes type midfield player who runs the game from central, hes nowhere near as good as Rooney drifting in the hole off the front, basically you need to play a very free system that allows him to come off the left flank.

Modric is a top class central midfield player, everything we are lacking, Nasri is not, to get the best out of Nasri wed have to drop one of Nani or Valencia or remove Rooney from his best position, basically balls to that.
Click to expand...

Modric is absolutely not a top class central midfielder nor is he anywhere near "everything we're lacking".

Nasri absolutely is a top class central midfielder when you play a 3. You'd probably need a Hargreaves type player next to him if you want him in a 2 but still. I'm not sure Nasri-Carrick for example is anymore of a defensive liability than Scholes-Carrick was.

Nasri is a versatile goalscoring attacking midfielder. Which is far closer to solving our midfield issues than Modric.
 
I actually would not mind him coming here. He is a technically sound player. A wonderful talent and he scores goals too. Would be a great addition to the team but he will end up signing a bumper contract at Arsenal. He is one of their top three players. I am sure they won't let him go.
 
Ekeke said:
Modric is absolutely not a top class central midfielder nor is he anywhere near "everything we're lacking".

Nasri absolutely is a top class central midfielder when you play a 3. You'd probably need a Hargreaves type player next to him if you want him in a 2 but still. I'm not sure Nasri-Carrick for example is anymore of a defensive liability than Scholes-Carrick was.

Nasri is a versatile goalscoring attacking midfielder. Which is far closer to solving our midfield issues than Modric.
Click to expand...

Stopped reading after that, anyone who has a basic grasp of football can see Modric is class and hed walk into our midfield and improve it ten fold, Nasri is not a central midfield player and hence doesn't play in central midfield...go figure.
 
Allforone said:
Stopped reading after that, anyone who has a basic grasp of football can see Modric is class and hed walk into our midfield and improve it ten fold, Nasri is not a central midfield player and hence doesn't play in central midfield...go figure.
Click to expand...

He has played in central midfield for Arsenal and done well. Its basically the presence of Fabregas in the side that's keeping him playing out wide.
 
Allforone said:
Stopped reading after that, anyone who has a basic grasp of football can see Modric is class and hed walk into our midfield and improve it ten fold, Nasri is not a central midfield player and hence doesn't play in central midfield...go figure.
Click to expand...

Actually Nasri always wants to play in central midfield but Wenger can't fit him in there with Fab, Wilshere, Diaby and Song all fit. Hence he plays on the wing for Arsenal.
 
Allforone said:
Stopped reading after that, anyone who has a basic grasp of football can see Modric is class and hed walk into our midfield and improve it ten fold, Nasri is not a central midfield player and hence doesn't play in central midfield...go figure.
Click to expand...

Yet thats where he's been at his best, where he played for Marseille and no doubt where he'd rather play if Fabregas wasnt there stopping him from being picked there.
 
Ekeke said:
Yet thats where he's been at his best, where he played for Marseille and no doubt where he'd rather play if Fabregas wasnt there stopping him from being picked there.
Click to expand...

Nasri likes to play off the front whether it be via the left flank, the right or in the hole, this is not a player we're in need of which is rather obvious, we have a clear requirement for a high quality central midfield player, not a luxary one who needs the freedom of the pitch to express himself or 2 defensive midfielders to do his dirty work thats not how we play at all and never has been under Sir alex.

When has Nasri ever played in a 2 man centre midfield? Considering we play 4-4-2 for 99% of the season thats quite an important requirement after all, unless your advocating dropping a striker, playing Rooney on his own, picking 2 defensive midfielders and basically ripping up the team and building it around Nasri?
 
Allforone said:
Stopped reading after that, anyone who has a basic grasp of football can see Modric is class and hed walk into our midfield and improve it ten fold, Nasri is not a central midfield player and hence doesn't play in central midfield...go figure.
Click to expand...
It's not really up for debate. Nasri is an AM and Modric a CM.
 
Nasri is a nice player. He would get plenty of games at United, but he would not be a guaranteed starter.

And yes, Modric would be perfect alongside Carrick in central midfield. I have been saying this since 2009, before he was popular here.
 
Allforone said:
Nasri likes to play off the front whether it be via the left flank, the right or in the hole, this is not a player we're in need of which is rather obvious, we have a clear requirement for a high quality central midfield player, not a luxary one who needs the freedom of the pitch to express himself or 2 defensive midfielders to do his dirty work thats not how we play at all and never has been under Sir alex.
Click to expand...

