Young is certainly not superior to Valencia defensively, only to Nani. What he is though is a hybrid of Nani and Valencia, giving our squad an interesting alternative for our tactical needs.
Smashley Young
- Thread starter Red Defence
- Start date
Nani not playing these days doesn't have much to do with his abilities as a player.
True. Disappointing stuff.
I don't see how adding Nani would have improved a single thing frankly. We'd have been better going forward at the cost of leaving our left wing wide open, due to Evra having been tactically withdrawn infield to deal with Chelsea's 3 playmakers. Attacking wise Young was very rusty, but defensively he was spot on. If anything I questioned why Valencia started, given he was poor the last to games, but he justified his place.
And I think he would do exactly the same right now regarding the choice between young and Nani if we were to play Real Madrid next week, because they are so dangerous on the counter. On the other hand if we played Barca I think Nani's ability to get out of very intense pressure would give the nod to him instead.
All i'm saying is that Young has just been and will be again, chosen over Nani on the wing in certain games. Not many mind, but definately some of the bigger ones because he offers more protection especially if Evra has a dip in form and it's one of the main reasons Valencia has been indespensible, because he offers an attacking fullback great cover.
Agree to disagree I guess. Nani has torn Chelsea a new one plenty of times and I thought it would've been the perfect game for him to play in. it's not like Young being in the team prevented us from being bitch slapped for those 15 mins before and after the half, once Chelsea hit their stride.
We largely agree.
Personally I believe if Nani is on form Valencia is the one who would bench. For Nani is the bigger threat going forward and does offer some protection to his fullback defensively. It's on the left where the issues lie, because at times the left winger has to act as a secondary fullback. Which never happens on Rafael's wing and its a job Nani is ill suited to.
Disagree about it being the perfect game for him, think what with Chelsea's home form and attacking potential, we needed to be at the races defensively as a unit. And when under the cosh, Young did pull his weight.
The perfect game for Nani is against Arsenal at home on Saturday imo. Hope he starts then, but against chelsea even though it was a risk in terms of recent game time for young, tactically it was a decent call imo.
Nani really isn't that bad defensively, he's definitely better than Mata and Hazard defensively at any rate, I don't think he would be a liability there. What he would have given us though is someone capable of actually beating a player in tight areas. After half an hour Valencia really didn't go past anyone and Young isn't really that sort of player. Mata and Hazard walked past most our players pretty easily most the game.
At any rate whilst nani is out of the team I think Young might get a lot more games especially if we continue with more of a 433 like against chelsea. He's probably the most natural after Nani at offering the wide threat but also having the versatility to come inside. If we want to make the attack more dynamic we need players who can play on the outside and come inside, otherwise we'll just end up as rigid as we have been in general in recent years.
At any rate whilst nani is out of the team I think Young might get a lot more games especially if we continue with more of a 433 like against chelsea. He's probably the most natural after Nani at offering the wide threat but also having the versatility to come inside. If we want to make the attack more dynamic we need players who can play on the outside and come inside, otherwise we'll just end up as rigid as we have been in general in recent years.
I don't know about you but for me, the most important thing for a winger is what they can do offensively, not defensively, regardless of opposition.
Fair enough.
To be fair we got bitch slapped because our center gave way by us defending poorly as a unit rather than due to Young's presence/Nani's absence. I'm also not sure how Nani would have improved our ball retention because as team it was very careless. However, If anything I'd have had him in over Valencia and I suspect he'd have created one more goal (remember that moment when Valencia delayed to pick out RVP or shoot and it became a corner)and would have scored that chance Valencia wasted....
At the start personally, I questioned why Valencia was in head of Nani, given Valencia's display vs Stoke and what Nani did when he came on vs Stoke and Braga, and given his own history vs Chelsea. But with what Valencia did in the end, since he also tends to save his A game for Chelsea, its hard to go down that road. It's easy in hind sight to think Young was the odd one out, but in truth his role for the day wasn't one Nani could play.
Some good points there, but as was said above, Nani's absence from the team seems to be more to do with off field issues than him as a player nowadays, so not much can be done I suppose.
No one is saying he'd be a defensive liability. We are saying rather that he wouldn't fit a secondary left back role which is the brief Young was given tactically. Young was literally playing like a wing back in a 3-5-2.
Which is sad. I hope they get sorted soon. For I feel ala Anderson he is currently getting less game time for reasons other than his form or football.
