Tom Cleverley | 2011/12 Performances

[amolbhatia50k]

Fletcher has always been underrated technically. Good in the air, great engine, good passer and very smart tactically. If Cleverley reaches the same level as Fletcher did at his peak then I'll be delighted.

I won't. He's much more talented than Fletcher. If he has the same attitude and mentality he'll easily surpass Fletcher.

Fergie has already said that he hasn't seen a young player have such a huge influence on the team in a long time (as Cleverly). As good as Fletcher was, he couldn't that.

 

[Eriku]

He was steadily increasing in his ability and influence, ever since the 06-07 season, until his illness caught up with him. And when he was a youth we were supposedly ready to start him at age 16, but it wasn't allowed, and then his injury came.

Brown had an incredible season in 07-08, but he too went up and down, his promises not being fulfilled due to injury. I have no idea how you can claim it so fervently for him when Fletcher by 08-09 had grown and grown and consistently shown an ability to win the midfield battle and more for us with his dynamism.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, I guess.

 

[KingEric7]

No im afraid i don't see what you have obviously seen, nor do i recall his arrival on the scene with any great excitement or anticipation. For me a good honest player and fantastic professional, but his technical limitations and the lack of specificity to his role put him well down the pecking order of Utd midfield talent imo.

As for best youth talent we have produced since 95. Possibly, considering the only other 2 before Fletcher were O'shea and Brown. I would say Browns season at RB in 07/08 was every bit as impressive as anything fletcher has ever produced in my view. He was absolutely fantastic that year.

I just don't see these sheer heights you speak of. Almost like he was Roy Keane for a year. For me a good player who had a purple patch for 12 months and then went back to the form he had shown before. His condition may have affected him, but i cannot say for certain, so i judge him on what he has produced over his career from my viewpoint. That to me equates to 12-18 months of very good form, and the rest of the time he was not particularly good and often inconsistent. Sorry.

I remember it vividly, and was there in the flesh to witness it!

It's a bit difficult to prove the point when there's such a clear disagreement, and I can only recommend digging up threads from on here at the time, or catching a few games from the 08/09 season or from the first half of the 09/10 season. Still, you have your own opinion, and I can't force you to change it.

He wasn't Roy Keane, but he was putting in some fantastic performances consistently. Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, in Europe...you name it. I've said it before, but I vividly remember walking out of Old Trafford pretty much after every game during that 08/09 season thinking, "feck me...Fletcher for man of the match today - that was a bit ridiculous actually...". It was quite a unanimous thing amongst fans that he was brilliant at that time, and it was made all the sweeter given the stick he received earlier in his career.

His rise to form started in 06/07 though, actually. He had a cracking game against Liverpool and, though he couldn't cement a place in the starting line up ahead of Carrick and Scholes, he had some other really good performances that year. Same goes for 07/08, though they were few and far between from what I remember (injuries). He's basically been very unfortunate. He never had the ability of Scholes, but when he came into his own, he was no doubt good enough to start for us.

As you say, Brown was absolutely fantastic in 07/08 and, when fit, Fletcher was at that level. Absolutely fantastic is good enough for me.

 

[KM]

Fletch was excellent in 08/09 and also very good in 09/10 season. I remember the reaction on here when he got the red card against Arsenal in SF and many of us were gutted and rightly so because he was fecking brilliant.

It's a shame that after all this he got this disease and was never the same after it. If Clev reaches those heights then I would be delighted however he is a different type of player.

 

[Bross]

Fletcher? At his best before his troubles he was imperious.

Cleverley's going to be a candidate for sure, and he exerts incredible influence for his young age. When he said he'd like to take over for Scholes, I thought he was overreaching like feck... That's not what I think anymore.

If Fletcher is our best shout at developing someone after the babes then thats just underlining his point.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Although let's be fair, big games in England have generally been extremely suited to harriers and battlers like Fletcher and Lucas Leiva. I think people do get a tad carried away with their performances in those matches. It shouldn't be taken away from them but it's a lot harder for someone like Scholes to impress in those big games because the things he does well are harder to pull of in those tight matches. Whereas because those matches get so tight and teams often negate each other, guys getting stuck in tend to stand out a fair deal.

Personally, Fletcher was never really a top player for me. He was good but there's no doubt in my mind that people went overboard in their estimation of him at the time. He was one of those players you do need in your team that help give your team certain qualities to win titles but those qualities are a lot easier to find than the likes of technical brilliance.

