He worked the line well defending wise, attakcing wise he was only ok. Went quiet 2nd half, but to be fair that half was a fecking nightmare altogether, play never got flowing. To be expected after a long layoff with his injury.
Smashley Young
- Thread starter Red Defence
- Start date
Decent return for him. His crossing will get even more goals out of RVP, when he's fully back and has had a run of games. I like him, he gets far too much stick on here. His crossing is superb, puts the balls in areas where proper strikers like it to be.
My point was that Young saw quite abit of the ball, and far more of the ball then Valencia... so actually, they do sort of prove that.
Well what's new. I was watching from the stands and he looked completely lacking in confidence.
He kept running inside into Van Persie's space instead of showing for the ball, and refusing to take anyone on or take the ball in tight situations...which I thought went against the reason why he'd been picked ahead of Welbeck in the first place. Plus he was reacting visibly too slowly to things defensively.
I thought he had a bit of a mare to be honest. Though he did make some good runs, and there was nothing wrong with his work rate...but then there never is.
Just wish RVP had have passed to him in the first half when he would have been through on goals instead of shooting from long distance.
I don't always disagree with you in fairness. But I think you are being very harsh on him. I was delighted his return in the 1st half
He made two key runs today, I don't rate him all that much but can't deny he did his bit in the game.
To be fair, it looked a first half tactic for him and RVP to overlap. He did become anonymous as the game went in though...
He did well today, good influence at getting at Chelsea early on. I like him, some don't but I think there's something like-able about him both as a player and a person. Happy he's a United player.
I already praised him for his passing and movement, so 51 completed passes isn't surprise to me. What I really meant when I said he offered nothing in attack is his (lack of) shots, crosses, and dribbles. I think he crossed one time for whole game, and that's about it, and I think he didn't make single shot, and his dribbling isn't even worth of mentioning. It's the wingplay he lacked.
He got Ivanovic rightly sent off. That beats any crossing for me.
I find him more frustrating than Nani.
Anyone else thought he went down too easy for the red card? I was hoping he'd stay on his feet and get off a shot on goal at the time.
Thing is, it clearly looked as if he was told to cut inside and support RVP whenever he could... he constantly kept cropping up in decent positions down the middle of the pitch, one of which led to the first goal, and another led to the Ivanovic red card. I think the wingplay lacked because he was asked to attack differently today (thats just my guess though!).
Nah, Ivanvoic cut right across and got tangled in his legs... if that was any other player who didn't have the reuptation of Ashley Young (like RVP for example) I don't think anyone would even ask the question.
Really? Fair enough but I think in my mind I don't think I've ever found anyone as frustrating as Nani as I believe Nani is a phenomenal talent and has such ability, but doesn't fulfill it through frustrating decision making. Young for me is what he is, a good, positive winger who in my eyes gets a lot of unjust stick from United fans.He may not be as effective as Valencia but he does a job and pops up with the odd important goal/assist (Giggs v Norwich, 2 vs Spurs, 2 Vs Arsenal, Blackburn, WBA).
Defensive wise he was ok, offensive wise, he left a lot to be desired. Although it was Chelsea and he's back from an injury, he didnt really play well
He and Valencia both did but overall I thought their performances was average at best.
Agree. He was basically in the hole for the first 20 minutes and was an outlet. After the 2 goals he drifted out wide and we didn't use him as much until he seemingly drifted back inside and caused the sending off.
When we were on top, he was part of it, I'm not sure what more people want.
Its a close run thing, but when Young has one of those games when every pass he gives is under or over hit and every cross hits the first defender I want to pull my hair out.
Yes, it was probably down to that, but IMO he still could have been more of a threat to their goal tbf.
A case in point was the first goal, he was in a great position with just one man between himself and goal. He ended up passing it on and it was fine, but he took forever about it, and a confident Young would have tried to turn his man and score.
I thought he played very well today, was making good runs off the ball and was doing a good shift defensively, especially considering Evra was bombing forward, getting completely knackered while Young was covering where he should have been.
I think there was one point in the game where he was effectively playing CB When Evans went to cover the run on the left and he ping a brilliant ball forward to start a counter attack.
I think for his first game back, the stakes and intensity of the game he was bloody good.
I think there was one point in the game where he was effectively playing CB When Evans went to cover the run on the left and he ping a brilliant ball forward to start a counter attack.
I think for his first game back, the stakes and intensity of the game he was bloody good.
Just came back from injury so understandably a bit lose with his touch and passing.
But imo he did well. Tracked backed well too.
But imo he did well. Tracked backed well too.
Made good runs and linked well with Evra but I'd obviously prefer he wasnt selected today
Why is that even relevant? You were responding to someone who said that Young offered little in attack by talking about the number of passes he made, clearly using the stats as an indication that he played well, when they prove absolutely nothing.
