Scott McTominay | Napoli

Ghirahim said:
Mctominay would thrive at Arsenal. Utd are the problem.

Edit:

Mctominay, Rashford and Garnacho are actually good players.
Click to expand...

He'd be coming off the bench as a possible goalscorer. They clearly have better starters which is why they have come 2nd in the league twice in a row and are 2nd again now.

But if hes a good sub for Arsenal, he's a good sub for United. And he was last season. The players we signed to replace him, Zirkzee mainly, arent scoring those goals. So we did a poor job replacing him
 
I don't think I have ever said anything negative about McT. I had no issues with what he did for us.

Part of our fanbase have this idea that any player that plays for us should be Xavi level and it doesnt take much for them to deeply critical. WIth time, it becomes cannon that the player is useless.

I also kind of hoped that Sancho would come back and give it another go with us particularly given Ten Haag's days were numbered in the summer.

I kind of understand why the club had to sell McT to make some profits but if we had Sancho and McT at the club, we may be good enough to be in the top 8.
 
diarm said:
Only if you’re a bit dim.

A footballer who gets the club, is a great trainer, never causes hassle, is happy to sit on the bench and can regularly come off it to score important goals when chasing games is the answer to plenty of problems and always will be.

Especially for a club that struggles to score goals and see out games or break a deadlock as badly as we do.
Click to expand...

Plus he was great at defending set pieces.

Amad Diallo's winner v Liverpool last season started with McT clearing a corner at the near post. This season Liverpool would probably score off us from the same corner!
 
Tallis said:
I don't think I have ever said anything negative about McT. I had no issues with what he did for us.

Part of our fanbase have this idea that any player that plays for us should be Xavi level and it doesnt take much for them to deeply critical. WIth time, it becomes cannon that the player is useless.

I also kind of hoped that Sancho would come back and give it another go with us particularly given Ten Haag's days were numbered in the summer.

I kind of understand why the club had to sell McT to make some profits but if we had Sancho and McT at the club, we may be good enough to be in the top 8.
Click to expand...
McTominay fair enough. The lad is a professional

But why mention Sancho? Aside from him being another immature twat who stole a wage from us whilst spending his days playing fifa, he was appalling whenever he played.
 
AndySmith1990 said:
McTominay fair enough. The lad is a professional

But why mention Sancho? Aside from him being another immature twat who stole a wage from us whilst spending his days playing fifa, he was appalling whenever he played.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. They shouldn't be in the same post - I agree.
 
Mctominay reminds me of Fletcher. Mctominay would have played a pivotal role in SAF's team.
 
Ghirahim said:
Mctominay reminds me of Fletcher. Mctominay would have played a pivotal role in SAF's team.
Click to expand...
Someone who either never watched Darren Fletcher or lost all memory of what he actually played like.
 
BuzzKillington said:
He wasn’t great for us, but selling him so we could fund Zirkzee has proved to be a predictably shit decision.
Click to expand...

Zirkzee was on the books before McT was sold.

Now you can argue that Zirkzee has basically filled McT's space in the squad... and in that regards he's a massive step-down.
 
BuzzKillington said:
You seem quite definite on that so I won’t challenge it too much, but I’m fairly certain McTom was occupying a SS role rather than a DM one for the majority of his last season with us.
Click to expand...

He was always seen as a CM rather than a SS, there were multiple reports saying we needed to sell McTominay to get Ugarte.
 
Dannn411 said:
Someone who either never watched Darren Fletcher or lost all memory of what he actually played like.
Click to expand...

Fletcher was top class. I think people who watched him and Fred for the best part of 6 years have wiped it from their memory just how bad they were at times. McT got schooled by Cleverly on more than one occasion if I remember it correctly.

McT was never good enough, just because his replacement hasn't been up to scratch it doesn't mean it was wrong to sell him..
 
BuzzKillington said:
You seem quite definite on that so I won’t challenge it too much, but I’m fairly certain McTom was occupying a SS role rather than a DM one for the majority of his last season with us.
Click to expand...
We had to sell McTominay to be able to sign Ugarte.
 
Ghirahim said:
Mctominay reminds me of Fletcher. Mctominay would have played a pivotal role in SAF's team.
Click to expand...
A lot of people say that, but in a lot of ways they are exact opposites.

Fletcher was very highly rated as a kid coming through the ranks, and his struggles in the first team were likely due to physical limitations (yes he could run a lot, but he was fairly weak and slow). Sure he wasn't a Scholes or Carrick on the ball, but he was still quite good on it. Once he hit his mid 20's and developed physically he really came to his own and became an important player for a couple of seasons until the illness took it's toll.

McTominay wasn't particularly rated as a kid, and really only got a chance in the team because of his physicality. And to this day that's still his main attribute.