That's right. It's because he can't survive over an hour of football without be knackered.
I dunno some people have in general commented that nani is a defensive liability, personally I acknowledge that Valencia and Young provide more cover but still feel that Nani does his bit.
Nani definitely does his defensive work for a player not naturally inclined defensively. Defensive liabilty = Hazard, Oscar and Mata. Not Nani
oh puhlease
Giggs didn't step on pitch for an hour.What? He played against Chelsea on Sunday straight after recovering from a injury and being two months out. Nani, Welbeck & giggs- the others players who can play on the left were all available. But do keep telling yourself that he is "squad" player. He also started most games in the left when he was fit last season. He was unfortunate to pick up injuries at the wrong moments otherwise he would have cemented a place in the first XI by now.
It is preposterous to suggest he is just an alternative to our proper starters. He is not like Buttner, who is their provide cover for the position. He is a genuine first choice player when fit and on form.
That is why we needed someone who can come and play on the left. Hence, the Young purchase.
oh puhlease
Giggs is played late on for his experience, he is seen as more trustworthy than Anderson in the middle when we are leading.
If Anderson could last more than an hour. I would start him over Giggs and Scholes at this moment.
Is he as good as Nani and Valencia? Surely if they're both better players than him then it discounts that idea, no?
Young has been fortunate in that Valencia and Nani never seem to be fit and on form at the same time, but if both were then I don't think he'd get a look in in the majority of games. Well, they're both fit this season but the main reason Nani is out of the team seems to be nothing to do with actual football.
Young is better on the left than Nani.
Apologies if I'm mistaken but are you the guy who only reads posts selectively to suit his arguments?
He's not though, at all. Nani has put in performances on the left that Young could only dream of.
1. Young started in a role in which he was required to function like a left wing back in a 3-5-2. A thing none of our other wingers can do on the left side of the pitch.
Seriously, stop arguing for the sake of it.
2. I don't have to ''tell my self'' squat. Young is a first team squad player. If you don't grasp what that means its your own problem frankly.
3. Of course Young started many game on the left. Young is primarily a left side player and his only real competition spent the season either injured, off form or playing in center midfield.
4. Nani and Valencia too were equally as unfortunate to pick up injuries as Young. In fact injuries plague the entire squad last season. I'm not sure where you are head with that line of argument...
5. Buttner is a fringe/stop gap player. To compare Young's role to his shows that it's clear you do not even understand what you are trying to argue against.
You clearly don't understand the difference between a first team squad regular and a first team squad fringe player. First team squad regulars are the ones who challenge and some times even replace bonafide starters from their first XI slot. This idea that you have that they equate to Buttner types is laughably silly.
Utter rubbish. Giggs simply weakens the midfield and invites pressure because he has no legs yet can't keep the ball any where near as good as a Scholes. In addition, against 10 men Anderson is a far superior choice. It's not even debatable.
They can as well come on for the last part of the game if he is done at the hour mark.
I would disagree with you on that Anderson was the superior choice but since it is not "debatable" there isn't much point.
Scholes should have come on but I think Giggs came on because he combines both experience and ability to run at players. He is also a pretty good closer which I think Fergie wanted and Giggs in return provided it.
I also don't think Fergie consistently wants to waste a sub on Anderson every game. He isn't that good. Once Anderson improves his fitness he will play more.
huh? It was a 3-5-2 with a wingback and a leftback? Now I know who to PM when I am looking for technical nous the next time.
Everyone is a first team squad player. Young is as much a starter on the left as are Nani or Welbeck. He has started games before on the left ahead of Nani and vice-versa. But never let logic or truth come in the way of your agenda.
So, Scholes and Carrick are the starters in the midfiled whereas Cleverley, Anderson etc. are squad players? How does it work?
Smalling a squad player? What about Evans? Rio?
What are we arguing here?
So how many different "categories" of players do we have?
If you have been watching United regularly and carefully than you'd know that football, especially the league is a squad game. We play around 60 games a season and rotation is a very important part of managing the squad. There are no bona fide starters per se. Players like Rooney and RVP will start most games when fit but the rest are what you call "first team squad regulars". There are no bona fide starters on wings, all three picked based on fitness and form. Even beloved Nani.
If it was an individual sport than Nani might trumph Young on the left. But unfortunately football is a team sport and Young is better suited and is better for team than Nani as a left winger.
