Feel free to name 5 who aren't over 30 years old and are top quality.Mozza said:
Utd Sign Carrick
- Thread starter ehsanul
- Start date
YesFortitude said:
Then you're delusional. If you truly believe that, then you don't watch the player.Mozza said:
Fortitude said:
Are they anymore rare these days than 10-20 years ago?
Basically, what you have done is to name some of the greatest midfielders of the last couple of decades. Not a very good way to explain it.
What a team needs is two midfielders who complement eachother, just like a team needs two centrehalves who complement eachother and two strikers who complement eachother.
IMO, the best thing would be to have two midfielders who could attack and defend - which, to be frank, is the job of a midfielder; support the defense and support the attack.
Mozza said:
He can't tackle.... He is not a ball winner. With Carrick and Scholes in the midfield we will have a great attack and no defense. The back four will be under a lot of pressure.
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Exactly. This is why i'd like to see us add one more DEFENSIVE midfielder to the ranks. Signing Carrick is good, but he adds to what we already have in the shape of Giggs, Scholes, Fletch etc, but doesn't make up for what we don't have in terms of a Makalele, not even one.
Fortitude said:
What's Carrick missing compared to each and every one of those?
433tom said:
He doesn't have to be, if he is good at positioning himself and intercepts the ball.
Alan Hansen was one of the greatest defenders ever to have played in the English league. Didn't really tackle.
Fortitude said:
Gerrard, Lampard, Essien, Xavi, Maniche
As for the good but not proven - Reo-Coker, Nolan, Cahill, Jenas
But if I was to try and mention 'midfielders' of the great variety in the modern game you would have maybe 3or4, because midfield is now a specialised position. Player's like Makelele didn't exist 20yrs ago - someone who just sits in front of the defence and does nothing else. A 'DM' from 20yrs ago would be a Tigana or Falcao or along that line - they are bloody good footballers. Makelele is the best in the world at what he does, imo, but he is not a good technical footballer in the same breath as the likes of the ones I mentioned.CnutOfAllCnuts said:
We're the last team to use 2 'midfielders' and even we changed it to a 4-5-1 and had Keane sit.
kanchelskis14 said:
Thank god for that. For a start, I think Makelele is massively overrated as a footballer. Does his job effeciently, but plays a very limited role. I don't want United to play with one midfielder who's job is limited to defensive duties. Waste of a midfielder in my book.
kanchelskis14 said:
Nonesense, he prefers to play infront of his defence, we are not spending 15 million to buy someone that can't play with Scholes, or Giggs or any other midfielder.
You have to know that is a bunch of piss poor examples, surely? This just shows that the all-round midfielder is a dying breed. Gerrard and Essien are the only two of the 5 you listed that are 'all-round' Lampard can't defend to save his life. Maniche is mediocre and Xavi although class does not play 'box-to-box' as he has a DM behind him to do that job.Mozza said:
If that's the best you can come up with, my point is proven.
Fortitude said:
And I hope United won't go down that route.
Mozza said:
If you watch United over the last season or so, Scholes always seems to be picking the ball up from his defence and spraying passes around in a way Carrick usually does himself. He hardly gets into the box anymore, and plays very deep in a Pirlo type of way. I wouldn't mind seeing Hargreaves come on the cheap, or even Duscher just to give us the option, if not to start games regularly.
Aggression, bite, the ability to actually go to ground. Carrick is competent defensively, nothing more. Asking him to do that job is also a waste of his talents, which lay in spraying the ball all over the place like all other deep-lying playmakers do.CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Lampard can run any one down, Maniche is superb at getting up in the box and getting back to defend.
Xavi doesn't count becuase he's got a DM behind him? You've just argued that every team has a Dm these days, that means non of them count.
Xavi doesn't count becuase he's got a DM behind him? You've just argued that every team has a Dm these days, that means non of them count.
In modern football, there may not be a choice. Also a top quality DM allows the attackers to abandon defensive duty and attack for most of the 90. The box-to-box midfielder of the past is almost a finished era, we either adapt or create our own.CnutOfAllCnuts said:
I think Carrick is a good buy for United,he's an intelligent player,good vision, good passer. He never struck me though as a great defensive player,he is not the best tackler and lacks a bit of a physical approach that true holding midfielder possesses.
I think he'd be better suited to play a third central midfielder position(Tiago role in Chelsea 2004/05) if United were to play three in the midfield, he can help out defensively and is creative enough to support the attack.
If Fergie gets someone like Mascherano to play the DM with Scholes and Carrick as the other two central midfielders, your middle of the pitch problems could be solved.
I think he'd be better suited to play a third central midfielder position(Tiago role in Chelsea 2004/05) if United were to play three in the midfield, he can help out defensively and is creative enough to support the attack.