It's just a bizzare way to assess someones performance, especially a winger. Why did you even compare him to Valencia when nobody else had brought him up? It's not relevant.
But as I said above, for a winger a high pass rate isn't indicative of a good performance at all. Young's issue is that he doesn't beat his man, once again today he didn't dribble the ball enough and get a cross in. He regularly just cuts back inside and lays it back to Evra or inside to Carrick, slowing the tempo and causing the attack to stagnate. He also lossed the ball more than Valencia, was tackled more, had less crosses, less shots, less dribbles and created less chances. But yeah.. that pass rate really proves something.
If you look at our best wide performances with Ronaldo, Nani, Valencia it has zero to do with how many passes they make. They just play direct football attacking the fullback, dribbling and getting a cross in, or in Ronaldo's case cutting inside and having a shot. It's a pointless stat for a winger.
You were responding to someone who said that Young offered little in attack by talking about the number of passes he made, clearly using the stats as an indication that he played well, when they prove absolutely nothing.
It's just a bizzare way to assess someones performance, especially a winger. Why did you even compare him to Valencia when nobody else had brought him up? It's not relevant.
But as I said above, for a winger a high pass rate isn't indicative of a good performance at all. Young's issue is that he doesn't beat his man, once again today he didn't dribble the ball enough and get a cross in. He regularly just cuts back inside and lays it back to Evra or inside to Carrick, slowing the tempo and causing the attack to stagnate. He also lossed the ball more than Valencia, was tackled more, had less crosses, less shots, less dribbles and created less chances. But yeah.. that pass rate really proves something.
If you look at our best wide performances with Ronaldo, Nani, Valencia it has zero to do with how many passes they make. They just play direct football attacking the fullback, dribbling and getting a cross in, or in Ronaldo's case cutting inside and having a shot. It's a pointless stat for a winger.
Erm... no I didn't. I responded to that by saying he had a direct hand in our first goal and Ivanovic's Red Card. I then started a new paragraph that discussed his overall play... and his overall play was decent. I used his stats to show how he was involving himself in the play, and as he's playing on our wing... who would be a good person to directly compare him too? Oh yeah, our other fecking winger! At no point did I say his pass rate was soley indicative of a good performance, just simply to show that he was getting on the ball fairly often. But please, read into it however you want.
As has been said, Young was clearly told to operate more centrally today, hence why he wasn't hurling in crosses or dribbling down the line. Look how often he cropped up in those central areas during the times when we were in the ascendancy. But hey, continue to anaylse his wide play... sounds like a giant waste of time.
You compared one stat to Valencia, the only one in which he comes out on top, so you didn't 'directly compare' them at all. You just cherry picked a statistic that suited your point. He had less dribbles, crosses, shots, pass %, key passes and got tackled more.
Everyone knows that he makes a lot of passes, it doesn't mean anything. Giggs makes a lot of passes on the wing, Park used to. In contrast Nani or Valencia have had incredible games making barely any. Stats prove nothing in the best of cases but this is just bizzare, United don't need him to make 5 yard passes to Evra, he needs to beat his man and get a cross in.
Everyone knows that he makes a lot of passes, it doesn't mean anything. Giggs makes a lot of passes on the wing, Park used to. In contrast Nani or Valencia have had incredible games making barely any. Stats prove nothing in the best of cases but this is just bizzare, United don't need him to make 5 yard passes to Evra, he needs to beat his man and get a cross in.
Jesus christ, learn to read man. Here is what I said.
"He made 51 passes today compared to Valencia's 30 (with an 86% completion rate compared to Tony's 87%) so he was definitely getting amongst the game"
If that's not enough for you, he also had the 3rd most touches of the ball then any of our players. My point is that he was getting involved in the game, please tell me where I'm wrong there.
Also, United need him to do whatever Fergie tells him to do. By the looks of the game today, Fergie didn't tell him to beat a man and put a cross in... but instead support RVP in central areas. So for you to be saying what he "needs" to be doing is what is actually bizarre. Sure, he might not be doing what you want him to do... but that's not really whats important or relevant here.
What are you on about, I know you are saying he had a lot of touches.
My whole point is that it means feck all. Nobody cares, it's a useless statistic. He was poor offensively today and didn't create enough chances, regardless of how many 5 yard passes he made.
You just seem to place way too much emphasis on that stat. To me it means nothing, watching the game you could see that he wasn't as creative as someone like Nani would be. He might make more passes but it's not an important consideration.
He was primarily playing wide all game, he cut inside for the first 20 minutes especially but his main area was the wing. Did he set up many chances for Van Persie?
