Tom Cleverley | 2012-14 Performances

Status
Not open for further replies.
Looked good again, he's got all the tools it's just taking that in to a more disciplined role in the normal formation we play. Hopefully he'll get a run of games because his shortfulls can only be overcome with experience. Great that he got his goal and hopefully that'll give him some confidence. I dunno if it's just me but I always think he seems to have quite an odd technique. When he shoots it's sort of like a pass/scoop and his long passes seem to be hit in an odd way, probably just a crappy stream though making it look odd.
 
Comsmit said:
Sexy football? Jesus H Christ.

And it was Rooney pulling all the strings for me.
Click to expand...

We played some nice stuff. Wasn't quite as good as Arsenal playing City of the park, away from home, in the first 30 mins on Sunday though, now that was a lesson in possession football.
 
Very happy for him to finally get his first goal for United.


Hopefully it gives him more confidence in front of goal.
 
Ash_G said:
Looked good again, he's got all the tools it's just taking that in to a more disciplined role in the normal formation we play. Hopefully he'll get a run of games because his shortfulls can only be overcome with experience. Great that he got his goal and hopefully that'll give him some confidence. I dunno if it's just me but I always think he seems to have quite an odd technique. When he shoots it's sort of like a pass/scoop and his long passes seem to be hit in an odd way, probably just a crappy stream though making it look odd.
Click to expand...

No it isn't just you. He sometimes does it when he passes the ball on the ground, it's a weird sort of slightly camp dink. It is actually quite annoying because he doesn't shape his body quite right and it affects his technique. Some of his passes he doesn't follow through correctly with the ball he just powder puffs it, perhaps trying to caress it but not quite getting it right.
 
Cutch said:
I think we're too open no matter who plays in centre midfield. I'd like to see both get a run of games together. Both have the mobility and movement off the ball, that could get us functioning as an attacking unit.
Click to expand...

Would leave us more open though. I see no problem in a 3 man midfield with 3 forwards. Our forward players are adaptable enough.
 
95 passes tonight, he puts up very good numbers stats wise when it comes to passing. I agree his instep pass/shot doesn't look quite right but it doesn't seem to have to much of an adverse effect on what he's trying to do.
 
Comsmit said:
No it isn't just you. He sometimes does it when he passes the ball on the ground, it's a weird sort of slightly camp dink. It is actually quite annoying because he doesn't shape his body quite right and it affects his technique. Some of his passes he doesn't follow through correctly with the ball he just powder puffs it, perhaps trying to caress it but not quite getting it right.
Click to expand...

lol never heard a football pass described as camp, but I know what you mean.
 
He was the best player on the pitch tonight. Only Rooney was close and it took him a while to get going. It's not like everyone else was shite either.
 
Jimy_Hills_Chin said:
We played some nice stuff. Wasn't quite as good as Arsenal playing City of the park, away from home, in the first 30 mins on Sunday though, now that was a lesson in possession football.
Click to expand...

Sadly United are simply not capable of playing like that. I thought it was just terrific. If a team can keep possession in that manner it just eases the pressure so well. That is the big issue with this current United team, we can't keep the ball long enough. The current idea is to break down a game into staccato movements or periods where we overwhelm the opposition, it's what was so successful from 2006-2009 when Ronaldo was on fire. It just doesn't work as well now that teams are focusing more clearly on maintaining possession and pressing hard to win back the ball.

The performance tonight reflects this....really good in short bursts but not maintaining this level for long enough. Newcastle were the better team second half. If we look at the season so far this pattern is reflected in most of the games played, particularly Fulham, Liverpool and Galatasaray.
 
Newcastle weren't the better team in the second half. Their only threat was Papiss Cisse, and they resorted to Stoke like game in the last ten minutes. Hernandez missed a clear header and then hit the post.
 
Ash_G said:
lol never heard a football pass described as camp, but I know what you mean.
Click to expand...

Heh! I was searching for the word in my head and it just wasn't there. It's like he does a little skip, almost like he doesn't want to kick it too hard.
 
