Sneijder

Status
Not open for further replies.
SATA said:
Better probably, not sure about far far better
Click to expand...
Miles better. Sneijder had awhile when he was brilliant but scholes was top quality for more than a decade and a half. He was a fantastic goal scoring midfielder and a fantastic playmaker in two phases of his career. He was so much better.

If you're talking about peaks, then I'd agree with your statement but overall scholes will go down as one of united's greatest ever players. Sneijder wouldn't be remembered that much in the footballing world IMO.
 
We cannot not sign players on the basis that they're not as good as someone who has previously retired, surely.
 
Plugsy said:
We cannot not sign players on the basis that they're not as good as someone who has previously retired, surely.
Click to expand...
But we can on the basis that we have absolutely no need for them whatsoever.
 
Kid Cunto said:
That seems to be the concern, and it's bollocks. He can play centre midfield absolutely no problem, in fact it'd probably suit him more to drop deeper as he enters this stage of his career. Like a certain Paul Scholes, anyone remember him? I don't know how people can write off Sneijder for us having seen Scholes the past five or so years.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure why Scholes is being the comparison here. Sneijder can't control a game like Scholes could, he was one of the greatest ever in terms of controlling the game and the pace.

Sneijder makes no sense what so ever. I'd be in near disbelief if a two man midfield including Sneijder worked for US. It'd be along the lines of an Anderson/Cleverley in that we'd get cut open way too easily. Sneijder would work great in a midfield three, which so far we've shown no signs of switching to. And even then, he'd be operating similar positions to Rooney. If people hadn't realised, Kagawa has consistently been shunted out of position because Rooney won't be dropped in that role of often dropping deep and floating around that attacking midfield area.
 
JP77 said:
I'm not sure why Scholes is being the comparison here. Sneijder can't control a game like Scholes could, he was one of the greatest ever in terms of controlling the game and the pace.

Sneijder makes no sense what so ever. I'd be in near disbelief if a two man midfield including Sneijder worked for US. It'd be along the lines of an Anderson/Cleverley in that we'd get cut open way too easily. Sneijder would work great in a midfield three, which so far we've shown no signs of switching to. And even then, he'd be operating similar positions to Rooney. If people hadn't realised, Kagawa has consistently been shunted out of position because Rooney won't be dropped in that role of often dropping deep and floating around that attacking midfield area.
Click to expand...

Sneijder can control a game like Scholes did.
 
This place makes me laugh. Everyone going on about how we need to strengthen. Every player linked:

"Shit"

"Not as good as Scholes"

"Do not want"

fecking hell. We're like the sap in the way of a speeding bullet and when offered a protective jacket says "Yellow? feck that, got anything in white?"
 
Kid Cunto said:
Sneijder can control a game like Scholes did.
Click to expand...

No, he really can't. It's one of Scholes greatest strengths and what made him one of the greatest central midfielders to ever play the game.


Plugsy said:
This place makes me laugh. Everyone going on about how we need to strengthen. Every player linked:

"Shit"

"Not as good as Scholes"

"Do not want"

fecking hell. We're like the sap in the way of a speeding bullet and when offered a protective jacket says "Yellow? feck that, got anything in white?"
Click to expand...


For the record, I wasn't saying that. Sneijder was quality and if kept fit could quite clearly still produce the goods. It'd just be a matter of how we'd plan on actually fitting him in though, because I wouldn't be confident in seeing him in a two man midfield for us. You wouldn't find me complaining if we signed him, though I don't really believe for one minute we're going to.
 
Kid Cunto said:
Sneijder can definitely control a game from the centre of the park, I'm telling you.
Click to expand...


Who's saying he can't control a game? I'm saying he can't do it anywhere near the level of what Scholes did, who was almost a master of it. See Neville's discussion on it a little while back when discussing Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard.

