Am I only one who remembers how bad Fellaini was as a midfielder?! He couldn't tackle, he couldn't pass, he didn't even have a long range shot on him. All he could do was bring the ball down with his chest and lay it off to the nearest man. Mctominay is a better midfielder than Fellaini was - and I don't rate Mctominay particularly highly.
39
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 43
- Goals
- 10
- Assists
- 3
- Yellow cards
- 4
- Status
He does and impact sub role is the best place for him.
Had he scored that chance v Tottenham (easier chance than yesterday) United would be be just three points behind both Spurs and Villa hence the frustration.
But that is actually a bad thing for Utd this season as it meant he got more games.
People have actually made that argument this season, sure we would have been so much better with him out of the team and Hannibal or Amrabat playing with all the other players missing. Or not, but at least we would have passed the football purity test.
Don't get me wrong, Fellaini was pretty bad but as bad as he was, he was more nimble with the ball at his feet than McTominay. But McTominay is more effective as a scorer than Fellaini ever was in the box.
Soucek is the closest thing to Fellaini, a beast in the air who can get a goal but nowhere near as good. McT is much more mobile than either, it is why he is also a threat on breaks and stuff other than crosses and long balls, has excellent running power.
His goals has earned us 12 points this season. Top scorer for us.
There was a poster whom I had a big argument last month. I am not calling his name out but please come forward and appreciate this guy's contribution.
There was a poster whom I had a big argument last month. I am not calling his name out but please come forward and appreciate this guy's contribution.
He excels at a very specific and important function without being good enough for a role in the type of team we aspire to be.
Ideally what should happen is, we replace him + £10M to £20M with another player that's able to serve the same function but is also good enough for a back up role.
However, giving all the other issues we need to address with the first team, I'd say replacing him isn't a top priority.
Ideally what should happen is, we replace him + £10M to £20M with another player that's able to serve the same function but is also good enough for a back up role.
However, giving all the other issues we need to address with the first team, I'd say replacing him isn't a top priority.
We have a club, and the others ain't in it.
Mctominay is a more effective goal scorer? I haven't checked the stats, however based on what I remember, I'd say Mctominay is more athletic but less technically polished than Fellani.
That's exactly my point, that Fellaini was a more technically polished footballer than McTominay. Both were/are pretty athletic though. Fellaini a bit stronger although relatively lacking in mobility, whereas McTominay is slightly more mobile than Fellaini was.
The stats I'm seeing has Fellaini having scored 12 goals in 119 appearances for United. McTominay has 19 goals in 165 appearance for United.
I was also in the same boat as you, but McTominay has started to turn me around. Ironically, van de Beek had a similar type role in that Ajax team. He wasn't a pure 10, not really an 8 either, and should be that guy that can do McTominay's job and offer a bit more technically.
But how many players have come and go, how many managers have come and go, and yet McTominay is still here, still getting considerable game time and contributing heavily to the team. That's not something that should be undervalued.
I think the key for me is that EtH finally sees what type of player he is. Mourinho, Ole etc seemed to want to mould him into a DM. I don't know if it was just because he was big, and you had the likes of Matic and Carrick at the club and managers thought they could be role models for him, but EtH actually understands that McTominay is not a conventional midfielder.
He's like a box-to-box No. 10, if that even makes sense. Does all his good work in both boxes, and doesn't influence the midfield like every other midfielder should. That's both a negative, but also something that makes him quite unique. It's also worth pointing out how late McTominay hit puberty and made his breakthrough, so could be the case that he is still to peak as a footballer.
I don't know what it is about him, but there are many others I would look to get rid of before him.
I do worry that we have a bit of a habit of mischaracterising players due to their build at the U21/U18 level. Going back to Pogba, he was never really a midfielder and should probably have come through as something like an inside left. I'd actually say similar of Hannibal, who looked a silky technician, but came into the first team like some kind of midfield attack dog. At the other end of the scale, Angel Gomes was only ever gonna get chances on the wing for us but since, in spite of his size, he has proven himself a capable deep midfield playmaker in France.
Here we are with McTominay at 27 years of age, and it's a bit like only now everyone at the club properly gets him.
Also, not to overate Fellaini but I remember him impacting games to the point where teams use to have to game plan for him. Goals aside, his knockdowns were unrivalled. Playing against Everton, even we use to struggle to deal with him. I still remembers this ridiculous half volley pass Pogba hit towards him at pace and he just controlled it like it was nothing.
Last edited:
This is the most frustrating thing for me. Especially because we already had this evidence of him playing this role for Scotland but yet chose to ignore it.
I see what you're saying about keeping him, especially because of his intangibles. However, For me (and this isn't just a McTominay thing), I wouldn’t keep a plan B player that is incapable of playing in your plan A.
ill say the same thing about him as i do about Casemiro, use this season to build up his value and sell in the summer. Keep getting him these goals as a super sub type player and people might forget how little he does when actually starting and having to be a midfielder. Club needs a reset and to reinvest as much as possible into a new generation of players here.