Newcastle were playing a Stoke like game all night. All they did was play to win freekicks and then hoof them up the pitch. We schooled them all night in the middle of the pitch. They never knew whether to commit to the midfielders/Rooney running into space, or double up on Welbeck and Hernandez.

That's exactly the sort of football I wish we'd line up to play with in proper games. There's absolutely no reason why we're not good enough to do it. Plus we've got so many players who are adaptable to different positions in that system, it'd be impossible for any team to properly prepare to play us...you could play Rooney further back or up top. Kagawa in the midfield three or wide. Welbeck pretty much anywhere...or go with two out and out wingers. It'd be a fecking nightmare to try and plan how to deal with.
 
KM said:
Newcastle weren't the better team in the second half. Their only threat was Papiss Cisse, and they resorted to Stoke like game in the last ten minutes. Hernandez missed a clear header and then hit the post.
Click to expand...

The first ten minutes of the second half were fairly even in terms of possession, but the last 25 minutes Newcastle had more of the ball and looked the more likely to score.

It really doesn't matter. It isn't the only example I provided in terms of what I was suggesting in the post.
 
noodlehair said:
Newcastle were playing a Stoke like game all night. All they did was play to win freekicks and then hoof them up the pitch. We schooled them all night in the middle of the pitch. They never knew whether to commit to the midfielders/Rooney running into space, or double up on Welbeck and Hernandez.

That's exactly the sort of football I wish we'd line up to play with in proper games. There's absolutely no reason why we're not good enough to do it. Plus we've got so many players who are adaptable to different positions in that system, it'd be impossible for any team to properly prepare to play us...you could play Rooney further back or up top. Kagawa in the midfield three or wide. Welbeck pretty much anywhere...or go with two out and out wingers. It'd be a fecking nightmare to try and plan how to deal with.
Click to expand...

And so they should. Their midfield two were a clearly unfit Tiote and Dan Gosling, with an inexperienced Harris Vukcic in front. Anderson, Cleverley and Fletcher clearly have more experience and are clearly more talented.

Applying that domination against a top drawer midfield is a wholly different examination.
 
yep, their plan on how to score an equaliser wasn't too complex: "hoof it up to Cisse"
 
Comsmit said:
The first ten minutes of the second half were fairly even in terms of possession, but the last 25 minutes Newcastle had more of the ball and looked the more likely to score.

It really doesn't matter. It isn't the only example I provided in terms of what I was suggesting in the post.
Click to expand...

Are you just making things up? We had 61% possession over the 90 minutes, so if they had more of the ball for the last 25mins we must have completely dominated possession before then, which would be odd, considering we can't keep possession. I'd like you to back this up with facts.
 
Comsmit said:
No it isn't just you. He sometimes does it when he passes the ball on the ground, it's a weird sort of slightly camp dink. It is actually quite annoying because he doesn't shape his body quite right and it affects his technique. Some of his passes he doesn't follow through correctly with the ball he just powder puffs it, perhaps trying to caress it but not quite getting it right.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what you mean. He played a simple ball along the halfway line at one stage.
Just needed a side foot but he had weird technique which made it seem like it was so much more.
 
It's been playing on my mind a little bit because I've always scored goals when I've gone out on loan but I've not been doing it for my club and country

The gaffer gave me a bit [of stick] at half-time for missing the chance in the first half so it was nice to stroke that one in. Hopefully that sets me off on a run now--Tom Cleverley
Click to expand...

Monkey.Off.Back.

All he needed was a good talking to from Sir Alex. Man management at its best. :lol:
 
Played really well last night! Once again confirmed my theory that he is not a proper central midfielder, but more of a CAM in a similar vein to Kagawa because he brings so much in the final third. Once he has no defensive responsibilities, Cleverly is always quality.
 
Baby Faced Assassin said:
Any Times subscriber share this Cleverley interview please?
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/premierleague/article3551752.ece
Click to expand...

Here:

Tom Cleverley: ‘You really have to punish teams’

One of the traits that best defines a Manchester United player — or, more specifically, a Sir Alex Ferguson player — is their ability to respond to adversity.