 

[Bross]

Fletch was excellent in 08/09 and also very good in 09/10 season. I remember the reaction on here when he got the red card against Arsenal in SF and many of us were gutted and rightly so because he was fecking brilliant.

It's a shame that after all this he got this disease and was never the same after it. If Clev reaches those heights then I would be delighted however he is a different type of player.

That reaction was there because Fletcher is a player that is very good at breaking up opposition play, and we were facing Barcelona, where that attribute is especially important.

Fletcher was never a great player, just a very useful destroyer for a season where we lacked the cutting edge to rely 100% on our own offensive play, resorting to breaking up the opposition as our main tactic against top opposition.

He was never anywhere close to Giggs, Scholes, Neville, Beckham etc in quality.

 

[KM]

He was very good, and was our best midfielder that season and therefore the reaction was like that.

 

[apotheosis]

I remember it vividly, and was there in the flesh to witness it!

It's a bit difficult to prove the point when there's such a clear disagreement, and I can only recommend digging up threads from on here at the time, or catching a few games from the 08/09 season or from the first half of the 09/10 season. Still, you have your own opinion, and I can't force you to change it.

He wasn't Roy Keane, but he was putting in some fantastic performances consistently. Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, in Europe...you name it. I've said it before, but I vividly remember walking out of Old Trafford pretty much after every game during that 08/09 season thinking, "feck me...Fletcher for man of the match today - that was a bit ridiculous actually...". It was quite a unanimous thing amongst fans that he was brilliant at that time, and it was made all the sweeter given the stick he received earlier in his career.

His rise to form started in 06/07 though, actually. He had a cracking game against Liverpool and, though he couldn't cement a place in the starting line up ahead of Carrick and Scholes, he had some other really good performances that year. Same goes for 07/08, though they were few and far between from what I remember (injuries). He's basically been very unfortunate. He never had the ability of Scholes, but when he came into his own, he was no doubt good enough to start for us.

As you say, Brown was absolutely fantastic in 07/08 and, when fit, Fletcher was at that level. Absolutely fantastic is good enough for me.

Fair enough and credit to you for disagreeing so agreeably!

 

[amolbhatia50k]

He was very good, and was our best midfielder that season and therefore the reaction was like that.

Central midfielder or overall midfielder?

His competition wasn't exactly of the level of players Brosstan mentioned. Wasn't Heinze voted our best player one season? Never a great player.

 

[Bross]

He was very good, and was our best midfielder that season and therefore the reaction was like that.

He offered close to nothing going forward, and that he was our best midfielder that season speaks volumes about our lack of creativity. Carrick, the only other possible contender for "best midfielder" that season suffered from an injury for long parts of the season, and also had to be shifted into defense at times because of the defensive injuries. He had a poor season, so in reality Fletcher was our best midfielder not because he was excellent, but because no one really stepped up.

His contribution that season has been overrated because of the Arsenal red card and subsequent fiction that we would have had a chance against Barca if he had played. People remember big games where he was good, for instance the Arsenal matches, which were perfect for his kind of playing style, frustrating them by breaking up their "beautiful passing game". But in games against poor opposition his lack of offensive ability was very obvious, and we suffered a lot that season from a lack of creative ability in the middle.

Ive never been a fan of terriers with limited passing and positioning ability in the midfield, but its typical British to overrate players like that. He had a good season and was very important for us in certain games 09/10, im not denying that at all, but his footballing ability was vastly overrated on here during that season.

But this is going off-topic. CLeverley is going to be great, and is a lot more talented than Fletcher

 

[Eriku]

He kept it simple at first... added more and more strings to his bow each season. And when he started reaching his best form he even started switching play with 40 yard balls every now and again, knowing exactly when to give and go and get some movement going in attack, and was a far more incisive passer going forward.

It was a brief window before mystery illness took over, but I never doubted he'd become good enough for our central midfield, and now people want to sow doubt again, now that he can't answer on the pitch anymore.

People love a good Fletcher bash, I'll tell ya.

Anyway, I won't de-rail this anymore, I have great hopes for Cleverley

 

[FlawlessThaw]

I just can't wait to see Cleverley and Welbeck link up together Let's not forget Welbeck's season could almost be entirely different if Tom hadn't played that beautiful cross into him against Spurs

 

[ArmchairCritic]

Fletcher, limited passing? There is a reason SAF felt comfortable in employing Fletcher in a deeper lying role when we did have him around this year and it's not because he's solely a 'destroyer'. Also considering he's had this illness for quite a few years there is clearly more to his game. Anyway I don't think you'd find any United fans saying Cleverley had more upside than Fletch 2 years ago and it's testament to Cleverley's development that is no longer the case. I do think Cleverley can become a better player but you guys are very unfair on Fletch, he wasn't the flashiest player but technically he's much better than most people realise.

 

[apotheosis]

He offered close to nothing going forward, and that he was our best midfielder that season speaks volumes about our lack of creativity. Carrick, the only other possible contender for "best midfielder" that season suffered from an injury for long parts of the season, and also had to be shifted into defense at times because of the defensive injuries. He had a poor season, so in reality Fletcher was our best midfielder not because he was excellent, but because no one really stepped up.

That's how i see it too. Everybody went into hiding after Ronaldo went, especially Carrick. this is why i believe SAF turned to a 4-5-1 that season, the 3 man midfield allowed the real quality we had in midfield Scholes to be played alongside Fletch and Carrick. Scholes provided the craft, Carrick the defensive screen and Fletcher could concentrate on running around closing down opponents, with having to worry about attacking or defending.

Ive never been a fan of terriers with limited passing and positioning ability in the midfield, but its typical British to overrate players like that. He had a good season and was very important for us in certain games 09/10, im not denying that at all, but his footballing ability was vastly overrated on here during that season.

Yes and has been ever since. Testament to that is the considerable amount of posters who still believe Fletcher is competent cover for Carrick at DM, despite every time Carrick has been out and Fletcher has played as the more defensive in a pair, we have shipped goals and results have suffered.

To prove the point at the start of last season Fletcher was paired with Scholes, in 6 games starting with the fulham match we conceded 9 goals and dropped 8 points, before Carrick came back and the rot was stopped. The fulham game incidentally saw the beginning of Jonny Evans run of poor performances, which unfortunately saw him out of the team regularly up until this season really.

 

[KM]

Can't be bothered to go into the Fletch argument, anyone saying that he was just a destroyer is as blinkered as Wenger who once said he was anti football.

Also, I don't understand apotheosis he highly rates Parker but is yet seemingly undermining Fletcher.

 

[Gambit]

Fletcher was fantastic at when he was at the height of his powers a few seasons ago he was incredible. He was just a well balanced all round midfielder.

 

[apotheosis]

Fletcher, limited passing? There is a reason SAF felt comfortable in employing Fletcher in a deeper lying role when we did have him around this year and it's not because he's solely a 'destroyer'. Also considering he's had this illness for quite a few years there is clearly more to his game. Anyway I don't think you'd find any United fans saying Cleverley had more upside than Fletch 2 years ago and it's testament to Cleverley's development that is no longer the case. I do think Cleverley can become a better player but you guys are very unfair on Fletch, he wasn't the flashiest player but technically he's much better than most people realise.

Yes there is. it was so he didn't have to run around all over the place when he is not 100% sure of his fitness. It is certainly not because he possesses Scholes like passing ability or the positional discipline of Carrick at DM.

However my opinions on Fletcher's ability have absolutely no bearing on my respect for the man. I sincerely wish Fletcher all the best and hope he can continue his career with us, his professionalism and determination deserve that opportunity at the very least.

 

[ArmchairCritic]

Yes there is. it was so he didn't have to run around all over the place when he is not 100% sure of his fitness. It is certainly not because he possesses Scholes like passing ability or the positional discipline of Carrick at DM.

However my opinions on Fletcher's ability have absolutely no bearing on my respect for the man. I sincerely wish Fletcher all the best and hope he can continue his career with us, his professionalism and determination deserve that opportunity at the very least.

So SAF plays Fletcher in a role which doesn't suit his play, why? SAF wouldn't shoe-horn anyone in for the sake of it. Fletcher's positional discipline is very good too, not quite Carrick level but still very good.

 

[#07]

Back on the subject of Tom does anyone think he's going to start the return leg against Ajax? Its quite clear that Sir Alex wants to bring on his fitness but Giggsy is going to get his 900th game at Old Trafford for sure on Thursday and its questionable whether the boss would want them playing together in centre midfield (although they did fairly well together in the second half of our preseason match against Barca in the States).

Sub appearance maybe?

 

[Bross]

Can't be bothered to go into the Fletch argument, anyone saying that he was just a destroyer is as blinkered as Wenger who once said he was anti football.

Also, I don't understand apotheosis he highly rates Parker but is yet seemingly undermining Fletcher.

Disagreeing with you means that someone is "as blinkered as Wenger" yet you cant even be bothered arguing your case properly. Quality poster right here.