He needs the same freedom to express himself as Modric or Anderson. His need is there but he's not a luxury player, no more than they are anyway.

When has Nasri ever played in a 2 man centre midfield? Considering we play 4-4-2 for 99% of the season thats quite an important requirement after all, unless your advocating dropping a striker, playing Rooney on his own, picking 2 defensive midfielders and basically ripping up the team and building it around Nasri?
Click to expand...

When had Anderson ever played in any kind of central midfield before United? We put him in a midfield 2. Nasri would adapt far quicker and retain much of what makes him a very good player. To add to that he's already the ball retaining type, is outstanding at taking players on and he scores goals. He'd be like Giggs in central midfield but more of a goal threat.
 
He needs the same freedom to express himself as Modric or Anderson. His need is there but he's not a luxury player, no more than they are anyway.
Click to expand...



As an Arsenal fan has just told you, Modric is a CM Nasri is an AM, the discussion dosnt really need go any further, they are different players who play in different positions, one plays in a role we require improvement the other dosnt, Nasri likes to play in similiar positions to those Rooney and Nani occupy and forgive me for not wetting my undergarments at the propsect of him replacing their roles in the team.
 
Correct me if i'm wrong, but didnt Nasri completely and utrerly school England's midfield in the France game a few months ago. I'm probably wrong, but i remember him playing alongside Yoann Gourcuff, too who is equally offensive.
 
Allforone said:
As an Arsenal fan has just told you
Click to expand...

No. You mean Pete, the guy who virtually guaranteed that Arsenal would win the title. Please respect yourself and argue your own opinion, dont degrade it by trying to use any of the rubbish he comes up with

Modric is a CM Nasri is an AM, the discussion dosnt really need go any further
Click to expand...

There are many definitions for AM. It really comes down to which you go with. I go with the South Americans - AM = in the hole or a player "just inside" the wing, would be LAM or RAM. Think Ronaldinho at Barcelona

But it is clear that you can play with 3 central midfielders. Not 1 dcm, 1 cm and 1 am, but 3x CM. And he can play that role.

they are different players who play in different positions, one plays in a role we require improvement the other dosnt, Nasri likes to play in similiar positions to those Rooney and Nani occupy and forgive me for not wetting my undergarments at the propsect of him replacing their roles in the team.
Click to expand...

Eh Nasri plays in completely different areas to Nani. Yeah he likes to come up through the middle and Rooney plays there too, so what? So does Anderson. And Giggs. Sometimes we have all 3 on the pitch, we dont see Rooney running into them. In fact what we see is Rooney linking up with his team mates better.

What we require is someone to retain the ball and pass it around sensibly so we dont give it away a lot, but in case you forget we have few goals from midfield too. Nasri would help out a lot more because of that. Modric doesnt get you goals, nor does he create oppertunities more often than Nasri.
 
MacMUFC said:
Correct me if i'm wrong, but didnt Nasri completely and utrerly school England's midfield in the France game a few months ago. I'm probably wrong, but i remember him playing alongside Yoann Gourcuff, too who is equally offensive.
Click to expand...

You are correct, he played with Gourcuff and M'Vila
 
No. You mean Pete, the guy who virtually guaranteed that Arsenal would win the title. Please respect yourself and argue your own opinion, dont degrade it by trying to use any of the rubbish he comes up with
Click to expand...

Please don't insult my intelligence, i made the point regarding the difference in their positions long before Pete even entered the topic, as you well know and can clearly see via a 2 second scroll up the page.

Look we could be here all night arguing the semantics of positions occupied on the football pitch, the fact is we both agree to get the best out of Nasri you need to play a 3 man central midfield yes? to do that we can only play with 1 striker yes? that means basically Nasri takes Rooneys position on the pitch and we drop Hernandez whilst reducing the influence of our best player in the club on our game and dropping a man whos 1 short of 20 goals this season, im sorry but that to me is not strengthening our cause and not improving an area of the pitch we are clearly insufficient in at the moment.

our best system is 4-4-2, its what we play 99% of every season and what suits our playing staff the best, we need a replacement for Paul Scholes, that player is not Samir Nasri, he does not function in a 2 man midfield hence why Arsenal NEVER play him in a 2 man midfield.

I fail to see how any of these points arent obvious.
 
Allforone said:
Please don't insult my intelligence, i made the point regarding the difference in their positions long before Pete even entered the topic, as you well know and can clearly see via a 2 second scroll up the page.