Scott wouldn't have even come close to a position in any of Fergie's midfields. The only role that he might have held for a few years was an impact player coming off the bench when we were either searching for a goal or defending our box at the end of a match.
 
BuzzKillington said:
You seem quite definite on that so I won’t challenge it too much, but I’m fairly certain McTom was occupying a SS role rather than a DM one for the majority of his last season with us.
Click to expand...

He started from the DM positions, he just wasnt that noticable there. Didnt get on the ball much, didnt win the ball a lot and then once we got the ball he would make runs forward to pick the ball up in attack. Mount was doing similarly when he was picked in the DM positions, mostly trying to be ahead of the ball and waiting for other players to get the ball into the attack. We werent very good at getting the ball forward into attacking positons and having 1 less player to help do it made it more noticable.

Put it this way if we went back to 4-2-3-1 you wouldnt see Zirkzee being picked next to Mainoo etc. But the more noticable part of what McTominay actually did for us was in attack and getting on the scoresheet and thats what Zirkzee was supposed to help with.
 
Ghirahim said:
Mctominay reminds me of Fletcher. Mctominay would have played a pivotal role in SAF's team.
Click to expand...

Both of these sentences are way off. Fletcher was another level entirely, and was a very different player .

McTom has never been anywhere close to good enough to be a regular under SAF, never mind a pivotal player.
 
Ekeke said:
Put it this way if we went back to 4-2-3-1 you wouldnt see Zirkzee being picked next to Mainoo etc.
Click to expand...
You also shouldn't see McT being picked next to Mainoo, in fairness
 
Several things could be true, it's more than likely that Ferguson would have took a liking to mctom as he seemingly did when he was an academy prospect.

But it's also true that in his current iteration it's very unlikely he'll ever get ahead of fletcher a player who to this day I maintain his absence in the 2009 final made the difference.
 
Fergie may have liked his professionalism but I doubt he would have kept him around too long. Off course you could argue that perhaps Ferguson may have developed him better and found a niche role for him.

But he is very different to what Fletcher was as a player. Very different. It’s like comparing Roy Keane to Liam miller
 
Ghirahim said:
Mctominay reminds me of Fletcher. Mctominay would have played a pivotal role in SAF's team.
Click to expand...
Does he remind you of him because they are both Scottish? Because playing wise they’re nothing alike
 
FrankDrebin said:
The Fletcher comparisons are so damn lazy.
Click to expand...
Yep, not to mention doing him (Fletcher) a major disservice as well.

I like McT as much as the next guy, but the overrating of him since his move is insane :lol:. I'm glad he's doing well, and we all knew he was probably best suited to the '10' role, over any of the CM roles due to his goalscoring prowess, and running into the box (movement).

But he was never a very good CM/DM and that's what we need/needed. By all accounts, EtH also wanted to keep him (he always has been a good squad player) but McT wanted more guaranteed minutes (fair play to him! - you could never question his mentality) and the fact that he was one of our more sellable assets, says it all - all about him (performance versus wage) and all about those other high earners who couldn't be arsed.
 
Fletcher was one of our best performing players in 08/09 and 09/10 when we were still a top team. His peak was much, much higher than Mctominay.
 
McTominay played 255 times for United, often starting in centre midfield, in some of our worst seasons in modern history, being a big reason for that for his failings in the engine room. He played more games for United than the likes of Cantona, Van Nistelrooy and Park Ji Sung. The idea that he's some sort of lost talent because he's having a good season somewhere else at 28 years old is laughable. He got his chance here and then some under several managers, and ultimately wasn't good enough.
 
MadDogg said:
A lot of people say that, but in a lot of ways they are exact opposites.

Fletcher was very highly rated as a kid coming through the ranks, and his struggles in the first team were likely due to physical limitations (yes he could run a lot, but he was fairly weak and slow). Sure he wasn't a Scholes or Carrick on the ball, but he was still quite good on it. Once he hit his mid 20's and developed physically he really came to his own and became an important player for a couple of seasons until the illness took it's toll.

McTominay wasn't particularly rated as a kid, and really only got a chance in the team because of his physicality. And to this day that's still his main attribute.

Scott wouldn't have even come close to a position in any of Fergie's midfields. The only role that he might have held for a few years was an impact player coming off the bench when we were either searching for a goal or defending our box at the end of a match.
Click to expand...

Exactly, McTominay is closer to Gibson than Fletch. Lazy comparison because they are Scottish and a lot of United fans used to underrate Fletcher which is what some think happens with McTominay.

Fletch actually played the midfield role, getting on the ball and popping passes about, McTominay touches the ball too little to be an effective CM, but has developed a knack for good timing, movement and positioning in and around the box.
 
Mctominay at it again. A good goalscorer. We should of moved him into ST
 
You must log in or register to reply here.