I dont want to be too harsh on him considering he's just back from injury but his performances for a while now have been very mediocre. Doesnt look confident on the ball, not willing to take players on, not what you want from your winger.
Smashley Young
- Thread starter Red Defence
- Start date
I dont want to be too harsh on him considering he's just back from injury but his performances for a while now have been very mediocre. Doesnt look confident on the ball, not willing to take players on, not what you want from your winger.
I've never really considered him a good enough player to be a first team winger for this club to be honest, always a squad player. My opinion has not changed.
Can't disagree but I think overall Young will prove to be a useful option in the same sense that Park was, with maybe a little less nuisance but more general quality and technique, which I don't necessarily think is a bad thing.
I think too much is made of the winger aspect. He was never going to be the sort of winger who beat players, that's not why we signed him. At his best, which we saw at the beginning of last season, he's an intelligent passer who moves well on and off the ball and can play a part in the sort of brilliant interplay we saw from Rooney, Welbeck, Cleverley and Anderson. He's also got great delivery on crosses, especially to the back post, and an eye for goal.
At Villa he actually did dribble though, and even at the start of last season he could play direct and beat a man. You can say he's not a winger who will dribble and play direct, but equally he's not a Silva, Mata or even Nasri, who have all played a wide role focused on keeping the ball and creative passing. Between the two I think he's more similar to the former. His passing is okay, but very safe and hardly a threat. As you mentioned his crossing is probably his best asset, he's not a player who cuts in and slips in through balls. He's very much a traditional winger for me.
I think you got it spot on before, he is bereft of confidence. Hence, rarely takes his man on and just plays it simple.
I think you got it spot on before, he is bereft of confidence. Hence, rarely takes his man on and just plays it simple.
I'm not saying he never beats a man, he can do, usually with a drop of the shoulder and a turn of pace rather than a trick. But he's not a get-to-the-byline-and-cross type.
Agreed he's not a true inside forward like Mata or Silva either. I don't think his game's wildly dissimilar to Nasri's though, even if he's less skilful. He's primarily a passer, and though he's not amazingly creative he is intelligent. The very safe thing is a product of the underconfidence, when he had belief he would very often avoid the obvious ball and do something interesting and progressive.
When on his game he basically does everything well - not amazingly, but well. He can cross, shoot, head, beat a man, pass and move, play through-balls, defend, cover ground, er dive the whole time. He's quite quick, strong enough, has (or had) a winning mentality. That's actually quite rare and useful and it's why we bought him IMO.
Agreed he's not a true inside forward like Mata or Silva either. I don't think his game's wildly dissimilar to Nasri's though, even if he's less skilful. He's primarily a passer, and though he's not amazingly creative he is intelligent. The very safe thing is a product of the underconfidence, when he had belief he would very often avoid the obvious ball and do something interesting and progressive.
When on his game he basically does everything well - not amazingly, but well. He can cross, shoot, head, beat a man, pass and move, play through-balls, defend, cover ground, er dive the whole time. He's quite quick, strong enough, has (or had) a winning mentality. That's actually quite rare and useful and it's why we bought him IMO.
Well when he plays, he plays in a wingers position and displaces other wingers in the team, that's all.
It's probably overly harsh, I just don't think he was worth the fee paid, the wages he's on, and I don't think he merits a starting place, especially in big games, ahead of players like Welbeck and Nani. He's just not that good.
He had a good spell when he first came here but so did everyone during that period, he just hasn't done enough to convince me that he is good enough to be a regular in our first team. If he wasn't English there is no way SAF would have bought him, I reckon.
I agree with this. Although I will say my opinion of him somewhat changed after the Arsenal drumming last year and I did let myself believe that he could be great for us. Hopefully he can rediscover that form, because if I'm honest I wasn't impressed with him on Sunday and it doesn't say much for a great winger we have on the bench that needs game time. Young comes back from injury and gets a game at Chelsea away over Nani who has been fit?
That made me chuckle - and seems so fitting for him. Yet, hesitant as he often seems, he still often manages to make a good decision and execute it well. On the matchday forum the other night there were posters having a go at him when he was consistently our best outlet when they were on top of us. He was covering, tracking,making some neat touches. Of course, he missed a couple of touches but overall, he was actually even better than Tony V. As a winger, he sometimes comes up against a fb and clearly thinks 'oh, I'll give this fella a miss and give it back to Paddy instead" which doesn't exactly thrill the fanbase .....but, you can't deny, he is effective. Just the opposite to a player who flatters to deceive. He doesn't exactly thrill me, either - but he does amuse and is, actually effective. Despite being frustrated by him, I also expect the unexpected that we sometimes get from Nani.