If Fergie gets someone like Mascherano to play the DM with Scholes and Carrick as the other two central midfielders, your middle of the pitch problems could be solved.
Mozza said:
Yea, and look what happened to Spurs when they played Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, and Man Utd. (Heck, Bolton ate them up too).
If you watched our last game against Spurs, our midfield ran all over Carrick. Spurs did ok in the attack, but there was no defensive presence in the midfield. Thats exactly the situation we will be in playing a 4-4-2 with Carrick and Scholes in the middle.
not a bad player, not worth 17million though.
we need a midfielder though, anyone will do at the minute
we need a midfielder though, anyone will do at the minute
That's a poor argument. You should consider the players you listed before presenting it. Beings as they all have a DM behind them. I think we're the only top class side who doesn't use one actually. Hence, box-to-box midfielders are dying out.Mozza said:
kanchelskis14 said:
The reason Scholes dropped back was becuase the other midfielder couldn't pass, with Carrick there picking it off the back 4 theres no longer that need, he can stay forward
Fortitude said:
Those players you listed, are all very different players, for a start. The one he is most similar to, out of those, is Hamann, but he is a much better passer of the ball.
There is nothing wrong with his bite, and he gets stuck in when he needs to.
Fortitude said:
Rubbish
why is everyone so negative?? Hes a bloody good signing IF confirmed.
Hes a very good passer and a much better tackler that some give him credit for, besides his positioning is so good that he doesnt have to run around like a loon tackling all over the pitch.
Im happy with this signing, it'll mean we keep ball a lot better
Hes a very good passer and a much better tackler that some give him credit for, besides his positioning is so good that he doesnt have to run around like a loon tackling all over the pitch.
Im happy with this signing, it'll mean we keep ball a lot better
Fortitude said:
The normal state of things is for a team to play one who is defensive with an allrounder (box to box if you must), they are not dying out, they are more important then ever.
feck Mascherano, Buy Hargreaves and i hope that if we do that i find the time to go through all the posts on here referencing hargreaves being shite, i've probably said it, and i am happy to eat my own words.
More than eat, i will have them kicked down my throat for 120 minutes by the man himself.
The lad is class, him and Carrick would be ace.
More than eat, i will have them kicked down my throat for 120 minutes by the man himself.
The lad is class, him and Carrick would be ace.
Fortitude said:
There is not a manager in world football who wants there wingers to abandon their defensive duties
Carrick plays like Alonso and Pirlo. He plays nothing like a DM because isn't one and he could not hold the forte like one either. He gets stuck as much as any other good deep-lying playmaker does. After all, they still get through a lot of defensive work in a game, but he is not and nor should he ever be the last line of defence between our midfield and the backline.CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Are you suggesting a Scholes-Carrick 4-4-2 could work?
Fortitude said:
Fecking 'ell, I give up. I've not got the energy to argue with fantasy football fans today...
Fortitude said:
why not? various combinations of smith, fletcher, giggs and oshea worked last season
Fortitude said:
Of course it COULD work, seeing as they are both two handy midfielders.
Whether it will work, remains to be seen.
you dont get it GB, he doesnt agree, so therefore we are WRONG!
Carrick is very skillful at receiving the ball from defence and quickly moving it foward with accurate and often incisive passing. In a 4-4-2 formation his defensive role will be less about blood and guts tackling and more about closing space. Tackles in front of a defence often invite dangerous freekicks. Better to force play wide by intelligent positioning and harassing. Carrick and Scoles in the middle with Ronaldo/Park/Giggs wide could be highly effective. Rio, Vidic and Wes are skilled and quick enough not to need a Makelele type positioned in front of them. When Roy adopted this role it never really suited our style.
Carrick may be expensive, but then there are many around available and able. If his signing helps keep us compete with Chelsea on results, then it will be money very well spent.
Carrick may be expensive, but then there are many around available and able. If his signing helps keep us compete with Chelsea on results, then it will be money very well spent.
Fortitude said:
Yes.
Fortitude said:
Play behind Carrick? He plays that deep you'll be needing a centerback
I don't know what game it is you're watching. You're completely wrong. No point going on and on about this. 8yrs ago there were some of the very best 'box-to-box' midfielders around, because teams played that way. The position is almost eradicated now as your list of 5 'box-to'box' players would show. 5yrs ago that list would have read Keane, Vieira, Redondo, Effenberg and Davids...now look at that shite list of players you put up and tell me the position is not dying out. Only Gerrard comes close to any of them.Mozza said:
Mozza said:
Most managers want their wingers to attack. And not have to cover for ineffienciencies in the middle of the pitch.Mozza said: