Yoann Gourcuff

I didn't want to start a new thread but I heard that we are looking at one of Gourcuff's teammates. He play's defense. Don't know what position or the player.

maybe someone with a better knowledge of the French game could help?
 
Probably Benoît Trémoulinas their left back or maybe someone even younger who hasn't made in to their XI yet.
 
Mojo_pin said:
I didn't want to start a new thread but I heard that we are looking at one of Gourcuff's teammates. He play's defense. Don't know what position or the player.

maybe someone with a better knowledge of the French game could help?
Click to expand...

They play with :

Chalmé - Ciani - Planus - Trémoulinas
 
Gourcuff by far. He's exactly the type of player we need. He's not got the versatility of Milner, but he's a specialist. They'd probably have equal prices, but Gourcuff is a much better footballer
 
Gourcuff would be more expensive but I would much rather have him
 
Alex said:
Gourcuff would be more expensive but I would much rather have him
Click to expand...

Milner would cost about £20 million, with him being English and all. But with Gourcuff I can't see Bordeaux demanding much more than that. He only cost them £10 million, and if he stays another year the potential price would be less as he'd only have 2 years left on his contract.
 
Sneijder would be my pick in an ideal world. Gourcuff seems to be a more realistic target, and not far off in quality from what I've seen.
 
I must confess to having only seen Gourcuff on roughly ten occasions (possibly more), so I only have a very general opinion of him. For some that would be enough to either advise him to get a new job, or to suggest that he will almost certainly become the greatest player of all time, but I just don't believe that it's enough to even begin to scratch the surface, particularly in terms of form over consecutive games, or how they handle themselves on the biggest stage, etc. And there's no doubt that I have missed various aspects of his game that would be informative.

Having taken a general view, I can't deny that, purely in terms of technical ability — his ability to manipulate the ball at his feet; his grace when in possession, etc — there may only be one or two other players in the world that are more gifted with the ball at their feet. He's one of those players who you instantly recognize as having a very rare talent, indeed. Most players simply don't look that naturally wedded to a football, as if they were born with such a mastery of the art. In many respects, it is actually unnatural, because it's hard to understand how someone can become so gifted and graceful. But that obviously says nothing about whether he is capable of translating that undoubted ability in to regular performances on the pitch that are befitting of a player with such talent.

Whether we like the fact, or not, no matter how much ability a player has, they can only be an object of general admiration unless they are able to fully express themselves in the maximum number of situations and in the most difficult circumstances. It can sometimes seem unfair that a player with so much ability can't seem to translate it in to performances on the pitch, and we might be tempted to blame the game, itself, rather than their own inability to cope with its demands. But it should be obvious that those who are not capable of that necessarily lose some of the advantage that their superior ability offers in the first place. And that is why it is entirely possible — even preferable in certain circumstances — to believe that less talented players are likely to make more efficient use of their talent, and thus, to be a more useful member of your team.

So, I'd like to ask those who have seen a lot more of Gourcuff than I have where he can realistically operate on the field? I ask because I have become a obsessed with the idea that we could solve several issues with the current team by finding a player who can operate both in a central attacking midfield role in, say, a 4-2-3-1 (as a midfielder behind the striker, as has been the case with both Park and Giggs, this season), or even perhaps a 4-4-1-1 (same thing in many ways), as well as part of a central midfield three, meaning that they would need to be able to operate from a little deeper, although it need not be a dramatically different role?

Looking at the issue from the perspective of the current team and the way in which we have set up over the course of the last few seasons, it would appear to me that what we lack are not specialists in the midfield, but players who can adapt to more than one subtly different position, which obvious includes the tactical shape of the team and their role in it. It would appear to be nonsensical to look for a player (or players) that can only operate in a very specific role in midfield, given the demands of the modern game.

That's why I can only really think of three players that could potentially fulfill that role: Milner would be one of them. Modric would be another. And then Gourcuff would potentially be the third. They're all subtly different players, of course, and there's no doubt that if we bought any one of them, not only would they be required to adapt to us, but we would also be required to adapt to the way in which they operate, particularly if the way in which we originally attempt to use them doesn't appear to work as well as we had hoped.