I'll leave it at that though rather than derail the thread, if you really think he can control a game or the pace of a game like Scholes did then fair dues. You're a bit crazy, but fair dues :p
 
I think the idea that you have an Arthur and Martha in midfield is a bit out-dated. IMO what matters is control/use of the ball e.g possession football. It isn't to dismiss the value of a ball-winner in the middle of the park but I don't think it's essential. Games these days at the top level are controlled by players who can use the ball rather than sit back or hold. To my mind it's as outdated as the belief you have a little and large up top; little cnut making the runs and big fecker winning the aerial balls. Of course such combinations can and do work but I don't think many would argue now (at least at the top level) that this is something to particularly aim for.

I'm of the same opinion when it comes to those who think a ball winner/holding player is an essential requirement for a CM partnership. So much of the English game tactically seems to rely on stereotypes.

midfield general
get-to-the-line winger
Big man up-top

....I don't think football works like that anymore. I hope in years to come talk of having aholding/ball winning CM as a minimum requirement is scoffed at along with the suggestion you need a big lump of a striker to aim long balls at.
 
Red Hand Devil said:
World Cup year has a habit of transforming a players form tho...
Click to expand...


True, but Sneijder isn't a great central midfielder. He's more than capable of putting in very good performances from midfield, but they're mostly sporadic. And for a central midfielder, it's crucial that consistency is achieved. He has stated before that he doesn't like playing as a central midfielder, and that he likes to occupy the second striker role. In truth, that's why I never wanted him at the club when he was linked a couple of seasons ago. We already had - and still have - Rooney who is better suited to the system and is a better all-round player. I don't believe any of the current rumours... I won't be disappointed if we signed him, but at the same time he's a player that is best suited to a free role between the lines.
 
It's just as simplistic to think that someone who can is good at affecting things the attacking play from further up the pitch is going to definitely be great in a deeper position where he was to play a very different way.
 
MoneyMay said:
True, but Sneijder isn't a great central midfielder. He's more than capable of putting in very good performances from midfield, but they're mostly sporadic. And for a central midfielder, it's crucial that consistency is achieved. He has stated before that he doesn't like playing as a central midfielder, and that he likes to occupy the second striker role. In truth, that's why I never wanted him at the club when he was linked a couple of seasons ago. We already had - and still have - Rooney who is better suited to the system and is a better all-round player. I don't believe any of the current rumours... I won't be disappointed if we signed him, but at the same time he's a player that is best suited to a free role between the lines.
Click to expand...


Agree with what you're sayin man, but he'd boost our options & also the buzz of the squad too. Too much deadwood at United at the minute - its feckin irritating to say the least. Get bodies in & shape our midfield properly is the key..
 
An AM that plays centrally also a central midfielder unless we send the feckers out with shackles and tell them each not to move beyond a five yard radius.
 
Plugsy said:
An AM that plays centrally also a central midfielder unless we send the feckers out with shackles and tell them each not to move beyond a five yard radius.
Click to expand...
Okay then. Let's sign Juan mata to play alongside Carrick. That would be work out really well.

Attacking midfielders and central midfielders are the same thing. This is a new one.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
Okay then. Let's sign Juan mata to play alongside Carrick. That would be work out really well.

Attacking midfielders and central midfielders are the same thing. This is a new one.
Click to expand...



Yes. They are.

If you played in CM, at one point you were expected to cover DM and AM as and when. Now suddenly Fm14 enthusiasts have broke them down into three entirely separate fecking positions.

If you're a winger you play in midfield and up top (by-line) if you're a fullback you're expected to defend and push forward.

But if you're a DM or AM you cannot enter the centre circle (from each respective end) and if you're a CM you apparently can't fecking leave it now.

The positional is Central midfielder. You may be a CM with defensive qualities or attacking qualities but you're still a CM. I dunno why people try and break everything down to where a couple of yards either side somehow constitutes an entirely new position.

Next I'm expecting it to evolve whereby a CM that plays left of centre is to be considered a completely alien position to those who play right of centre and we'll all be debating "He's a LCM not a RCM you prick!!" for ever more
 
SATA said:
Better probably, not sure about far far better
Click to expand...

