Striker10
"Ronaldo and trophies > Manchester United football
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2004
- Messages
- 18,856
What has Darren's opinion got to do with SAF's mind?
like father like son?
What has Darren's opinion got to do with SAF's mind?
Has he been linked to Villa? - If Milner goes the fans won't be happy with a kid on loan who played for Watford last year, much more likely that they'll take players as part of the deal or sign a replacement.
If he goes out on loan he needs to be playing very week. Newcastle would be a good move - likely to play at a club with good support and pressure to perform. Would see whether he can cut it in the PL.
Personally I'd like to see him remain with us.
What has Darren's opinion got to do with SAF's mind?
Doesn't sound like it's Darren's opinion, sounds like Fergie has told him that.I'm pretty certain of that after speaking to my dad, he's going back to United."
I am always a bit perplexed about sending players on loan.
Part of the success of being at United is that you receive the best training facilities, under the guidance of the best manager, with the best coachesm and allows them to develop playing alongside some of the greats in the game.
Now unless I am being totally thick here, going to other clubs deprives players of that. Would you send a racehorse to an inferior trainer if you think he's got that much potential. Of course you wouldnt. You'd make sure he had the best facilities to bring out that natural talent.
Surely that should apply to players like Cleverley. Keep them at United, give them the best training and facilities, let them learn from the best in the game, and bring them on that way. We've seen too many young players sent out on loan, and they never come back and they fade into obscurity.
Just doesnt make sense. Give them the training and the coaching and they'll make the grade.
Doesn't sound like it's Darren's opinion, sounds like Fergie has told him that.
Doesn't sound like it's Darren's opinion, sounds like Fergie has told him that.
I wish we had options in our midfield so we could send Cleverly on loan to a premiership club where he'd be able to get games (like Wilshere is doing at Bolton). I think at his age he needs the consistency of games every week to develop, and he won't get that this year with us.
Unfortunately I can see him being kept at the club because SAF has nobody else if say Scholes and Carrick go down to injury. The fact he is a sort of utility type player means he will probably stay with us but not get enough games to really push forward his development. (and if he does, that will probably be because we've had some massive injury problems - which isn't great new either).
The lad looks a great prospect, but I think he's still a year or so away from being really ready and it would have been great to see him really battle away with a relegation team in the premier league this season to prove that he is ready for a full season with us.
Sending Rossi out to Newcastle was disastrous. He had a bad time of it and we ended up selling him for a vastly undervalued price.
So just because he 'could' play there, he's an option that we should keep? Have you seen him play in the middle then? He plays out wide for Watford bar some games where they had injury crisis, he plays out wide whenever he plays with the first team, he plays out wide too for the reserves and the same goes for England sides he's been involved in. He could play there, but if SAF is planning on him playing there, surely he would have played some game on in the friendlies in the middle for us.Cleverly is versatile. It don't matter if it's not his main role wan as he's still improving. He was a full back lets not forget. How do you know 100 games in he won't be a better midfielder? Alot of people imagined becks would have been a top midfielder but it didn't prove to be the case and again when you take Gibson who will get games - this is a guy who's about as fit as a pub team player, has limited mobility and wouldn't be anywhere near uniteds first team but the goals. You have to imagine we've said he's not perfect - but we'll work with him and he will come good. So when you give kids chances, they don't have to be perfect
I'd ask any of you guys if you think Gibsons ready, and the answer is no but we hide behind the clubs decisions as validation
I don't know if that's because of him being that good on the wing (becks) or the fact we had scholes and keane there but Toms position is likely to change because he can play a few positions and because he wouldn't oust nani and valencia but I don't think midfields tied up when you think about the future. I don't think so.
Think about this: Hargreaves, Giggs and Scholes - could be gone within a season. That's three midfielders right there.
Wan, cleverly did play in the middle for us in a game this pre-season. Cant remember the opposition, but he played very, very well. Hes a very creative player and i actually believe his future is in the middle of the park, not the wing.
Didn't he play in the middle against the MLS.
Yes! i think thats the one! And that was our best performance of the tour.
So just because he 'could' play there, he's an option that we should keep? Have you seen him play in the middle then? He plays out wide for Watford bar some games where they had injury crisis, he plays out wide whenever he plays with the first team, he plays out wide too for the reserves and the same goes for England sides he's been involved in. He could play there, but if SAF is planning on him playing there, surely he would have played some game on in the friendlies in the middle for us.
It would be a waste to see him restricted when his game is all about the movement. With the movement he's shown, it suits him better to play out wide IMO, or just in front of the CMs. He could do a job as the 3rd CM I guess, but we only play that way in the important games, and he wouldn't get much playing time for those kind of games.
Gibson? Probably not yet. But as an option, he's good enough for now. In the limited amount he's played, he's shown flashes here and there. To me, he has the tools already, far better on the ball than Fletcher was and more confident with his passing. He just need to show his presence more, be more involved because right now he seems like a passenger most of the time.