So, while I have never been totally convinced by someone like Milner, for example — although I have to admit to being encouraged by both his progress and adaptability over the last twelve months or more — I can certainly see the logic in our being linked with him, given the need that has been identified (and suspecting that Sir Alex may be thinking along similar lines). We know, for example, that both Milner and Modric can operate in a two or three man central midfield, as well as slightly further forward in a predominantly central attacking midfield role in a 4-2-3-1 (and in both wide positions, if necessary, which is tactically advantageous in certain games). We also know that while both are talented footballers, though somewhat different, as well, they are also more than capable of performing a more disciplined and tactical role for the team.

In an ideal world, we would all buy the absolutely most talented players that we could find, but we must also admit that our admiration for players is often not terribly related to the way in which they would likely operate in Manchester United's team structure, over the course of an entire season. Admiration generally doesn't work like that. We fall in love with players, not for those reasons, but because they inspire something in us. And that usually has little to do with whether they would be the perfect fit for our team, and more to do with our emotional reaction to their ability with the ball at their feet. The two are only sometimes related, though.
 
Poetic post Joga.
Gourcuff's best position (at least where he has produced his best matches) is the one you wondered about.He loves to orchestrate things, make late runs in the box for shots and headers.In terms of what you describe in your great post, he is the missing link but sometimes like you said there is no relation between how we perceive a player to perform in our team and how he'll eventually do it.
There is a big question mark regarding his capacity to raise his game for the big occasions (where he would be needed the most) because it was his forte last season and his main problem in this one.In almost every important match, he disappeared.
If he was to be bought, it will only for a big fee (more 20m£ easily) and I'm wondering if United can afford to buy him
 
Joga_Bonito said:
I must confess to having only seen Gourcuff on roughly ten occasions (possibly more), so I only have a very general opinion of him. For some that would be enough to either advise him to get a new job, or to suggest that he will almost certainly become the greatest player of all time, but I just don't believe that it's enough to even begin to scratch the surface, particularly in terms of form over consecutive games, or how they handle themselves on the biggest stage, etc. And there's no doubt that I have missed various aspects of his game that would be informative.

Having taken a general view, I can't deny that, purely in terms of technical ability — his ability to manipulate the ball at his feet; his grace when in possession, etc — there may only be one or two other players in the world that are more gifted with the ball at their feet. He's one of those players who you instantly recognize as having a very rare talent, indeed. Most players simply don't look that naturally wedded to a football, as if they were born with such a mastery of the art. In many respects, it is actually unnatural, because it's hard to understand how someone can become so gifted and graceful. But that obviously says nothing about whether he is capable of translating that undoubted ability in to regular performances on the pitch that are befitting of a player with such talent.

Whether we like the fact, or not, no matter how much ability a player has, they can only be an object of general admiration unless they are able to fully express themselves in the maximum number of situations and in the most difficult circumstances. It can sometimes seem unfair that a player with so much ability can't seem to translate it in to performances on the pitch, and we might be tempted to blame the game, itself, rather than their own inability to cope with its demands. But it should be obvious that those who are not capable of that necessarily lose some of the advantage that their superior ability offers in the first place. And that is why it is entirely possible — even preferable in certain circumstances — to believe that less talented players are likely to make more efficient use of their talent, and thus, to be a more useful member of your team.

So, I'd like to ask those who have seen a lot more of Gourcuff than I have where he can realistically operate on the field? I ask because I have become a obsessed with the idea that we could solve several issues with the current team by finding a player who can operate both in a central attacking midfield role in, say, a 4-2-3-1 (as a midfielder behind the striker, as has been the case with both Park and Giggs, this season), or even perhaps a 4-4-1-1 (same thing in many ways), as well as part of a central midfield three, meaning that they would need to be able to operate from a little deeper, although it need not be a dramatically different role?

Looking at the issue from the perspective of the current team and the way in which we have set up over the course of the last few seasons, it would appear to me that what we lack are not specialists in the midfield, but players who can adapt to more than one subtly different position, which obvious includes the tactical shape of the team and their role in it. It would appear to be nonsensical to look for a player (or players) that can only operate in a very specific role in midfield, given the demands of the modern game.