 

[ArmchairCritic]

Back on the subject of Tom does anyone think he's going to start the return leg against Ajax? Its quite clear that Sir Alex wants to bring on his fitness but Giggsy is going to get his 900th game at Old Trafford for sure on Thursday and its questionable whether the boss would want them playing together in centre midfield (although they did fairly well together in the second half of our preseason match against Barca in the States).

Sub appearance maybe?

Why is that for sure? SAF will try to rest Giggs and Scholes as much as he can, no major reason for them to play against Ajax. Cleverley could do with another 60 mins.

 

[Cutch]

Back on the subject of Tom does anyone think he's going to start the return leg against Ajax? Its quite clear that Sir Alex wants to bring on his fitness but Giggsy is going to get his 900th game at Old Trafford for sure on Thursday and its questionable whether the boss would want them playing together in centre midfield (although they did fairly well together in the second half of our preseason match against Barca in the States).

Sub appearance maybe?

A certainty to start. He needs the minutes to get up to speed for the league. Its a great opportunity to get match sharpness in a less pressurised environment seeings as we're home and already winning 2-0 from the first leg.

 

[Shimo]

When fletch was paired with Scholes, he was not the DM and it was Scholes that sat in front of the defense. Don't think I've ever seen Fletcher play the holding player role for us but, think if SAF were to ever employ a pure defensive mid, he'd be our best option. But Saf doesn't want us playing with with a pure DM but someone that can be a deep lying playmaker.

That's why Ando at the start of the season was playing there and Cleverley was playing more forward.

 

[KM]

Disagreeing with you means that someone is "as blinkered as Wenger" yet you cant even be bothered arguing your case properly. Quality poster right here.

Thanks, I know.

 

[#07]

Why is that for sure? SAF will try to rest Giggs and Scholes as much as he can, no major reason for them to play against Ajax. Cleverley could do with another 60 mins.

Don't quote me on this but I thought the Boss said he'd give Giggsy he's 900th appearance next week?

It would just seem right that Giggsy should get to play and then get clapped off by his home fans having hit such a magnificent milestone.

That being the case it would seem logical that one of Cleverley and Scholes will get dropped as Giggsy's played most his football this year down the middle. Unless Sir Alex decides with Valencia out injured that he needs to protect one of Young or Nani and plays Giggsy out wide?

I agree with you Cleverley needs more match time but I don't know how you can accommodate everybody?

 

[Ash_G]

All I'll say about fletch was that when he was at his best he was one of the best centre mids in the league and one of the first names on the team sheet and if he was available and at the same fitness of twos seasons ago I'm confident that he'd be one of the first names of the team sheet again. That for me makes him a big success from our academy, and whist he's not at scholes level the level he's reached so far is pretty damn high. It's a big shame that his illness has got him when it did as I think going into last season he was starting to get recognition not just by us but by others outside of the club. I sincerely hope that he comes back to as full a fitness as he can and gets back to his best. Would be great for us and hopefully he'd win over whatever doubters are left.

 

[ArmchairCritic]

Don't quote me on this but I thought the Boss said he'd give Giggsy he's 900th appearance next week?

It would just seem right that Giggsy should get to play and then get clapped off by his home fans having hit such a magnificent milestone.

That being the case it would seem logical that one of Cleverley and Scholes will get dropped as Giggsy's played most his football this year down the middle. Unless Sir Alex decides with Valencia out injured that he needs to protect one of Young or Nani and plays Giggsy out wide?

I agree with you Cleverley needs more match time but I don't know how you can accommodate everybody?

Haven't heard that to be honest, we'll have to wait a see. Possible midfield 3?

 

[Bross]

So SAF plays Fletcher in a role which doesn't suit his play, why? SAF wouldn't shoe-horn anyone in for the sake of it. Fletcher's positional discipline is very good too, not quite Carrick level but still very good.

It wasnt about shoe-horning Fletcher in. We had a severe lack of creative quality during 09/10 and so instead of focusing on our own offensive play, we set out to destroy the opposition, disrupt their play and go for counter attacks whenever we faced a quality side.

That was the best possible tactic we could employ with the squad we had at hand that season, it worked, and Fletcher played a big part of that. But he was always lacking technically and creatively, something that isnt that hard to see if you just remember the 09/10 season, the season where Fletcher was a regular starter, and the amount of 1-0 struggling victories we had against poor opposition. We seriously lacked creativity that season, (something Carrick got blamed for, because Fletcher was seen as the "defensive" midfielder who could be excused for not having defense-splitting passes), and Fletcher really added very little when we had to break down opposition parking the bus, which almost all the lower-half sides did that season.