And what's your point? You think being behind the likes of Nani, Park, Giggs and Valencia for the wings option and behind the likes of Scholes, Carrick, Fletcher, Gibson, Giggs would prepare him to take over from those three that might be gone next season? That's why people are saying he should go on loan to a team where he would get games because staying with us, he would be behind a lot of players and that wouldn't be good for his development unless SAF intends to blood him in this coming season by giving him games.
He looks ready, but we have a lot of options out wide. 6 months on loan would be good for him and us if he gets regular playing time. After that we can decide what to do.
I'm not entirely sure if he played the whole game there as I didn't manage to catch that game but when i watched the extended highlights on ESPN (approx 30mins) he seemed to be in the middle and he certainly scored his goal from that position.
if he did play middle, I doubt it matters to some people as they seem to think he can't play there. They seem to think if he went midfield, he'd crumble
The one game he played centrally he played far too much ahead of Scholes and our midfield was overrun. His best game was when he played wide and could drift in and link with the strikers.
I don't see the argument against loans as long as they are playing regularly.
I would love to see him try and get into the United but have a feeling Fergie will send him out. Hopefully he gets a decent PL season this year.
You base that on a game. A game. One game. We've played 4 in pre season and didn't dominate celtic or the wizards. The mls all stars one we pretty much dominatesd but certainly not the last one. It could be that it would have worked better with fletcher. I mean let's face it if we played two in midfield, we wouldn't play Carrick and Gibson would we. Combinations clearly important and if we're over run with a two man midfield it's usually a case of putting an extra body in the midfield or a forward dropping deep to support. It's a team game.
My argument is he's ready (from the outside lookig in), we have to plan now for the future and if Tom played and kept Scholes and Giggs on the bench, believe me they'd have no complaints and neither would we and also I don't believe we've the depth - certainly not in quality some would have us believe.
He's "Tom" now, is he?
You're odd as feck, you know that?
You base that on a game. A game. One game. We've played 4 in pre season and didn't dominate celtic or the wizards. The mls all stars one we pretty much dominatesd but certainly not the last one. It could be that it would have worked better with fletcher. I mean let's face it if we played two in midfield, we wouldn't play Carrick and Gibson would we. Combinations clearly important and if we're over run with a two man midfield it's usually a case of putting an extra body in the midfield or a forward dropping deep to support. It's a team game.
My argument is he's ready (from the outside lookig in), we have to plan now for the future and if Tom played and kept Scholes and Giggs on the bench, believe me they'd have no complaints and neither would we and also I don't believe we've the depth - certainly not in quality some would have us believe.
No you tool, I was responding to a post that said he played very well in central midfield in one game.
I don't see what the rush to convert him into a central midfielder is. He's best at the moment in an attacking role. In the future he may end up there but at present a wide position or an attsacking midfield role suits him better.
SAF is one of the best at developing young players and I'll go by his judgement. If he determines a loan deal would be most beneficial, then so be it.
that's his name. It's also shorter then typing cleverly. It's something that I didn't give much thought too. But I guess that's not something you can just google you spasticated fool? If i were you i would think less about the impression you make on the net and more about real life. It seems to matter to you. IMVHO.
This is talk about a United youngster. That's your contribution and you call me that lol. C'mon Pogue.
To be honest, I've nothing to add on the topic at hand. Already made my point a while back and there's a few others also talking sense since, to which you seem completely oblivious.
The "tom" thing just seemed strange, that's all. Combined with the weird use of present tense, rhetorical questions and second person in all your posts means it's hard to focus on whatever point you're actually trying to make. All a bit odd really.
You base that on a game. A game. One game. We've played 4 in pre season and didn't dominate celtic or the wizards. The mls all stars one we pretty much dominatesd but certainly not the last one. It could be that it would have worked better with fletcher. I mean let's face it if we played two in midfield, we wouldn't play Carrick and Gibson would we. Combinations clearly important and if we're over run with a two man midfield it's usually a case of putting an extra body in the midfield or a forward dropping deep to support. It's a team game.
My argument is he's ready (from the outside lookig in), we have to plan now for the future and if Tom played and kept Scholes and Giggs on the bench, believe me they'd have no complaints and neither would we and also I don't believe we've the depth - certainly not in quality some would have us believe.
He's not going to put Giggs and Scholes on the bench in the next 8-9 months is he? fecking hell.
Didn't you also say we should sell Carrick and through Pogba straight into the first team recently? I'll have some of what you're smoking please.
