Nasri To City - Done Deal!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sharky7 said:
His best position is CM.
Click to expand...

No, and I wish people would stop imagining things as its clearly ACM as in tucked behind the striker, he does no have the workrate or tackling ability as well as positional sense to play there. He played as ACM for Arsenal in a 4-2-3-1 formation behind RVP before fabregas came back to full fitness at which point he was shuffle out to the left/right.

As for giggs playing there he is an exception as adapting to that position from winger is all about selflesness and team ethic as well as the intelligence to realise when your days are numbered as far as other position are concerned Giggs has alway had these qualities in abundance.

I've seen nothing in Nasri's style of play or general conduct which suggests he can also adapt in similar fashion.
 
BAMSOLA said:
No, and I wish people would stop imagining things as its clearly ACM as in tucked behind the striker, he does no have the workrate or tackling ability as well as positional sense to play there.
Click to expand...

He's played in a 2 for France plenty pal, as one of the 2 deeper midfielders with Gourcuff in the hole in front of them. Check it out.

I guess you were also one of the ones suggesting 1 year ago that Modric couldn't play in a 2, pure nonsense.

Good players adapt, especially from roles such as AM to CM.
 
Seems like nobody is fit to play in a midfield two according to RedCafe.
 
charleysurf said:
Nasri is going to get a big fecking new contract deal soon, probably announced by Arsenal the day Fabregas is sold.
Click to expand...

Well if we are interested as is claimed and Nasri is aware of that... Does he sign that contract? Really....
 
Sharky7 said:
He's played in a 2 for France pal. Check it out.

I guess you were also one of the ones suggesting 1 year ago that Modric couldn't play in a 2, pure nonsense.

Good players adapt, especially from roles such as AM to CM.
Click to expand...

So you made up your mind that CM is his best position based on his sporadic appearances for his national team? He doesn't play there for his club side so why would this be his best postion?

As for modric I'm not sure what your even talking about as he has alway been a CM who just happens to be able to play behind a front man if so required. His workrate has always been one of the key factors of his game so CM was always going to be his natural position when paired with his other abilities.

Have you ever seen anybody refer to Nasri as a player with particularly high workrate?

Not all players good or not are meant to adapt to CM and Nasri is about as well suited to that role as Messi.
 
Mainoldo said:
Well if we are interested as is claimed and Nasri is aware of that... Does he sign that contract? Really....
Click to expand...

Him and his agent are playing hardball for a big contract renewal. This is only about money And they know they'll get it too. Arsenal can't afford the loss in prestige in selling both Nasri and Fabregas.
 
Yes, Nasri has played in central midfield before, and it is possible that he will play there again if he signs for us, but I am skeptical if it can be successful.

Modrić has always had an excellent work rate and great athleticism, and he is not afraid to help out defensively. I am not sure Nasri has these traits, and he is not the same sort of refined and intelligent passer that Modrić is.

I would love us to sign Nasri though, because he is a superb player. But I do not think he is best suited in a deep-lying midfield role.
 
BAMSOLA said:
Have you ever seen anybody refer to Nasri as a player with particularly high workrate?
Click to expand...

And Scholes? high workrate? I'd say similar for sure. Nasri sure worked his ass off in that position vs. England and took the piss out of us.

Don't forget, not many would've ever considered Scholes as a CM when he first burst onto the scene.

Nasri has proven to me that he can do it, similar to Modric, he can play on the wing and behind the front man but imo he's most influential in a deeper role as the more attacking midfielder in a 2 or as one of the deeper but more attacking players in a 3.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
And how did they do against a top team like Barca?
Click to expand...

This post would suggest that Chelsea are not a top team, Barcelona are the best in the world so it's always going to be difficult that doesn't change the fact that Chelsea are one of the worlds best teams and in 3 matches in quite a short space of time a midfield 2 of Carrick & Giggs got the better of them.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
And how did they do against a top team like Barca?
Click to expand...

Are Chelsea not a top team?

Barcelona are on another level to any other team. We cannot match them, and we will not be able to for at least the next few years. There is no shame in admitting this.

We can match any other team, though, and that is the most important objective.
 
Chelsea were pretty abysmal in those games.

We shouldn't be lining up with a two man midfield against other top teams, especially away from home, in my opinion. Unless you have a Keane in there, you're going to get overrun more often than not.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Chelsea were pretty abysmal in those games.

We shouldn't be lining up with a two man midfield against other top teams, especially away from home, in my opinion. Unless you have a Keane in there, you're going to get overrun more often than not.
Click to expand...
We dont play top teams every week, and when we do more often than not we play a three.
 
charleysurf said:
Him and his agent are playing hardball for a big contract renewal. This is only about money And they know they'll get it too. Arsenal can't afford the loss in prestige in selling both Nasri and Fabregas.
Click to expand...

If we are interested.... what hard ball is there to play? Fabricated yes use United all you like to get a new contract, but it's not going to be the case if we really wont him. His not going to use us to get more money when he can get the same amount at United. Only faint interest from ourselves will make him sign a new contract.
 
EvilChuck said:
We dont play top teams every week, and when we do more often than not we play a three.
Click to expand...

Well yes, so why are you complaining about people saying he can't play in a midfield two? He probably could against Fulham at home, O'Shea could do that, people are talking about the important games.
 
Sharky7 said:
And Scholes? high workrate? I'd say similar for sure. Nasri sure worked his ass off in that position vs. England and took the piss out of us.

Don't forget, not many would've ever considered Scholes as a CM when he first burst onto the scene.