Look we could be here all night arguing the semantics of positions occupied on the football pitch, the fact is we both agree to get the best out of Nasri you need to play a 3 man central midfield yes? to do that we can only play with 1 striker yes? that means basically Nasri takes Rooneys position on the pitch and we drop Hernandez whilst reducing the influence of our best player in the club on our game and dropping a man whos 1 short of 20 goals this season, im sorry but that to me is not strengthening our cause and not improving an area of the pitch we are clearly insufficient in at the moment.

our best system is 4-4-2, its what we play 99% of every season and what suits our playing staff the best, we need a replacement for Paul Scholes, that player is not Samir Nasri, he does not function in a 2 man midfield hence why Arsenal NEVER play him in a 2 man midfield.

I fail to see how any of these points arent obvious.
Click to expand...



Arsenal dont play a 2 man midfield.

Fabregas can play in one and they dont play it, just the same as Nasri doesnt play in a 2 man midfield at Arsenal. See how thats not a reasonable argument?

Nasri or Modric essentially both mean the same thing. Our most promising midfielder dropped, they are picked wide or we play 3 in midfield.

Rather than replace him we need to build our midfield around Anderson. Nasri is better wide than Modric is. In a midfield 3 Nasri is easily the better player.

If we were going to play 2 in midfield exclusively, if Anderson doesnt matter and we arent going to sign any other midfielders, then sure Modric would suit us better. I just dont believe this to be true. And in any other circumstance than the one I just detailed, Nasri is a far better option because he's a far better player.
 
Ekeke said:
You are correct, he played with Gourcuff and M'Vila
Click to expand...

As i thought. He is more than capable of playing in the centre, in a 4-5-1 or 4-4-2, i personally cant see why this is up for debate. If Anderson can play in there, someone as gifted as Nasri can, too.

What I find quite stunning, is that the same probably want us to spunk £50m on Sneijder - someone who struggled to play in a 4-4-2 for Madrid. Dont remember him ever completing 90 minutea for them. Nasri would be a wonderful signing for us, as he ticks all the boxes. Modric wont get you goals, but i'd definitely take him over Sneijder.
 
MacMUFC said:
As i thought. He is more than capable of playing in the centre, in a 4-5-1 or 4-4-2, i personally cant see why this is up for debate. If Anderson can play in there, someone as gifted as Nasri can, too.

What I find quite stunning, is that the same probably want us to spunk £50m on Sneijder - someone who struggled to play in a 4-4-2 for Madrid. Dont remember him ever completing 90 minutea for them. Nasri would be a wonderful signing for us, as he ticks all the boxes. Modric wont get you goals, but i'd definitely take him over Sneijder.
Click to expand...

Give me 1 example of Nasri shining in a 2 man midfield at either club or international level in his entire career, theres no debate he can play and play well in a 3 but thats got nothing to do with my argument as ive said that all evening.

We dont play with a 3 man midfield very often, probably half a dozen times a season in the big games (even those lately weve favoured Rooney and Hernandez in a front 2) predominately we play a 4-4-2 and unless we're discussing a different Samir Nasri he is not a player who plays in a central midfield 2.

Im off to bed now so you have all night to find some examples of Nasri playing and excelling in a 2 man central midfield.

Oh and whilst im a big fan of Sneijder ive never said we should spend 50 million on him, i have the same reservations as i do with Nasri, Sneijder is very similiar, works great at the tip of a midfield 3, not alongside a partner in a 2.
 
MacMUFC said:
As i thought. He is more than capable of playing in the centre, in a 4-5-1 or 4-4-2, i personally cant see why this is up for debate. If Anderson can play in there, someone as gifted as Nasri can, too.

What I find quite stunning, is that the same probably want us to spunk £50m on Sneijder - someone who struggled to play in a 4-4-2 for Madrid. Dont remember him ever completing 90 minutea for them. Nasri would be a wonderful signing for us, as he ticks all the boxes. Modric wont get you goals, but i'd definitely take him over Sneijder.
Click to expand...

One of the biggest surprises I find on this site is how people overlook Scholes' lack of defensive skills. Even so, Fergie often picks him as the deepest of a midfield duo, then has to change it during the game as things are going wrong.

We used Anderson in a midfield 2 when he has no experience in playing central midfield and he was just 19 years old.