I too have my favorites and it's easy to delude ourselves into thinking that they are the best things since sliced bread but I am a Manchester United fan and no player is bigger than the club for me. Dream performances mean jack if my team doesn't get 3 points. You could be a wizard with the ball on your feet but if you can't track back prevent the opposition player from making a cross than you are not the better player imo. 90 minutes hard-workers than 10 minute geniuses any day of the week and twice on Sundays, please.
Giggs added nothing other than experience. It was a pointless substitution.
Ferguson himself said Anderson had done nothing wrong playing wsie to deserve the bench this season. So that wasting a sub idea is a rather a moot one....
He will never improve his fitness by being on the bench and never getting any game time, even when fit to play.
That is a really weird post.
Because Young is more selfless than Nani he's better on the left, ok. Basing who is the better player in a position by who is better at tracking back, when being a winger is far more about what you offer in attack, is odd. By your logic Young is better on the left than Ronaldo is.
I also don't think you're giving Nani enough credit here, because he's improved a lot defensively in the last few years.
WTF?!! What part of ''function like a left wing back in a 3-5-2.'' do you not understand? It's obvious to anyone not intent on arguing for the sake of it that I wasn't saying we were playing 3-5-2. Rather I said Young was tactically functioning like a wing back does in that formation.
Anyone who watched us play Chelsea cannot deny Young spent a lot of the time in the left back position with Evra tucked in next to Rio and Evans, whenever we were defending Chelsea attacks. Yet he still had his winger job to do.
Right. So Johnstone, Tunnicliffe, Macheda, Keane, Wooton, Buttner, Bebe and Powell are all first team squad players?
It makes one wonder why they wont end up with as many games this season as a Young, a Hernandez or a Welbeck. Even if you combined their appearances....
Young is more of a left sided player than Nani or Welbeck will ever be in wide man based formation. He built his career in the role after all . Nani only keeps him out of the role because he is simply the better player when on top form. As for Welbeck, he is no competition to a fully fit and firing Young.
Logic, truth and agendas eh? Where were there when you claiming Young was the one unfortunate to have injuries last season. As if injuries were not ravaging our entire squad all season long.....
Seriously You don't even understand what you are arguing against yet you are continuing? Do I really have to spell this out for you?You want to really make us all believe you don't know the difference between a first team squad player like a Young, Fletcher or Kagawa and a fringe player like a Powell, Bebe or Macheda?
Not we, YOU. What are YOU arguing about? Because as yet I don't get the point of your whole stance.
Everyone knows we have first team regulars a.k.a first team squad players and first team fringe players.
Says the man who is denying that Young is a first team squad player. The mind boggles...
A.K.a first team squad players. Yet you wonder why I said you have been arguing for the sake of it........
You must have thought Cristiano Ronaldo such a pointless luxury and preferred having Park on pitch in his place....
When all else fails, bring out the multi quotes Chief
What a load of shite. Start to finish.
Incredible you are patronising to say "I too have my favourites" and the go on to make up a bunch of nonsense. You're acting like Nani is Lee fecking Trundle. Just stop it.
When all else fails, bring out the multi quotes Chief
We may complain, but I'm warmed in my heart with every team sheet that has him at LWF rather than Park of the past 2 seasons.
So it wasn't pointless given he added his experience and closed out the game. Fergie's plan then worked.
We only get 3 subs, so if we can not consistently waste a sub on Anderson. If he was on the level of Rooney and Van Persie then it would be a moot one.
Again, match fitness isn't the same thing as lasting 90 minutes. Anderson can't do that. He needs to work on losing weight and stamina and that doesn't come with game time, it comes with hard work.
Fergie's plan worked only because Torres has been sent off. Giggs didn't help us close out anything.
We always have the options of 3 subs every game and always use at least 1. To call it a waste is garbage at its finest frankly.
It is part and parcel of it. You won't ever get to last 90 minutes if you never get to play any minutes.
''Anderson is a difficult one to leave out but I don’t think there’s been anything wrong with the form of Paul Scholes or Michael Carrick, which makes it difficult to involve other central midfielders when there’s always a desire to play with two wide players,”
“Anderson has done nothing wrong. His pre-season form was terrific and he’s a top player, but I still think that Scholes is a great player.''
SAF.
Anyone who is still using that ''he is fat and doesn't work hard'' excuse is doing an Ace Venutra and engaging in arse talking frankly.
Plenty of times?
The decision to start with Young was a bit mental even by SAF standards, but it turned out he played it in terrific fashion. All that counts really.