For some to say that they would be "delighted" if Cleverley, one of the best creative talents we have had at Carrington for decades according to our own youth developers, reaches Fletcher's level is a bit weird to me, as they are totally different kinds of footballers. To me Cleverley obviously has a lot more in his locker and if he doesnt surpass Fletcher in terms of footballing ability and game influence Ill be thoroughly disappointed.

 

[#07]

Haven't heard that to be honest, we'll have to wait a see. Possible midfield 3?

Its possible. If Berba is still injured the Boss may go with one up top especially as 2-0 up there's no need to start Rooney.

 

[Ash_G]

Haven't heard that to be honest, we'll have to wait a see. Possible midfield 3?

From what I saw on thurs I reckon if we stick park in there we could get away with a 3. Park clev and giggs. It's not ideal but I think we should give carrick a rest if we can. Also with Valencia on park could use some game time as he's likely to play in the next few weeks.

 

[ArmchairCritic]

It wasnt about shoe-horning Fletcher in. We had a severe lack of creative quality during 09/10 and so instead of focusing on our own offensive play, we set out to destroy the opposition, disrupt their play and go for counter attacks whenever we faced a quality side.

That was the best possible tactic we could employ with the squad we had at hand that season, it worked, and Fletcher played a big part of that. But he was always lacking technically and creatively, something that isnt that hard to see if you just remember the 09/10 season, the season where Fletcher was a regular starter, and the amount of 1-0 struggling victories we had against poor opposition. We seriously lacked creativity that season, (something Carrick got blamed for, because Fletcher was seen as the "defensive" midfielder who could be excused for not having defense-splitting passes), and Fletcher really added very little when we had to break down opposition parking the bus, which almost all the lower-half sides did that season.

For some to say that they would be "delighted" if Cleverley, one of the best creative talents we have had at Carrington for decades according to our own youth developers, reaches Fletcher's level is a bit weird to me, as they are totally different kinds of footballers. To me Cleverley obviously has a lot more in his locker and if he doesnt surpass Fletcher in terms of footballing ability and game influence Ill be thoroughly disappointed.

I'm talking about Fletcher's use this season, he tended to play in a deeper role removed from his usual box to box nature. Also if Cleverley plays 302 games for us and becomes a key player in our team I'll be delighted.

 

[KM]

Goals scored in 06/07 season =83
Goals scored in 07/08 season =80
Goals scored in 08/09 season =68
Goals scored in 09/10 season =86

Yeah obviously we lacked extreme "creative quality" in that season.

 

[apotheosis]

Can't be bothered to go into the Fletch argument, anyone saying that he was just a destroyer is as blinkered as Wenger who once said he was anti football.

Also, I don't understand apotheosis he highly rates Parker but is yet seemingly undermining Fletcher.

Parker does a specific and consistent job at DM. It is not a question of undermining fletcher, it is only an undermining to those who consider him capable of more. For me it is a perfectly accurate summation of what i believe he provided not only in his best season, but of those in and around it.

His best season was 08/9 was as a spoiler between the creative Scholes and the defensive Carrick. Im not saying that was all he did, but to me he was much more effective in that set up because he did not have to be the most predominant attacking or defending player, as we would usually see in a pairing.

As part of a pair his limitations are obvious, not technically good enough to be a regularly creative or attacking force, nor disciplined or composed enough to be a competent option at DM.

It's that simple for me, i have no intention to knock him, but equally i cannot understand those who claim he was/is more than i state him to be. Each to their own of course, but i have just never seen it im afraid.

Cleverley in my view has all the hustle and bustle Fletcher had, but is a much more inventive and dynamic option going forward. He is so much more comfortable in possession, receiving the ball, and distributing it. In my view he looks to have the wide variety of all round attributes, at a sufficient technical level, which are necessary to be regularly effective in either a midfield 2 or a 3.

 

[hungrywing]

...Personally, Fletcher was never really a top player for me. He was good but there's no doubt in my mind that people went overboard in their estimation of him at the time. He was one of those players you do need in your team that help give your team certain qualities to win titles but those qualities are a lot easier to find than the likes of technical brilliance.

Hmm. Read an interview with an NBA scout the other day where he was asked that question and he answered the other way. That in his profession it is much easier to spot the faster runner, the better passer, the higher jumper, the better vision, etc. than it is to find the 'chemistry' guy that can take a team from 'very good' to 'legitimate contender'.