Perhaps it depends on your definition of "far far better". There have been plenty of footballers who have had talent but not the application to make the kind of impact that Scholes has made over a long and distinguished career. Sneijder has allowed his greed to derail his career to the point that none of the top clubs (including United) wanted to pay his unrealistic demands. Maybe playing for Galatasaray has been a humbling experience and brought him down a peg or two.
 
a) He'd be a first choice cm for us, even though it's not his best position.
b) As an AM he could still be better than Kagawa, who has yet to convince as a Manchester United player.
c) He'd presumably be relatively cheap and available.
d) Don't him and RvP detest each other?

In short, a very logical backup signing that almost certainly won't happen.
 
Plugsy said:
I think the idea that you have an Arthur and Martha in midfield is a bit out-dated. IMO what matters is control/use of the ball e.g possession football. It isn't to dismiss the value of a ball-winner in the middle of the park but I don't think it's essential. Games these days at the top level are controlled by players who can use the ball rather than sit back or hold. To my mind it's as outdated as the belief you have a little and large up top; little cnut making the runs and big fecker winning the aerial balls. Of course such combinations can and do work but I don't think many would argue now (at least at the top level) that this is something to particularly aim for.

I'm of the same opinion when it comes to those who think a ball winner/holding player is an essential requirement for a CM partnership. So much of the English game tactically seems to rely on stereotypes.

midfield general
get-to-the-line winger
Big man up-top

....I don't think football works like that anymore. I hope in years to come talk of having aholding/ball winning CM as a minimum requirement is scoffed at along with the suggestion you need a big lump of a striker to aim long balls at.
Click to expand...


Kind of agree with this. When we were talking about signing Fellaini people were saying he was the type of cm we needed instead of noticing that he wasn't of the quality we needed. You also see people demanding we bring in someone who can play in the "Carrick Role", as if someone of Carrick's style is totally essential in our cm. Similarly, when Keane retired people were looking for someone to play the "Keane Role", as if a Roy Keane type was essential to any winning side.

People fixate too much on the type of player we sign when, in reality, any two players who are of high enough quality and who compliment each other will do. Any combination of types will have its own strengths and weaknesses. You can always adapt and alter your midfield, as we did when Keane left.
 
Sneijder is a good player but not needed at Man Utd, we need a proper CM and not a player who used to play there. Sneijder is also a bit of a coward.
 
Plugsy said:
Yes. They are.

If you played in CM, at one point you were expected to cover DM and AM as and when. Now suddenly Fm14 enthusiasts have broke them down into three entirely separate fecking positions.

If you're a winger you play in midfield and up top (by-line) if you're a fullback you're expected to defend and push forward.

But if you're a DM or AM you cannot enter the centre circle (from each respective end) and if you're a CM you apparently can't fecking leave it now.

The positional is Central midfielder. You may be a CM with defensive qualities or attacking qualities but you're still a CM. I dunno why people try and break everything down to where a couple of yards either side somehow constitutes an entirely new position.

Next I'm expecting it to evolve whereby a CM that plays left of centre is to be considered a completely alien position to those who play right of centre and we'll all be debating "He's a LCM not a RCM you prick!!" for ever more
Click to expand...
You do know this already happens, with left and right sided centrebacks who always play on a particular side, right?
 
The Neviller said:
You do know this already happens, with left and right sided centrebacks who always play on a particular side, right?
Click to expand...


Yes but they're not referred to as entirely different species as what happens with the three separate 'realms' of CM these days. I was merely making the point that for the sake of pointless tactical discussion that leads nowhere, people de-construct the feck out of everything. Like those who insist a striker dropping back a couple of yards is a completely new formation worthy of 10,000 pages of analysis rather than 'he dropped back a bit'

It's also odd how it only happens to certain positions this over-analysis. A fullback can play the whole game effectively left or right midfield but nobody gives a feck to give a mention. A striker or central midfielder can play a yard or two either side of where you'd expect: NEW FORMATION!!!

"I think we should play 4-1-0.5-1.5-1-2"!
 
Plugsy said:
Yes. They are.