That's why I can only really think of three players that could potentially fulfill that role: Milner would be one of them. Modric would be another. And then Gourcuff would potentially be the third. They're all subtly different players, of course, and there's no doubt that if we bought any one of them, not only would they be required to adapt to us, but we would also be required to adapt to the way in which they operate, particularly if the way in which we originally attempt to use them doesn't appear to work as well as we had hoped.

So, while I have never been totally convinced by someone like Milner, for example — although I have to admit to being encouraged by both his progress and adaptability over the last twelve months or more — I can certainly see the logic in our being linked with him, given the need that has been identified (and suspecting that Sir Alex may be thinking along similar lines). We know, for example, that both Milner and Modric can operate in a two or three man central midfield, as well as slightly further forward in a predominantly central attacking midfield role in a 4-2-3-1 (and in both wide positions, if necessary, which is tactically advantageous in certain games). We also know that while both are talented footballers, though somewhat different, as well, they are also more than capable of performing a more disciplined and tactical role for the team.

In an ideal world, we would all buy the absolutely most talented players that we could find, but we must also admit that our admiration for players is often not terribly related to the way in which they would likely operate in Manchester United's team structure, over the course of an entire season. Admiration generally doesn't work like that. We fall in love with players, not for those reasons, but because they inspire something in us. And that usually has little to do with whether they would be the perfect fit for our team, and more to do with our emotional reaction to their ability with the ball at their feet. The two are only sometimes related, though.
Click to expand...
Great post. I hope Gourcuff will be the man we pick and succeed with.
 
Joga_Bonito said:
I must confess to having only seen Gourcuff on roughly ten occasions (possibly more), so I only have a very general opinion of him. For some that would be enough to either advise him to get a new job, or to suggest that he will almost certainly become the greatest player of all time, but I just don't believe that it's enough to even begin to scratch the surface, particularly in terms of form over consecutive games, or how they handle themselves on the biggest stage, etc. And there's no doubt that I have missed various aspects of his game that would be informative.

Having taken a general view, I can't deny that, purely in terms of technical ability — his ability to manipulate the ball at his feet; his grace when in possession, etc — there may only be one or two other players in the world that are more gifted with the ball at their feet. He's one of those players who you instantly recognize as having a very rare talent, indeed. Most players simply don't look that naturally wedded to a football, as if they were born with such a mastery of the art. In many respects, it is actually unnatural, because it's hard to understand how someone can become so gifted and graceful. But that obviously says nothing about whether he is capable of translating that undoubted ability in to regular performances on the pitch that are befitting of a player with such talent.

Whether we like the fact, or not, no matter how much ability a player has, they can only be an object of general admiration unless they are able to fully express themselves in the maximum number of situations and in the most difficult circumstances. It can sometimes seem unfair that a player with so much ability can't seem to translate it in to performances on the pitch, and we might be tempted to blame the game, itself, rather than their own inability to cope with its demands. But it should be obvious that those who are not capable of that necessarily lose some of the advantage that their superior ability offers in the first place. And that is why it is entirely possible — even preferable in certain circumstances — to believe that less talented players are likely to make more efficient use of their talent, and thus, to be a more useful member of your team.

So, I'd like to ask those who have seen a lot more of Gourcuff than I have where he can realistically operate on the field? I ask because I have become a obsessed with the idea that we could solve several issues with the current team by finding a player who can operate both in a central attacking midfield role in, say, a 4-2-3-1 (as a midfielder behind the striker, as has been the case with both Park and Giggs, this season), or even perhaps a 4-4-1-1 (same thing in many ways), as well as part of a central midfield three, meaning that they would need to be able to operate from a little deeper, although it need not be a dramatically different role?

Looking at the issue from the perspective of the current team and the way in which we have set up over the course of the last few seasons, it would appear to me that what we lack are not specialists in the midfield, but players who can adapt to more than one subtly different position, which obvious includes the tactical shape of the team and their role in it. It would appear to be nonsensical to look for a player (or players) that can only operate in a very specific role in midfield, given the demands of the modern game.