When Tom Cleverley missed a gilt-edged chance that he really should have buried against Newcastle United in the Capital One Cup on Wednesday evening, his head could have dropped. Instead, he picked himself up and, with the “rollicking” Ferguson had given him at half-time doubtless still ringing in his ears, made no mistake when opportunity knocked for thirteen minutes into the second half. His first competitive goal for United ultimately won his team the game.

Aside from his technical excellence and comfort on the ball, it is this resilience and conviction that has defined Cleverley’s short career so far. It has been strikingly evident not only for his club — for whom he has bounced back strongly after a foot injury that sidelined him for 3½ agonising months last season — but also for England.

Denied an international debut against Netherlands in August last year after the friendly match was postponed due to the London riots, he was then forced to pull out of the squad for the rearranged fixture six months later because of injury. There was further disappointment when he failed to make Roy Hodgson’s 23-man squad for the European Championships, even if it was tempered somewhat by his involvement for Great Britain at the Olympics.

But he never lost heart and, over the course of the past six weeks, the midfielder has endeared himself to Hodgson with three encouraging performances in an England shirt. It is why it would be perilous to bet against Cleverley winning his latest, and biggest, battle. Having started United’s first three games, he was an unused substitute in the subsequent three before Wednesday brought a welcome return to action.

The irony is that the obstacle in his way — Paul Scholes — is also his greatest source of inspiration.

“Yes, probably,” Cleverley said when asked if he had learnt more from watching Scholes play than anyone else. “I’d actually say more from training with him than watching games, though. The step up from reserve team to first-team football is huge, everything is that second ahead and there’s no better example of that than Scholesy.

“You think you’ve made a pass that will get to its target and he intercepts it and it just makes you think that next time I’ll have to disguise that pass.”

At 37, Scholes is fourteen years Cleverley’s senior. Had someone told Ferguson five years ago that Scholes would still be a mainstay in his midfield, the manager would probably have scoffed. But when asked if it was incumbent on the likes of himself and Anderson to put more pressure on their veteran team-mate, Cleverley’s response about the size of the task he faces was illuminating.

“Even now, when you see him in training, I’d still say Paul Scholes is the best midfielder in the world, so to try to knock the best midfielder in the world out of the team is a big challenge.

“I think he has that ability to watch games and know what it needs. Sometimes it is just about a player who has played 700 games coming on with a cool head in the heat of the battle to play some important passes and win us the match.”

There was another answer that marked Cleverley out as a United player, a Ferguson player. He was, he said, not in a rush to make up for lost time personally after last season’s injury troubles but “lost trophies”. The memory of United relinquishing the Barclays Premier League title on goal difference in the final seconds of the final day to Manchester City still jars.

It would have been very different had they not thrown away a two-goal advantage in the final seven minutes against Everton in April to draw 4-4 and Cleverley is firmly of the belief that the team must rediscover their ruthlessness to see off opponents.

“This season we will learn that games we are winning two and three nil, we need to go and win five or six nil,” he said. “It is never nice losing the title on the last day but to [lose it on] goal difference makes it worse.

“It does not take the manager to tell us that we let sides back into games. That is one thing as a young player I have learned — that if you are winning by two or three goals then you have really got to punish these teams because that can count come the end.”

United have yet to fully hit their stride this season, but having won their past six games in all competitions, Cleverley senses it will not be long before they click into top gear, especially with Wayne Rooney back from injury and in contention to partner Robin van Persie in attack against Tottenham Hotspur at Old Trafford tomorrow.

“Hopefully we can get to our highest level in the next few games, maintain that, and if we do then we have got it in us to go on a really good run,” Cleverley said. “We’re lucky as a club to have the strikeforce we do. I just think it’s nice as a midfielder to know that if you play that through ball the chances that you create are going to get finished.”

Cleverley has goals in him, too, even if a couple of missed chances against Ukraine for England have perpetuated a myth that his finishing is a weakness in his game.

Since switching from full-back to midfield at the age of 18, he has chipped in with his fair share of goals, notably scoring thirteen in 35 appearances while on loan at Watford. Scoring regularly for United is, of course, a much greater demand, but having claimed that all important first, Cleverley is confident more will follow. Conviction, after all, is not something he is short of.
Click to expand...
 