I know this is a bit before you young uns' time but he's like an effective Johnny Aston.
oh noooooooooooo
Never understood the contempt people here have of Young as a footballer. I think Pletch and Denis' Cuff have it pretty much bang on, when he's confident he has a bit of everything in his locker, jack of all trades, quite simply a better attacking version of Park, puts in a good shift, knows where to be and when (both defensively and offensively) and does the simple things consistently well. He does have something extra about his as well which people tend to ignore, our biggest goal threat out of our wingers imo, and his attacking runs off the ball are very good. Without the natural ability of say, Nani, he's still a constant threat which teams can ignore, E.g. Ivanovic red card...
If all our wingers are in form then he's third choice for most games, having said that people saying he clearly shouldn't be starting over the other two, ever, in big games are being daft. He's a bigger goal threat than Valencia and better defensively than Nani. Added to that he's a better set piece taker than either. A great player to have in your squad and for his first game back in a while I thought his performance against Chelsea was very good.
How anyone can completely dismiss a better set piece taker, bigger goal threat and defensively very sound winger is beyond me. DO NOT BE SUPRISED IF HE STARTS IN THE BIG GAMES BECAUSE HE WILL!
If all our wingers are in form then he's third choice for most games, having said that people saying he clearly shouldn't be starting over the other two, ever, in big games are being daft. He's a bigger goal threat than Valencia and better defensively than Nani. Added to that he's a better set piece taker than either. A great player to have in your squad and for his first game back in a while I thought his performance against Chelsea was very good.
How anyone can completely dismiss a better set piece taker, bigger goal threat and defensively very sound winger is beyond me. DO NOT BE SUPRISED IF HE STARTS IN THE BIG GAMES BECAUSE HE WILL!
Is he better? I agree with the "attacking" version of Park in that he's around a similar level but a more attack minded player.
His set pieces have not been that impressive for us.
The game against Chelsea made me realize how good is his passing. With Evra's defensive frailties him or Welbeck are better suited to start on the left. He is better than Nani on the left.
He is not a player who is going to pull the rabbit our of the hat and wow us. He is someone who is going to do his job well and will work for the team. I like him.
He is not a player who is going to pull the rabbit our of the hat and wow us. He is someone who is going to do his job well and will work for the team. I like him.
He most certainly is not.
I'd like to see him given another run out tomorrow night. Give him a chance to get a another game under his belt and also a chance to nail down that left-wing slot.
He was playing very high up the pitch and very tucked in for most of the game.
You don't think he is? I've got him as faster, stronger, better range of passing, better first touch, better crossing and a bigger goal threat. Park had immense movement, very versatile, energy and defensively was unparalled as a winger imo. My personal view is that he's an upgrade, yes.
Better than Nani's and Valencia's which was my main point really, and third choice for me behind Van Persie and Rooney who should take them if all playing. When he has taken them in a dangerous area when we need a good ball he usually delivers a dangerous ball in. Often over looked invaluable quality to have in the big games.
He did ok considering it was his first game back, and a big game at that. Made two good runs into the box which resulted in the opening goal and the Ivanovic sending-off. Glad to have him back.
He wasn't bought to be a starter. He was bought to keep starters on their toes.
He was brought in to play on the left as Giggs with age moved more central. It's preposterous to suggest that 17m was spent for him to "keep players on their toes".
He was never going to be as good as Nani or Valencia. "Keeping players on their toes" or "squad player", it's the same thing. And it's correct IMO.
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 firmly in that camp too, especially having watched him for years at Villa. He's the kind of player that would make perfect sense if he came through the academy and was a United fan through and through, but it really didn't make sense to me at the time.
He'll be a decent squad player who'll serve us well and will probably end up at Spurs in 2-3 seasons.
It's wrong IMO.
I still believe that he has a lot of potential... he has the ability, he needs the genius.
You're a proper little Nani fan aren't you? Get very frustrated even if there's a hint that someone suggests one of our wingers does something better than him. Nani is, as Wenger put it a few years ago, a 'virtuoso' technically, so so gifted and anyone who can't see it with him is generally blinded by dislike or just not a very good judge of ability imho. But he's not the finished article and other players do, do things better than him sometimes.
Essentially it's horses for courses of who's better on the left wing, I don't mean in terms of ability or who people prefer I mean in terms of who plays against who. If we're overly concerned about another teams attacking threat I think Young will probably play, if we think there right back is a weak link then Nani is the obvious choice for example.
Nani is clearly more 'gifted' and technically better but Young doesn't tend to switch off and give the ball away overly cheaply. I think the games and preperation for what we want will dictate who plays. And it will stay that way untill either Nani leaves or he becomes indespensible from the performances he's capable of. Which is neither yet.
We will end up playing about 50 games this year, both will obviously start, and both start huge games. Like they have already. He was bought to share the games out between three quality wingers instead of two.