If you played in CM, at one point you were expected to cover DM and AM as and when. Now suddenly Fm14 enthusiasts have broke them down into three entirely separate fecking positions.

If you're a winger you play in midfield and up top (by-line) if you're a fullback you're expected to defend and push forward.

But if you're a DM or AM you cannot enter the centre circle (from each respective end) and if you're a CM you apparently can't fecking leave it now.

The positional is Central midfielder. You may be a CM with defensive qualities or attacking qualities but you're still a CM. I dunno why people try and break everything down to where a couple of yards either side somehow constitutes an entirely new position.

Next I'm expecting it to evolve whereby a CM that plays left of centre is to be considered a completely alien position to those who play right of centre and we'll all be debating "He's a LCM not a RCM you prick!!" for ever more
Click to expand...


No, no they're not.

It's not about "seperate fecking positions" and your pointless angst towards "the FM kids".

It's about defining or understanding the various roles players have in a football team and differentiating between them. It's about appreciating that different footballers are, in fact, different and despite them a lot of them playing in one giant area of the pitch (midfield), acknowledging that their actual use can be very different.

The whole bit about "can't leave centre circles" and so on and so forth is something I don't think anyone actually thinks and you've probably just made up to attack your age old nemesis - "the FM kid". I'm sure everyone would love their central midfielder to bomb forward, attacking midfielder to help out in deeper areas, striker to press and centre back to carry the ball out of defence, but that doesn't make the use of these "tags" bad. You can both believe in players being flexible and understand their roles being different.

Basically, this is a typical caf argument of going to extremes, with your extreme being "they're all the fecking same! they're all midfielders! Whats an AM, whats a DM, they're all CM's!!". Which, IMO, is over simplistic in nature and overlooks the fact that there are relevant differences between those footballers you want to lump into the same brackets that actually affects their use in different positions.
 
Plugsy said:
This place makes me laugh. Everyone going on about how we need to strengthen. Every player linked:

"Shit"

"Not as good as Scholes"

"Do not want"

fecking hell. We're like the sap in the way of a speeding bullet and when offered a protective jacket says "Yellow? feck that, got anything in white?"
Click to expand...


Spot on matey. I love the holier than thou attitude of some.

You know - I reckon the press publish stories like these "Primarily" to drive the Caf insane lol.

Skipping all of the unnecessary he will, he won't, he can and he can not..... if we can have the Dutchy, lets have him! I don't care what anybody says.
 
Gaeilge said:
Spot on matey. I love the holier than thou attitude of some.

You know - I reckon the press publish stories like these "Primarily" to drive the Caf insane lol.

Skipping all of the unnecessary he will, he won't, he can and he can not..... if we can have the Dutchy, lets have him! I don't care what anybody says.
Click to expand...

Yeah, hopefully our manager doesn't think like that.

'I'll take whatever I can get my hands on!'.
 
People do realize that these days we're linked left, right and center with every footballer and his dog, right? So, shock horror, a majority of them will be signings that wouldn't be good enough. And not just because half of them were dogs.
 
Plugsy said:
This place makes me laugh. Everyone going on about how we need to strengthen. Every player linked:

"Shit"

"Not as good as Scholes"

"Do not want"

fecking hell. We're like the sap in the way of a speeding bullet and when offered a protective jacket says "Yellow? feck that, got anything in white?"
Click to expand...
You love an analogy, don't you?
 
Plugsy said:
Yes but they're not referred to as entirely different species as what happens with the three separate 'realms' of CM these days. I was merely making the point that for the sake of pointless tactical discussion that leads nowhere, people de-construct the feck out of everything. Like those who insist a striker dropping back a couple of yards is a completely new formation worthy of 10,000 pages of analysis rather than 'he dropped back a bit'

It's also odd how it only happens to certain positions this over-analysis. A fullback can play the whole game effectively left or right midfield but nobody gives a feck to give a mention. A striker or central midfielder can play a yard or two either side of where you'd expect: NEW FORMATION!!!