I get why Casemiro gets flogged here but it really is no coincidence that with his return from injury that our team performances have dramatically improved. The idea thing to do with Casemiro is to find a youngish CDM for next season who can worked into the rotation for Casemiro's last season. If we nuke Casemiro now we're asking too much of his replacement.
But back McTominay. There is something about his game that screams Fellaini but the McTominay we're seeing now is more effective on goal than Fellaini ever was for us.
Completely different player when played further upfield. Never play him in Cas' position again please.
Absolutely. We should be using the rest of the season to get players inform that we want to sell to increase the price. We shouldn’t by any means keep players that aren’t good enough because they’ve showed a bit of form. Maguire/Mctominay, we can get at least 30/40m for both players. If we can bring in a solid young DM then it might be time to move Casemiro on while he still as some value. Varane is another one, this is a bit more debatable though.
An impact sub is what he is. He’s not good enough to start in any position. He’s different to all our other midfielders though, he’s a b2b and someone that will make late runs into the opposition box.
Impact sub and emergency striker. He has some uses for sure. And he seems to be a top pro. Keep
I think you're both right and both wrong to some extent.
IMO, if you want the player to just act as a normal central midfielder, Scott is better at that. He's certainly not good, but better than Fellaini. But when the manager wanted a more specific job done, Fellaini was very good at that. Even in this attacking role that Scott is playing in now, his general play is normally terrible (worse than it is when he plays in midfield) although obviously he does bring a good goal threat, a balance which is acceptable for a sub but not for a starter.
That would be Højlund, but outside of him he's been a proper clutch player.
Who'd of thought McSauce could be a second striker in a 4-2-3-1, certainly not me but long me the clutch goals continue!
That was Vieri and Bierhoff like bullet header.
Nobody has ever doubted his attitude. He always gives his all, and that’s the problem - he is simply not good enough consistently for a midfielder at a top club where he will have to be on the ball more. He’s luxury player to have because you need much more from your midfielders today than he can provide. If he can find consistency of a higher level (which I doubt), he is actually a very decent midfielder to have. He has a decent pass, he can run with the ball, has great timing on his runs into the box, top physique - he just doesn’t show it often enough. Right now his sole role is an impact sub.
How interesting. I totally disagree, although it’s possible you meant the exact opposite of what you actually wrote.
As for general midfield play, both were dismal but Fellaini was clearly the better passer of the ball although he was a fouling machine, and quite a few of his fouls were dirty. McTominay is no passer of the ball but he rarely commits a bad foul. But between the two, the one I’d want in the box chasing a match winner is McTominay.
no he wasn't. McTominay can play a 20-30 yard pass (if he's not being pressed). Fellaini couldn't even do the basics of passing.I think we should keep him as a squad player. He comes off the bench to provide physicality, tenacity, presence in either box from set pieces, and equal value in chasing a lead as defending it. I don't think too highly of his passing, positioning, technique or any of the other skills needed to succeed as a starter in midfield at Man United, but bit part players who come on and give it their all on the pitch are a rare breed. He's a model professional on low wages, too - not many of those in our recent academy graduates. The goals may be a bonus now and dry up soon - but his attitude this season, knowing that the manager has wanted him out for a while - has won me over.
He's playing in the same role he's been deployed all season, credit to Ten Hag for recognising this as his best position. The difference is this method is effective in like last 20 minutes of the game, if he starts then we have even less control of the game (this isn't his fault entirely though).
I am happy with him as a squad player but would probably sell him and get rid of Martial to make room for another attacker. We might however stick to him to another season if we're fixing other stuff (probably midfield needs overhaul AGAIN).
I am happy with him as a squad player but would probably sell him and get rid of Martial to make room for another attacker. We might however stick to him to another season if we're fixing other stuff (probably midfield needs overhaul AGAIN).
Spot on, we have constantly rewarded mediocre players for above average seasons and then being stuck with them for the next 4/5 years on massively overpriced contracts rather than cashing in and upgrading. Hopefully Ineos will see this for what it is. There are several on the list that fit this
He'll be 28 this year, and this season should raise his value. We need to sell in the summer because Scott won't keep this form going.
The other issue is when he needs to start games due to injuries and you just can't rely on him to even do a job in midfield, due to his poor positional play and lack of ability on the ball.
I think we'd be stupid to sell, and find this talk a bit mental tbh.
We'd get what, maybe 30m? Your not going to get someone coming off the bench and scoring winners like he can for that price.
We'd get what, maybe 30m? Your not going to get someone coming off the bench and scoring winners like he can for that price.
Tend to agree. He is not good enough as a starter but can be an impact sub, question is does he want to settle for that for next 3-4 years. Too often we sell these players and waste money on upgrades who prove to be worst. It will really depend on financial position, other youth products coming through and need for cash to fund top targets. But on latter we need a massive improvement in recruitment.
His deciding goals have given us around 8 points. We would have been around 10th place without him.