We've all played with - or been - the star player who is prone to coasting from time to time. It's your Fletchers, Parks, O Sheas that keep those players honest by threatening to make them look bad by virtue of effort. Deep down, no big-ego player wants to get upstaged by the so-called water-carrier types.

Fletcher, limited passing? There is a reason SAF felt comfortable in employing Fletcher in a deeper lying role when we did have him around this year and it's not because he's solely a 'destroyer'. Also considering he's had this illness for quite a few years there is clearly more to his game. Anyway I don't think you'd find any United fans saying Cleverley had more upside than Fletch 2 years ago and it's testament to Cleverley's development that is no longer the case. I do think Cleverley can become a better player but you guys are very unfair on Fletch, he wasn't the flashiest player but technically he's much better than most people realise.

I think he's a very underrated crosser of the ball as well. He's not out wide enough - for good reason, tbf - to prove it consistently. He's just one of those players that's so well-rounded he doesn't appear to stand out in one area. Scholes, for example, is a wonderful counter-example. Passing, phenomenal. Exquisite. Jump right up on that bandwagon and praise it to the high heavens. Tackling, eh, well, his passing is phenomenal.

Fletch, well, he kind of does everything pretty well enough that you can't really complain. And that, boys and girls, is a boring bandwagon.

 

[apotheosis]

So SAF plays Fletcher in a role which doesn't suit his play, why? SAF wouldn't shoe-horn anyone in for the sake of it. Fletcher's positional discipline is very good too, not quite Carrick level but still very good.

SAF playing players out of position to somehow accommodate them in the team!! How ridiculous of me, what was i thinking?

Please accept my complete and unconditional apologies for such a slanderous slur!

Seriously AC, his positional play is not that good. Just look back at how the team have struggled for results whenever Carrick does not play. Many times when carrick hasn't played Fletcher has been used as the more defensive player out of whichever pairing it has been.

The performances have not been great, nor the results and mostly because Fletcher goes haring around the pitch, and clever players just draw him in and then pass the ball into the areas he has just vacated. Seen it time and again mate.It exposes the CB's way too often and that is why we ship goals when Carrick is out. That is positional discipline required right there and Fletcher just does not have it, he becomes too embroiled in his own enthusiasm.

 

[ArmchairCritic]

SAF playing players out of position to somehow accommodate them in the team!! How ridiculous of me, what was i thinking?

Please accept my complete and unconditional apologies for such a slanderous slur!

Seriously AC, his positional play is not that good. Just look back at how the team have struggled for results whenever Carrick does not play. Many times when carrick hasn't played Fletcher has been used as the more defensive player out of whichever pairing it has been.

The performances have not been great, nor the results and mostly because Fletcher goes haring around the pitch, and clever players just draw him in and then pass the ball into the areas he has just vacated. Seen it time and again mate.It exposes the CB's way too often and that is why we ship goals when Carrick is out. That is positional discipline required right there and Fletcher just does not have it, he becomes too embroiled in his own enthusiasm.

You've just totally ignored the roles the players are often told to play. Fletcher is box to box, he presses aggressively, in the times he has played a deeper role his positioning is spot on. Also I don't get why you think SAF would accomodate Fletcher into the team if he doesn't bring much to the table technically.

 

[apotheosis]

Goals scored in 06/07 season =83
Goals scored in 07/08 season =80
Goals scored in 08/09 season =68
Goals scored in 09/10 season =86

Yeah obviously we lacked extreme "creative quality" in that season.

Didn't we have OG as our second top scorer that season KM?

 

[Bross]

I'm talking about Fletcher's use this season, he tended to play in a deeper role removed from his usual box to box nature. Also if Cleverley plays 302 games for us and becomes a key player in our team I'll be delighted.

Yea he did, and as a result we had no defensive stability at all during those matches. It wasnt for a lot of matches anyway, and was probably just a result of him being the best option. I mean, what other choice did we have? Anderson as a DM? Could have used Jones I guess, but this was before he had shown that he would be an important player for us already this season. Carrick was injured or "not match fit" according to official statements.

You are delighted just if players play games for us, regardless of their actual quality during these games?

 

[Bross]

You've just totally ignored the roles the players are often told to play. Fletcher is box to box, he presses aggressively, in the times he has played a deeper role his positioning is spot on. Also I don't get why you think SAF would accomodate Fletcher into the team if he doesn't bring much to the table technically.

Because there are other roles that a player can fill, for instance harrying the opposition midfield, disrupting their build up play? You dont need much creative or technical ability to do that job, just a certain amount of positional sense and a good engine.