Actually, Cleverley was only put into the full back position for a season as a way to improve his defense, and give him some perspective to see the game from another position. He was never meant to be a full back.

Pretty good article, though, thanks for posting it!
 
Do you subscribe to The Times, Damien? Or is this another of your wizard tricks.
 
Damien1990 said:
Here:
Click to expand...

Nice interview.

Andrew~ said:
Played really well last night! Once again confirmed my theory that he is not a proper central midfielder, but more of a CAM in a similar vein to Kagawa because he brings so much in the final third. Once he has no defensive responsibilities, Cleverly is always quality.
Click to expand...

Cleverley is a straightforward mid 1990s style centre midfielder like Demetrio Albertini or Dino Baggio, not an attacking midfielder or a defensive midfielder.

Cleverley is at his best when he's at the heart of the game and doesn't thrive when the play is behind him. He has the intelligence to fulfil various roles as his various coaches have mentioned but he's at his best when he can get on the ball as much as possible and link up with other players readily and rapidly.

Cleverley's game doesn't depend on having no defensive duties but on having other players to bounce off. Cleverley's gift is his decision making, composure and ability to keep it simple. Playing to his strengths depends on being in close proximity to other players. When his midfield partners are mobile and the man in front be it Rooney or Shinji are coming deep he can play triangles constantly to create space but if its just him working in front of someone it doesn't matter how little he has to do defensively he'll become ineffective.
 
#07 said:
Cleverley is a straightforward mid 1990s style centre midfielder like Demetrio Albertini or Dino Baggio, not an attacking midfielder or a defensive midfielder.

Cleverley is at his best when he's at the heart of the game and doesn't thrive when the play is behind him. He has the intelligence to fulfil various roles as his various coaches have mentioned but he's at his best when he can get on the ball as much as possible and link up with other players readily and rapidly.

Cleverley's game doesn't depend on having no defensive duties but on having other players to bounce off. Cleverley's gift is his decision making, composure and ability to keep it simple. Playing to his strengths depends on being in close proximity to other players. When his midfield partners are mobile and the man in front be it Rooney or Shinji are coming deep he can play triangles constantly to create space but if its just him working in front of someone it doesn't matter how little he has to do defensively he'll become ineffective.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, this 2012, and football tactics have changed dramatically. I know what Cleverly's strengths are ( and there are a lot of them), but it's also very important to recognise what his weaknesses are. The strange thing with Cleverly is, all his strengths are becoming weaknesses because everyone wants him to become the new Paul Scholes, a player who he really doesn't play anything like.

When you put Cleverly in as one of the two deeper midfielders, his desire to make runs into the box, play progressive one-touch football becomes a problem because of the massive spaces he inevitably leaves behind him. Hence why it's well know how exposed our midfield becomes when he's there. Use him as an attacking midfielder though, you unleash all his abilities. His vision, decision making, close control, work ethic; his desire to press for the ball in the final third... all of that becomes more pronounced.
 
Andrew~ said:
With all due respect, this 2012, and football tactics have changed dramatically. I know what Cleverly's strengths are ( and there are a lot of them), but it's also very important to recognise what his weaknesses are. The strange thing with Cleverly is, all his strengths are becoming weaknesses because everyone wants him to become the new Paul Scholes, a player who he really doesn't play anything like.

When you put Cleverly in as one of the two deeper midfielders, his desire to make runs into the box, play progressive one-touch football becomes a problem because of the massive spaces he inevitably leaves behind him. Hence why it's well know how exposed our midfield becomes when he's there. Use him as an attacking midfielder though, you unleash all his abilities. His vision, decision making, close control, work ethic; his desire to press for the ball in the final third... all of that becomes more pronounced.
Click to expand...

By the same token I could have said Ander Herrera, Thiago Alcantara, Luca Modric, Joao Moutinho or any other number of players from the current era. None of whom play in the Kagawa, Silva, Hazard role and none of whom are obsolete with today's tactics. The problem is whenever someone mentions present day players it leads to a discussion on comparisons and ignores you are talking about Clev's style of play not his skill and ability.