That's why I can only really think of three players that could potentially fulfill that role: Milner would be one of them. Modric would be another. And then Gourcuff would potentially be the third. They're all subtly different players, of course, and there's no doubt that if we bought any one of them, not only would they be required to adapt to us, but we would also be required to adapt to the way in which they operate, particularly if the way in which we originally attempt to use them doesn't appear to work as well as we had hoped.

So, while I have never been totally convinced by someone like Milner, for example — although I have to admit to being encouraged by both his progress and adaptability over the last twelve months or more — I can certainly see the logic in our being linked with him, given the need that has been identified (and suspecting that Sir Alex may be thinking along similar lines). We know, for example, that both Milner and Modric can operate in a two or three man central midfield, as well as slightly further forward in a predominantly central attacking midfield role in a 4-2-3-1 (and in both wide positions, if necessary, which is tactically advantageous in certain games). We also know that while both are talented footballers, though somewhat different, as well, they are also more than capable of performing a more disciplined and tactical role for the team.

In an ideal world, we would all buy the absolutely most talented players that we could find, but we must also admit that our admiration for players is often not terribly related to the way in which they would likely operate in Manchester United's team structure, over the course of an entire season. Admiration generally doesn't work like that. We fall in love with players, not for those reasons, but because they inspire something in us. And that usually has little to do with whether they would be the perfect fit for our team, and more to do with our emotional reaction to their ability with the ball at their feet. The two are only sometimes related, though.
Click to expand...

IMO you can add hamsik as another to your list of three.
 
VoetbalWizard said:
IMO you can add hamsik as another to your list of three.
Click to expand...

Yep — I have just been in the Hamsik thread and realized that I had completely overlooked him. It's interesting, because it does appear that there are more players of that type than I had originally thought. They are all subtly different, though, so I may spend some time looking at them more closely, which may or may not turn in to a post.
 
Great post Joga and there's a couple of issues I'd like to bring up.. especially with regards to Hamsik and Gourcuff.

I see them both as very technical superior versions of Frank Lampard and in a 4-4-1-1... both would be potentially exceptional.. getting bags of goals and setting Wayne up to.

However I have worries about their ability in a 4-4-2 and whether they'd be the Scholes replacement we want in midfield.

If Anderson is to achieve anything close to his potential then I can see him being a deep lying playmaker and that would allow the likes of Hamsik/Gourcuff to fit into the side seamlessly and fulfil the role they've been enjoying for their respective clubs. For example..

Fletcher Anderson
Gourcuff​

I find it hard to contemplate in certain 4-4-2 games say if Anderson was not to achieve his potential for a potential Fletcher Gourcuff or Fletcher Hamsik, I don't think they playmake enough in deeper positions in terms of getting ball of the defenders turning and constructing play.

Its why I think Milner would seamlessly fit into the side, he has enough about him defensively.. he can come deep to construct play as well as play in the hole and thus his versatility makes him less of a risk in terms of being a potential ****.

Modric is another who has shown good versatility and his ability to play in a variety of positions and similar to Milner he can run a game from deep too either in a two man mid or a three man mid.. means he is potentially less of a risk.

I think Fergie will be wary in the transfer market from now on especially after the Berbatov problem and he will ensure that any big money spent has to be on a player who fits United in a variety of ways.

Its about picking the right players .. not necessarily the most talented.
 
Joga_Bonito said:
I must confess to having only seen Gourcuff on roughly ten occasions (possibly more), so I only have a very general opinion of him. For some that would be enough to either advise him to get a new job, or to suggest that he will almost certainly become the greatest player of all time, but I just don't believe that it's enough to even begin to scratch the surface, particularly in terms of form over consecutive games, or how they handle themselves on the biggest stage, etc. And there's no doubt that I have missed various aspects of his game that would be informative.

Having taken a general view, I can't deny that, purely in terms of technical ability — his ability to manipulate the ball at his feet; his grace when in possession, etc — there may only be one or two other players in the world that are more gifted with the ball at their feet. He's one of those players who you instantly recognize as having a very rare talent, indeed. Most players simply don't look that naturally wedded to a football, as if they were born with such a mastery of the art. In many respects, it is actually unnatural, because it's hard to understand how someone can become so gifted and graceful. But that obviously says nothing about whether he is capable of translating that undoubted ability in to regular performances on the pitch that are befitting of a player with such talent.