"I think we should play 4-1-0.5-1.5-1-2"!
Click to expand...
Yeah, but your point about centre midfielders and attacking midfielders is a bit daft. Under your simplified system, Ozil is a centre midfielder. Stick him in centre midfield and see how he gets on.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
No, no they're not.

It's not about "seperate fecking positions" and your pointless angst towards "the FM kids".

It's about defining or understanding the various roles players have in a football team and differentiating between them. It's about appreciating that different footballers are, in fact, different and despite them a lot of them playing in one giant area of the pitch (midfield), acknowledging that their actual use can be very different.

The whole bit about "can't leave centre circles" and so on and so forth is something I don't think anyone actually thinks and you've probably just made up to attack your age old nemesis - "the FM kid". I'm sure everyone would love their central midfielder to bomb forward, attacking midfielder to help out in deeper areas, striker to press and centre back to carry the ball out of defence, but that doesn't make the use of these "tags" bad. You can both believe in players being flexible and understand their roles being different.

Basically, this is a typical caf argument of going to extremes, with your extreme being "they're all the fecking same! they're all midfielders! Whats an AM, whats a DM, they're all CM's!!". Which, IMO, is over simplistic in nature and overlooks the fact that there are relevant differences between those footballers you want to lump into the same brackets that actually affects their use in different positions.
Click to expand...

This is fair enough. It does indeed come down to individual qualities and what you call relevant differences. However, to the present debate, one such relevant difference between Sneijder and, say, Mata (who has been used as an example here) is that the former is in fact quite suited to play in a more withdrawn role. He has done it before, he has a range of passing and a positional awareness which makes him a decent fit in such a role. He is clearly better in a more advanced role - but should, in theory, be able to play as a central midfielder (rather than an attacking one) for us, in the formation we normally use.

I'm not saying we should buy him. There are plenty of reasons why we shouldn't. But he is capable of playing in a deeper role.
 
The Neviller said:
Yeah, but your point about centre midfielders and attacking midfielders is a bit daft. Under your simplified system, Ozil is a centre midfielder. Stick him in centre midfield and see how he gets on.
Click to expand...


But being an AM is part of being a CM. There are defensive centre midfielders and attacking central midfielders but they're all essentially still central midfielders as they play in the midfield, in the middle.

Same as there are deep-laying centre forwards, advanced centre forwards, holding centre forwards etc. But people generally call them 'forwards'. It's not to say they're all the same sort of players or don't perform different roles within the 'forward' role but they're still forwards.

Some CMs are attacking, others are defensive, others are a bit of both of neither. All pretty much still CMs though
 
Plugsy said:
But being an AM is part of being a CM. There are defensive centre midfielders and attacking central midfielders but they're all essentially still central midfielders as they play in the midfield, in the middle.

Same as there are deep-laying centre forwards, advanced centre forwards, holding centre forwards etc. But people generally call them 'forwards'. It's not to say they're all the same sort of players or don't perform different roles within the 'forward' role but they're still forwards.

Some CMs are attacking, others are defensive, others are a bit of both of neither. All pretty much still CMs though
Click to expand...
I know where you're coming from and it's purely semantics, but when people talk about centre midfielders, especially in English football, they think of players who are involved in that battle in midfield, in where the muck and bullets fly, where matches are won and lost. That's where I'd view a player as being a midfielder, a proper one. "AM's" like Ozil, Mata, Silva etc aren't that, for me.
 
Plugsy said:
This place makes me laugh. Everyone going on about how we need to strengthen. Every player linked:

"Shit"

"Not as good as Scholes"

"Do not want"

fecking hell. We're like the sap in the way of a speeding bullet and when offered a protective jacket says "Yellow? feck that, got anything in white?"
Click to expand...

The "let's just get someone who might do a job in CM" type of thinking brought us Marouane Fellaini. We have enough squad players, players who "can do a job" - and we most definitely do not need another player competing for that spot behind the main striker. At least not in January and not until we sort out CM.

And not every player is frowned upon on the Caf, see the Herrera and the Gündogan threads as examples. Even Cabaye has a substantial number of backers here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.