Cleverley is not an attacking midfielder. He's an orthodox centre midfielder who does a bit of defending and a bit of attacking. If you make it his job to do strictly one or the other he becomes a lesser player. He's fine in the heart of midfield where he can pick up the possssion and go forward with it. Playing him where you seem to be suggesting not only doesnt suit him it also minimises one of his key weapons which is interchanging with the man in the hole. Cleverley's very good at the give and go and running beyond the man in the hole. To do that effectively as he did in the build up to Nani's 1st in the 2011 Shield match you need to start deeper.
 
A few nice shots from the game against Newcastle:

152802292-tom-cleverley-of-manchester-united-scores-gettyimages.jpg

152802257-tom-cleverley-of-manchester-united-gettyimages.jpg

152802228-tom-cleverley-of-manchester-united-gettyimages.jpg


more: http://www.gettyimages.com/Search/Search.aspx?EventId=152583266&EditorialProduct=Man Utd
 
Andrew~ said:
With all due respect, this 2012, and football tactics have changed dramatically. I know what Cleverly's strengths are ( and there are a lot of them), but it's also very important to recognise what his weaknesses are. The strange thing with Cleverly is, all his strengths are becoming weaknesses because everyone wants him to become the new Paul Scholes, a player who he really doesn't play anything like.

When you put Cleverly in as one of the two deeper midfielders, his desire to make runs into the box, play progressive one-touch football becomes a problem because of the massive spaces he inevitably leaves behind him. Hence why it's well know how exposed our midfield becomes when he's there. Use him as an attacking midfielder though, you unleash all his abilities. His vision, decision making, close control, work ethic; his desire to press for the ball in the final third... all of that becomes more pronounced.
Click to expand...

Few teams play with 2 sitting midfielders who dont get involved in play like Cleverley does. You make it sound like he is in fact Scholes bombing into the box. He isnt. And being exposed from in behind the midfield isnt just something you can dump on Cleverley. It was when Anderson was playing next to him, an even more attacking player and a player with a lot less positional awareness.

Carrick is our main central midfielder because of Fletcher's troubles. He specialises in filling in behind a midfielder who likes to get involved a bit further up the pitch which is perfect for Cleverley.
 
Ekeke said:
Few teams play with 2 sitting midfielders who dont get involved in play like Cleverley does. You make it sound like he is in fact Scholes bombing into the box. He isnt. And being exposed from in behind the midfield isnt just something you can dump on Cleverley. It was when Anderson was playing next to him, an even more attacking player and a player with a lot less positional awareness.

Carrick is our main central midfielder because of Fletcher's troubles. He specialises in filling in behind a midfielder who likes to get involved a bit further up the pitch which is perfect for Cleverley.
Click to expand...

In 'theory', I agree. However, for whatever reason (and I think that results reflect this) Carrick/Anderson or Anderson/Cleverley seems to work better. Maybe if Fletcher gets back to his best the dynamic changes but for now at least - Carrick and Cleverley don't seem to be operating on the same wavelength when they play together.

I'm a huge, huge fan of Cleverley and what he can bring to the squad, both positionally and as a threat up field. I just feel that when paired up with Carrick in a midfield two - for whatever reason, it hasn't seemed to work. But, for what it's worth; I wouldn't pair Carrick and Scholes together at this point either, without additional protection in the midfield.

I think that our Tom, like any player, has weaknesses (ala Scholes). But he needs someone to compliment that. IMO, we aren't going to find that until, like Scholes, Cleverley learns how to dictate tempo. He has all the tools as a footballer but I think he lacks the confidence to be 'the guy' - who pulls the strings. If he could possibly figure this out, he wouldn't even have to be able to pull off the 50 metre passes to the wing. Just control the tempo of the game. Again, he has the tools and talent to do that.

**I think that the Cleverley/Anderson combo works so well at times is that they are both constantly looking for the quick/killer pass rather than (like Scholes) knowing when to pull it back and slow it down at times. This comes with experience and surely training with the likes of Paul Scholes, it will rub off on both of them at some point, I hope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.