Whether we like the fact, or not, no matter how much ability a player has, they can only be an object of general admiration unless they are able to fully express themselves in the maximum number of situations and in the most difficult circumstances. It can sometimes seem unfair that a player with so much ability can't seem to translate it in to performances on the pitch, and we might be tempted to blame the game, itself, rather than their own inability to cope with its demands. But it should be obvious that those who are not capable of that necessarily lose some of the advantage that their superior ability offers in the first place. And that is why it is entirely possible — even preferable in certain circumstances — to believe that less talented players are likely to make more efficient use of their talent, and thus, to be a more useful member of your team.

So, I'd like to ask those who have seen a lot more of Gourcuff than I have where he can realistically operate on the field? I ask because I have become a obsessed with the idea that we could solve several issues with the current team by finding a player who can operate both in a central attacking midfield role in, say, a 4-2-3-1 (as a midfielder behind the striker, as has been the case with both Park and Giggs, this season), or even perhaps a 4-4-1-1 (same thing in many ways), as well as part of a central midfield three, meaning that they would need to be able to operate from a little deeper, although it need not be a dramatically different role?

Looking at the issue from the perspective of the current team and the way in which we have set up over the course of the last few seasons, it would appear to me that what we lack are not specialists in the midfield, but players who can adapt to more than one subtly different position, which obvious includes the tactical shape of the team and their role in it. It would appear to be nonsensical to look for a player (or players) that can only operate in a very specific role in midfield, given the demands of the modern game.

That's why I can only really think of three players that could potentially fulfill that role: Milner would be one of them. Modric would be another. And then Gourcuff would potentially be the third. They're all subtly different players, of course, and there's no doubt that if we bought any one of them, not only would they be required to adapt to us, but we would also be required to adapt to the way in which they operate, particularly if the way in which we originally attempt to use them doesn't appear to work as well as we had hoped.

So, while I have never been totally convinced by someone like Milner, for example — although I have to admit to being encouraged by both his progress and adaptability over the last twelve months or more — I can certainly see the logic in our being linked with him, given the need that has been identified (and suspecting that Sir Alex may be thinking along similar lines). We know, for example, that both Milner and Modric can operate in a two or three man central midfield, as well as slightly further forward in a predominantly central attacking midfield role in a 4-2-3-1 (and in both wide positions, if necessary, which is tactically advantageous in certain games). We also know that while both are talented footballers, though somewhat different, as well, they are also more than capable of performing a more disciplined and tactical role for the team.

In an ideal world, we would all buy the absolutely most talented players that we could find, but we must also admit that our admiration for players is often not terribly related to the way in which they would likely operate in Manchester United's team structure, over the course of an entire season. Admiration generally doesn't work like that. We fall in love with players, not for those reasons, but because they inspire something in us. And that usually has little to do with whether they would be the perfect fit for our team, and more to do with our emotional reaction to their ability with the ball at their feet. The two are only sometimes related, though.
Click to expand...

Are you God?
 
Is it too early to get my cock out?
 
Ivor Ballokov said:
This place would go nuts if he signed for City
Click to expand...

Imagine if they end up like this

-------------------Neuer-----------------

Alves---------Lescott-------Chiellini----------Bridge

Gourcuff--------De Rossi--------Hamsik---------De Maria

----------------------Silva----------------------

----------------------Villa---------------------------

Some people would probably commit suicide.
 
golden_blunder said:
Fletcher - Milner - Gourcuff

Nice
Click to expand...
Fletcher - Hamsik - Gourcuff

Nicer.

devilish said:
Imagine if they end up like this

-------------------Neuer-----------------

Alves---------Lescott-------Chiellini----------Bridge

Gourcuff--------De Rossi--------Hamsik---------De Maria

----------------------Silva----------------------

----------------------Villa---------------------------

Some people would probably commit suicide.
Click to expand...
Not in a million years!!

Also, why buy a completely new starting 11 and leave Lescott and Bridge? :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.