I'm using that stat to say that he was involved in the game. Nothing more... and not at any point have I claimed anymore then that. You just saw me mention a stat and thought it would be a good opportunity to go on a "statistics don't prove anything" campaign. All I'm saying is he got himself involved in the game, I'm not sure what you've got against that.
He did cut inside for the first 20/30 minutes... oddly, that was the time in the game we were actually playing well! In the first 5 minutes, RVP might have played him in instead of shooting from distance, and then of course he played a big part in the first goal. Then it was all Chelsea until the point in the second half when Mr. Young again made a good run down the middle and got Ivanovic sent off, which changed the shape of the game.
To say he was "poor" offensively, when he had a direct influence on two highly important attacking moments for us is incredibly harsh.
He did cut inside for the first 20/30 minutes... oddly, that was the time in the game we were actually playing well! In the first 5 minutes, RVP might have played him in instead of shooting from distance, and then of course he played a big part in the first goal. Then it was all Chelsea until the point in the second half when Mr. Young again made a good run down the middle and got Ivanovic sent off, which changed the shape of the game.
To say he was "poor" offensively, when he had a direct influence on two highly important attacking moments for us is incredibly harsh.
While I do think Young could take on a full-back more (if just to vary his approach to give the defender something different to think about), I agree with you that today wasn't one of those days. I thought from as early as the 3rd minute when Young picked the ball up from Rooney that clearly we were going for a different approach, with Rooney often deeper than Young and Young pulling the full-back across the pitch.
The selection today was reminiscent of our good results vs them 2 seasons ago, with Young taking Parks position on the other wing. His performance was much like Parks during those games too, lots of energy, hustling, and generally being a nuisance and it seems he's being similarly underrated by some who never could see the justification for Parks inclusions either.
I think he is proving to be a very good player in some very intense games since he's joined us, at first I never really saw the need for him but he is an extremely useful option, and a good replacement for Park in the squad.
I think he is proving to be a very good player in some very intense games since he's joined us, at first I never really saw the need for him but he is an extremely useful option, and a good replacement for Park in the squad.
The only way he's like Park is that he didnt put crosses into the box. Currently averages 0.3 per game this season because of that
I thought Park's performances in big games were miles better than that of Young's yesterday, to be fair. Park took the 'being a nuisance' thing to a whole new level, whilst also being unexpectedly good in attacking sense. Those performances against Chelsea a couple of years back were fantastic.
Good tactical option, good player, useful to have in the squad. Was disappointing in the euros, but yesterday he was highly effective.
Young had been out for a couple of months mind...
No doubt those weren't the best circumstances in which to judge Young, but I must admit I still don't really 'get' him. He plays within himself a lot of the time, yet I'm not convinced his top level is all that either. He has played well and been productive on occasions (that Arsenal match, for example), but I've not seen a first team player in him as of yet be it in the Park role or any other role. If we're going to have a problem in our midfield (which we always will do if Carrick is ever off form, or if any one of 2 midfielders in a 442 formation isn't on their game), we've got to make sure we've got 2 wingers are very comfortable in possession and willing to get on the ball a lot. Young just doesn't strike me as that player at all.
I was one of those really questioning the wisdom of signing him before we did it, and unfortunately I think I still stand by that. If we really wanted a winger I'm sure we could've found someone decent at that price or just a little bit more with a much higher ceiling and range of attributes. This is all before even going on to consider these wages people are talking about...I mean, they surely can't be accurate can they?
Probably seems harsh and I'm not saying he's a poor player just to clarify. We've got him and he's a useful squad player, though I was amazed to see him on the team sheet yesterday.
I was one of those really questioning the wisdom of signing him before we did it, and unfortunately I think I still stand by that. If we really wanted a winger I'm sure we could've found someone decent at that price or just a little bit more with a much higher ceiling and range of attributes. This is all before even going on to consider these wages people are talking about...I mean, they surely can't be accurate can they?
Probably seems harsh and I'm not saying he's a poor player just to clarify. We've got him and he's a useful squad player, though I was amazed to see him on the team sheet yesterday.
He was pretty fantastic at the beginning of last season, since then we haven't seen that same player again.
What I liked about Young when we signed him was the way he carried himself. I felt that though he did no one thing amazingly, he did lots of things very well, but more importantly he seemed to have self-belief, to be relishing the big stage. To that extent he looked like a Man United player.
The tentative, underconfident Young we've seen since his injury, who doesn't want the ball and whose teammates aren't desperate to give it him, is a considerably less exciting sight.
The tentative, underconfident Young we've seen since his injury, who doesn't want the ball and whose teammates aren't desperate to give it him, is a considerably less exciting sight.