Nasri has proven to me that he can do it, similar to Modric, he can play on the wing and behind the front man but imo he's most influential in a deeper role as the more attacking midfielder in a 2 or as one of the deeper but more attacking players in a 3.
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with Scholes workrate its pretty solid for a CM despite having Ashma. He also has excellent positional sense which is something Nasri has in attacking terms but not defensive, a modern day CM is required to have a bit of both.

As for taking the piss out of englands CM I wasn't even aware that they had one.

He is clearly perfectly suited to ACM as his pace, dribbling ability, eye for attacking positions, lack of serious workrate, lack of defensive positional sense and lack of williness to track back on most occasions makes him a perfect fit for the position. End of.
 
EvilChuck said:
We dont play top teams every week, and when we do more often than not we play a three.
Click to expand...

Flippin hell we need a midfield regardless whether we wiped the floor with Chelsea or got raped by Barca. Performances last year are irrelevant. The Midfield wasn't that bad last year but it was far from amazing..
 
Was happy to dismiss this as bullshit but strangely the momentum is building. Still just can't see it but it's gone on much longer than I anticipated - for £20m, he'd be a great buy.
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
But we did make them look bad all the same. 4-4-2 can work vs big sides as Spurs have shown if you can keep the ball well and have ''legs'' in that 4 man midfield.
Click to expand...

Did Spurs not play with one striker and Van Der Vaart dropping into midfield most of the time against the big teams? That's what I saw.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Well yes, so why are you complaining about people saying he can't play in a midfield two? He probably could against Fulham at home, O'Shea could do that, people are talking about the important games.
Click to expand...
I wasnt complaining... I agree with you! I dont think we should play a 2 man midfield against top teams, and usually we dont so in a 3 he can be the more advanced and in a 2 (which we use in games where we dominate the stats) he can play as the attack minded of the two with a disciplined Carrick next to him.
 
EvilChuck said:
I wasnt complaining... I agree with you! I dont think we should play a 2 man midfield against top teams, and usually we dont so in a 3 he can be the more advanced and in a 2 (which we use in games where we dominate the stats) he can play as the attack minded of the two with a disciplined Carrick next to him.
Click to expand...

Sorry, yes, I thought you were someone else.
 
BAMSOLA said:
T.... lack of serious workrate, lack of defensive positional sense and lack of williness to track back on most occasions makes him a perfect fit for the position. End of.
Click to expand...
Nah. He displays such things because he plays for Wenger at club level, a man who doesn't seem to care too much about his attacking players helping out defensively any more. For Marseille in the past and for France under Blanc he has proved he can work much much harder.

At Nasri's current age, under an SAF, he'd improve that side of his game drastically. There is really no reason why he can't play the very role Giggs played for us at the back end of last season. Which was closer to the Scholes role of old than that of the Scholes that retired.
 
Mainoldo said:
Flippin hell we need a midfield regardless whether we wiped the floor with Chelsea or got raped by Barca. Performances last year are irrelevant. The Midfield wasn't that bad last year but it was far from amazing..
Click to expand...
Have I misunderstood something here? I havent said we dont need a midfield, I think Nasri would be a good fit for us in both a 2 and a 3.
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
But we did make them look bad all the same. 4-4-2 can work vs big sides as Spurs have shown if you can keep the ball well and have ''legs'' in that 4 man midfield.
Click to expand...

That's another myth, they mostly played a 4-2-3-1 formation with Van Der Vaart dropping in to make it a 5 at times, and what top sides? Inter were a shambles and we beat that Milan side 7-2 on aggregate the previous year when we were going through a transitional season.
 
Mainoldo said:
If we are interested.... what hard ball is there to play? Fabricated yes use United all you like to get a new contract, but it's not going to be the case if we really wont him. His not going to use us to get more money when he can get the same amount at United. Only faint interest from ourselves will make him sign a new contract.
Click to expand...

You're assuming a player at Arsenal would be desperate to go to United if United were interested. But why wouldn't a French player be perfectly happy to stick with a French mamager at Arsenal, a CL level club, if they give him a masive pay rise? I think he'll get more money by staying at Arsenal then he would get at United.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Did Spurs not play with one striker and Van Der Vaart dropping into midfield most of the time against the big teams? That's what I saw.
Click to expand...

He played in the hole, the same position as Özil for Real Madrid, Fàbregas for Arsenal, and Rooney for us.

We are really not so unique in playing with two deep-lying midfielders and one player in the free role.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Did Spurs not play with one striker and Van Der Vaart dropping into midfield most of the time against the big teams? That's what I saw.
Click to expand...
Van der vaart was given the same role as Rooney had for us at the back end of last season. He wasn't dropping that far into midfield at all. He was infact just floating around Crouch. Then they'd sometimes take a Lennon off, bring on Defoe and place Van der Vaart wide right.
 
charleysurf said:
You're assuming a player at Arsenal would be desperate to go to United if United were interested. But why wouldn't a French player be perfectly happy to stick with a French mamager at Arsenal, a CL level club, if they give him a masive pay rise? I think he'll get more money by staying at Arsenal then he would get at United.
Click to expand...

I don't. I do think he will stay at Arsenal, though.
 
charleysurf said:
You're assuming a player at Arsenal would be desperate to go to United if United were interested. But why wouldn't a French player be perfectly happy to stick with a French mamager at Arsenal, a CL level club, if they give him a masive pay rise? I think he'll get more money by staying at Arsenal then he would get at United.
Click to expand...

Because he wants to win things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.