We played Ryan Giggs in a central midfield 2. A player who is lightweight, with aging limbs

We played Gibson in central midfield before he became the very decent player he is these days. Back when he didnt really do anything except his rocket shot.

We have taken far bigger chances in central midfield than playing Nasri there. And even if he hasnt played in a midfield 2 before, his nature is similar to that of a player who does. He retains the ball well, he will do his bit defensively. The risk would be there, but it would not be the biggest we've taken. And even if playing in a midfield 2 meant losing some of Nasri's attacking influence with having more responsibility to hold a position, his passing range is very similar to Modric's and we'd still have a similar player. But one with more goals in him and the potential to be a lot better.
 
After nearly 20 years as a left winger Ryan Giggs converted effortlessly to central midfield. I feel if you have good technique, mobility and a football brain your position becomes less relevant. I've never seen Nasri play in a 2 man midfield but I don't doubt he'd be fine there.

Not that it matters as Arsenal would never sell to us.
 
Ekeke said:
One of the biggest surprises I find on this site is how people overlook Scholes' lack of defensive skills. Even so, Fergie often picks him as the deepest of a midfield duo, then has to change it during the game as things are going wrong.

We used Anderson in a midfield 2 when he has no experience in playing central midfield and he was just 19 years old.

We played Ryan Giggs in a central midfield 2. A player who is lightweight, with aging limbs

We played Gibson in central midfield before he became the very decent player he is these days. Back when he didnt really do anything except his rocket shot.

We have taken far bigger chances in central midfield than playing Nasri there. And even if he hasnt played in a midfield 2 before, his nature is similar to that of a player who does. He retains the ball well, he will do his bit defensively. The risk would be there, but it would not be the biggest we've taken. And even if playing in a midfield 2 meant losing some of Nasri's attacking influence with having more responsibility to hold a position, his passing range is very similar to Modric's and we'd still have a similar player. But one with more goals in him and the potential to be a lot better.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. Particularly the last paragraph.

Allforone said:
Give me 1 example of Nasri shining in a 2 man midfield at either club or international level in his entire career, theres no debate he can play and play well in a 3 but thats got nothing to do with my argument as ive said that all evening.

We dont play with a 3 man midfield very often, probably half a dozen times a season in the big games (even those lately weve favoured Rooney and Hernandez in a front 2) predominately we play a 4-4-2 and unless we're discussing a different Samir Nasri he is not a player who plays in a central midfield 2.

Im off to bed now so you have all night to find some examples of Nasri playing and excelling in a 2 man central midfield.

Oh and whilst im a big fan of Sneijder ive never said we should spend 50 million on him, i have the same reservations as i do with Nasri, Sneijder is very similiar, works great at the tip of a midfield 3, not alongside a partner in a 2.
Click to expand...

I'd like you to tell me why Nasri cant play in a 4-4-2. Everyone had the same reservations for our little pal Modric before he wowed everyone alongside Palacios against Chelsea.

Nasri has shown he has the qualities needed to play in a 4-4-2. Excellent awareness, stamina, tackling etc. Added to that, he's a creative passer, very good dribbler and will get you goals. As I said before, he's played as a defensive midfielder for Arsenal before, which shows the versality and qualities he has.

Fair play. I think Sneijder would suffer from Veron syndrome if he ever came here if im honest.
 
Our main priority is CM. Nasri is no central midfielder.

We have quality wingers in Nani and Valencia, Giggs still going strong, Park invaluable backup and versatility, plus a couple youngsters to consider. Plus with Hernandez and Rooney striking up a partnership it looks as though we'll see a lot more 442, or have Rooney playing in the hole or out wide, i.e. in areas Nasri would play.

edit: He could do an okay job in CM, but I think there are more suitable options. Plus, we already have players who can play a role in CM when required...I think we need someone who can absolutely boss games from CM.
 
RDCR07 said:
Just because he does not play in CM means he is not a CM?
Click to expand...

I see the point you are making but you have to admit that the way you have worded it doesn't exactly benefit your cause :lol:

The same phrase could be applied to any player. Just because VDS does not play in CM....Of course, that would merely be tongue in cheek.

I think we have several capable/very decent CMs. I don't want us to sign another such player, I want us to get someone to really control and dominate the CM, someone who is first name on the team sheet in big games whatever formation we play and regardless of who else is in form to play alongside them. I don't think Nasri is that player. He's more Joe Cole than Paul Scholes. Joe Cole, thank feck SAF didn't sign him last season.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.