Erik could even have been sacked if it wasn't for his goals. All hypothetical though.
Erik could even have been sacked if it wasn't for his goals. All hypothetical though.
I'm a little sympathetic to the view that we should entertain offers, as we're coming to the point now where we either have to sell him or give him a new contract on improved terms. Never for £30m though; he's worth maybe twice that.
Aside from the obvious McTomophobes, I think there are a lot of people looking at PSR and seeing him as an ideal way to boost our spending power. As I've posted somewhere earlier though, I think we'll be pretty comfortable after June 30th.
He's been here a long time and one of the big things INEOS should be doing is managing our contracts ensuring to buy players on the up and sell them whilst they still have value.
As an academy player selling him would improve our FFP position greatly and he's has such a limited skillset for a team who wish to play the way we would like to.
Given his performances this season we should be able to get 30-40m which would be significant funds. Give it another year and he would enter the last year of his contract and we'd get half that.
This is of course based on the assumption that INEOS and our new DoF/HoR could identify the right player who we could get cheaply but offer on the pitch a significant improvement. That's the goal they're looking for - here's hoping.
As an academy player selling him would improve our FFP position greatly and he's has such a limited skillset for a team who wish to play the way we would like to.
Given his performances this season we should be able to get 30-40m which would be significant funds. Give it another year and he would enter the last year of his contract and we'd get half that.
This is of course based on the assumption that INEOS and our new DoF/HoR could identify the right player who we could get cheaply but offer on the pitch a significant improvement. That's the goal they're looking for - here's hoping.
I'd actually say McTominay is the better passer on a technical level. He doesn't do it enough, but he is capable of playing some good passes. It's one of the things that has always frustrated me about him, as every now and then he goes through a month here or a month there where he's doing what I want him to do in that position. It's more a mental thing with him IMO, which is why I've always thought there's a chance that if he moves to a weaker team and decides he needs to take on more responsibility that he might look more like the player we wanted him to be.
Fellaini tended to keep it short and safe even more than Scott does, but probably gave it away even more. He was also more chaotic in general, which isn't what you want in an #8. Scott certainly wasn't good enough, but he was a bit more solid in that position.
As for which one I'd want in the box when chasing a goal, it's actually a difficult one. McTominay (if he keeps up what he's been doing) is more likely to make a good run in between defenders and score himself, but Fellaini would be more likely to bully the defenders and create space and an opportunity for a teammate.
I don't get the more mobile. Fellaini worked much harder on the pitch than McTominay has ever done. If one can say one thing about Fellaini, he worked his socks off and had great stamina: https://theathletic.com/2181229/2020/11/05/marouane-fellaini-everton-manchester-united-belgium/
McTominay isn't a strong runner. He's slow; he doesn't track back well. He's decent running with the ball as he's quite strong, but he's not mobile for a midfielder.
How many of the posters that want to sell McTominay, also expect Martinez to be a regular starter in the team ?
Is McTominay's replacement a similar height to Scott ?
There are plenty of matches that you can get away with a lack of height and defensive aerial ability but there are teams that will punish you if you can't compete at corners and wide free-kicks. We have so few players that are either very tall or exceptionally good in the air. If Martinez is a regular starter then we are already at a massive disadvantage over teams that have tall CBs in terms of defending corners etc. Go through our line-up, it is full of players that are poor in the air. Dalot and Shaw are reasonable for full-backs, Varane and Maguire good for CBs. Scott and Casemiro good for midfielders.
Looking at the midfields Liverpool have used over recent years, they don't seem to have had a problem selecting players with a similar ability on the ball to McTominay, making relatively simple passes to their forwards, who then do the damage. I suppose having Alexander-Arnold as right-back contributing so much creativity has a big impact.
Is McTominay's replacement a similar height to Scott ?
There are plenty of matches that you can get away with a lack of height and defensive aerial ability but there are teams that will punish you if you can't compete at corners and wide free-kicks. We have so few players that are either very tall or exceptionally good in the air. If Martinez is a regular starter then we are already at a massive disadvantage over teams that have tall CBs in terms of defending corners etc. Go through our line-up, it is full of players that are poor in the air. Dalot and Shaw are reasonable for full-backs, Varane and Maguire good for CBs. Scott and Casemiro good for midfielders.
Looking at the midfields Liverpool have used over recent years, they don't seem to have had a problem selecting players with a similar ability on the ball to McTominay, making relatively simple passes to their forwards, who then do the damage. I suppose having Alexander-Arnold as right-back contributing so much creativity has a big impact.
Last edited:
Which midfielders have Liverpool used that have a similar ability on the ball to McTominay?
And half of McTominay's problem is that he just doesn't get on the ball. It's hard to build or control a game when one of your midfielders get on the ball significantly less than basically any decent midfielder.
meh i cant quite remember the fellaini days, but would prob disagree with saying mctominay much more effective. Fellaini was a terror in the box as well, just we were accustomed to better overall play and less desperate for that kind of hope than we are now.
- Status