How is it wrong when we now have great options? Honestly? As above, both will play big games this year and both will contribute massively. When the games are tight then you need players who deliver. Against Chelsea, he had a positive impact on the result.
You actually think he's better than Nani and Valencia?
Apologies if I'm mistaken but were you the one who thought Rooney was better than Iniesta?
Agreed, solid squad player but I hope if Nani goes the plan isn't to have him as a regular first choice.
Young is not as good as Nani or Valencia, but I'm glad we have him on our team.
He's a good winger and as seen vs Chelsea can put in a good shift, and can be used when playing against teams where you know you're going to have to defend for a while as well, I believe he's better in tracking back and closing down, not that he's especialy talented in that aspect, but better than Nani.
It's good to know we've got so many talented options up front and on the wings, even if we don't field a "first choice" front we still have more quality up there than most other teams
He's a good winger and as seen vs Chelsea can put in a good shift, and can be used when playing against teams where you know you're going to have to defend for a while as well, I believe he's better in tracking back and closing down, not that he's especialy talented in that aspect, but better than Nani.
It's good to know we've got so many talented options up front and on the wings, even if we don't field a "first choice" front we still have more quality up there than most other teams
Which is exactly what I meant. He isn't a fringe player. He is a first team squad player. First team squad players get loads of games.
It's even more preposterous rather that you don't understand what it means yet you are trying to dispute it. If our best possible 11 is fit, on form and available, available Young is certainly not in it. What he is though is a first team squad player. A genuine alternative to our proper starters, and one of our first options off a bench during games rather than a fringe player who is a stop gap.
Regular first team squad players keep starters on their toes. Fringe players don't.
I'm not remotely frustrated, I just don't see how you can possibly come to that conclusion, unless it stems from the common myth that Nani isn't nearly as good on the left as the right (loads of stats and performances have proven that to be inaccurate in the past).
Nani is just a far superior player to Young, people may see that as an insult to Young, but it's not, it's just the way it is and I'm unsure as to how anyone who watches them both on a regular basis can think otherwise.
Well the is the way I'd perceive it too, but at times even when it's the case, he does start. he's been picked ahead of Nani and Valencia on a consistent basis plenty of times before.
Best 11? Sunday only person that was missing Shinji and not sure he would have started the game seeing as the tactical decision was to play 2 wingers.
There is nothing certain about what team we'd play if all are 100% fit and on form. Which is why we see once in a while questions about what is our best 11. Only players that I think are guaranteed to start if everyone is fit are Rooney, RVP, Evra and Vida, maybe Rio.
He was bought as a squad player. Giggs wasnt being used as first choice left winger
That is because the other 2 are never on form on a consistent basis, at the same time. Which results in Young getting games unless he is just plain off form too.
It's hard for them to be on form if they don't play though.
There's no way Young should've started ahead of Nani on Sunday, for example.
When our best 11 is on form and available I'mc certain it doesn't include Young, no matter what the formation. Besides, Nani and Valencia are superior to him in any winger based formation.
I strongly disagree. No matter the formation we can definitely see which 11 players are our best for each situation. I doubt there is a formation in which anyone would site Young as a starter in a best case scenario.
Clearly, if this past transfer activity is anything to go by, SAF wanted a winger. Hazard and Lucas was widely reported.
Going by that, and assuming Nani was on the transfer list out of the club, Young was not bought to be a first team starter and rather a good squad player.
Although, i do think that R17m is a lot for a squad player especially when you consider his wages.
Going by that, and assuming Nani was on the transfer list out of the club, Young was not bought to be a first team starter and rather a good squad player.
Although, i do think that R17m is a lot for a squad player especially when you consider his wages.
Save for this season, it's usually form or injury that has kept Nani or Valencia on the bench. Rather than any preference for Young.
I sort of disagree. Young was employed to imitate Park, whilst being a false striker. I'm not sure Nani would have enjoyed the Park bit of the task.
At times Young was literally playing left back with Evra as an extra center half when we were defending.
Its not the only reason though, its because Young is better defensively as well. You only have to look at the difference between Park and Nani going forward to know that our wingers are not solely picked on who's better going forward in recent years. It will be different if Nani hits his peak, because then he's up there with the rest of the best in the world... but as i said earlier he's not doing that so he's certainly not a definite starter. Also as a side note I don't think Nani shirks his defensive resposibilities and he does get back, but just not as well.
This whole best XI thing is useless as well, its my genuine opinion that if we played, Man City, Real Madrid and Barca, we could quite easily get three very different teams. The best thing about this squad is its versatility. Young will play in some of the big games over Nani or Valencia and it goes without saying that so will the other two over Young.
It was Young's first game in two months and he did play poor for the most part, it made no sense to me. I don't think it was worth sacrificing Nani's quality just to add a little more defensive stability.