Everyone and his dog knew Gibson and Fletcher was a central midfielder who gets game out wide to get experience. Scholes was an exception. He won't play too many games in the middle for us or anyone else when we play with 4 in midfield(2 in the middle). Gibson can although right now it doesn't look pretty, but he's capable of playing there since he's a CM by trade. Cleverley plays out wide mainly.You make it sound like he can only play one position. He's versatile which is valuable. You know Valencia plays midfield for Equador sometimes? you know that? Just dropping that in there. We're not tied down or rigid and if you've not seen him in midfield. So what? No one saw Scholes in midfield as a kid cause he was a striker. Just because he didn't start in midfield, it didn't stop him coming central did it? If he can come inside and offer a threat - that's a good thing. You can't try everything in four games.....and we saw with fletcher and gibson - both were played wide when they were first introduced
I know why people said he'd go on loan but that's silly. A week in and we might have injuries. We don't have a big pool of midfielders to pick. The fact is according to you he's a winger, now I don't care if he goes out on loan for 6 months to a year he ain't coming back and outing nani or valencia is he...he would still have a problem.
I'm sure Sir Alex would have made neville a centre back but he was too small so he ended up full back. There are lots of examples where it's the quality of the person that makes them, like O'shea in midfield. If you give tom a licence to roam forward with someone protecting behind him, I don't see a problem. It's not like Tom gets a nose bleed when he's central and because of his running he offers a threat. He's confident now. I don't think going to newcastle and doing well will make him more confident.
He's not saying, feck! I wish that best player of the year was for a premiership club. It don't matter who it was for. Footballs a simple game made complicated yes by Sir Alex at times hehe. I don't want o'shea in midfield but theres a chance it will happen and it's better to bed someone in now who can benefit from scholes and giggs advice.
If Tom went on loan, he'd miss that. If they retire at the end of the season, you get a player thrown into the squad when he could have had a season benefiting from our two biggest legends. I think Tom would rather stay here and fight personally
You think they'll play 50 games this season? I don't and I don't think Sir Alex would want that. Players like Cleverly..are the future and scholes and giggs ain't. These are who we have to somehow replace. Gibson put carrick on the bench. Who would have thought that before last season? Who would have thought it'd be Gibson playing against Munich?
The second point like my taglines a joke. No I did not. I was talking about Pogba and speculated if he has a chance in the cup he'd impress - I also said if you impress your in the mind of the manager and people put it all together. I said sell Carrick yes...it's not controversial. At a time where we're looking to replace scholes and giggs, Carrick has lost his automatic choice status.
It was also to point out the talent in our squad and I said we didn't have to buy anyone. I could have mentioned a fair few players who have the potential to save the club money and who have the potential to be united players. I could have mentioned Tunnicliffe who is a very good player. He's a tackler but I didn't.
They'll play 30 each at least injuries permitting, and they won't be "kept on the bench" by Cleverly.
Nani, Valencia, Carrick, Park and Fletcher are capable of playing 50 each. Ditto Berbatov and our other strikers (we usually play 442). He is also still behind Obertan and Gibson in the pecking order whether you agree or like it or not. And behind Anderson, who I am sure will be available for 30 or so games this season.
Gibson "put Carrick on the bench" for what, 3 games, as a punishment for Carrick's atrocious mistakes against Bayern to cap a truly awful season. It's not a particularly meaningful event.
Re: Pogba, you definitely, 100% said we should sell Carrick this summer and throw Pogba into league games. I find it hilarious you are saying keep Cleverly for the season as we are short in the squad, but you want to sell Carrick. By hilarious I mean spasticated.
If a suitable loan move isn't found then he will get a few appearances here, and fewer really meaningful ones. If there is a loan move which offers him 30+ games a season as an important player for a PL side then that is obviously preferable, and it's not even close. Such a move might not exist, but the avenue most definitely needs to be explored.
I don't really know why I've bothered replying in such detail as previous conversations with you have shown that it's like talking to a brick wall, and you've already basically admitted that you're a WUM.
that's his name. It's also shorter then typing cleverly. It's something that I didn't give much thought too. But I guess that's not something you can just google you spasticated fool? If i were you i would think less about the impression you make on the net and more about real life. It seems to matter to you. IMVHO.
This is talk about a United youngster. That's your contribution and you call me that lol. C'mon Pogue.
shit it'll take an age. I want to make something clear to you. I've not paid attention to your posts and so bringing up a post of mine that's not even to do with this, is kinda dumb of you. It puts me at a disadvantage and you expect me to respond to your points?
Here's a suggestion. Stick to the topic. I'd certainly be able to read your reply on the subject a bit easier. I might even respond to it.
Your best contribution to the site? It can't be far off
No, it's quite valid.
You think Pogba (and you praised yourself for restraining from mentioning Tunnicliffe) should be picked ahead of Carrick.
LIKEWISE, you think Cleverly can force Scholes and Giggs (not to mention Berbatov, Park, Anderson, Obertan...) onto the bench. In the next 9 months.
You live in a dream world. I've given up trying to make you realise or admit it, I'm posting to discredit you in front of other posters. I'm very happy for you to not respond, it'll save me having to unravel your bizarrely twisted logic yet again.