Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

Orando Broom · 01-05-2012 02:40PM

Nuts102 wrote: »

Dear lord when you think you see it all people start talking about selling Rooney after a poor game.

Relax, the forum or it's mods DO NOT have the power to sell Rooney. He will remain a Man United player.

Is hypothetical discussion no longer allowed? The talk of the sale of Rooney is not because of a poor game but as a follow-on theory that perhaps United need a seachange to compete with City. It is interesting to see what people have to say on it. It would be a huge deal WERE it to happen (it's not happening).

Is that fair enough or do you want to send us a prescribed list of topics on which we can discuss?

can people do the following, type a post; breathe and engage the brain. Read what they were responding to, breathe and relax, re-read thier own response. edit/amend accordingly and then post it. Thanks. Less of the brain-dead reactions.

BenK · 01-05-2012 02:43PM

United need to add quality players to the team / squad not remove them!

me-skywalker · 01-05-2012 02:44PM

If we win the league ill be effing delighted be one of the greatest league victories ever. Hopefully we can do our own job right first though, knowing us we'll lose to John O'Shea.

Its strange because its not like we have never not won the league, Arsenal came, Chelsea came and Liverpool got a horn for one season now the Arsenal B team are the top team we need to compete with. We’ll recover and rebuild as we always do but let’s see what happens with these last 2 games.

We’ve done well this season considering the injuries, the lack of top quality or options in the centre and Fergusons brain farting with his “tactics”.

In my mind we need to get rid of Mike Phelan and get Queiroz back he’s the one who got Fergie to double think his European plan and modernise his training regime. Now we need another model and another variance to our play again. I like Rene but he doesn’t seem like he can grab Fergie by the collar and tell him what needs to be done.

Orando Broom · 01-05-2012 02:44PM

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

What do you want Wayne Rooney to do? For the love of god. Should he have tracked back, won the ball, dribbled up the whole pitch past 10 City players and rifled one in the top corner? Even if he did that I would be reading "Rooney doesnt pass enough".

Wayne Rooney was left alone against 4 City defenders and at least 1 midfielder at almost all stages last night. If you cant see that he didnt perform because those other 10 United players were totally incapable of getting the ball to him then please, shut it.

We lost because we were totally dominated in midfield. City beat us TO EVERY SINGLE BALL. There was nobody to pass to. Ever. It is the same thing that happened with Bilbao and Barcelona last year, we just had nobody to pass it to. So we pass it around until the pressure is too much and we have to hoof it away. Use your ****ing eyes like.

the first paragraph is stupid and wholly unnecessary. Nobody suggested he do that. You are the only one. It is a completely invalid position to take.

The bit in bold is wrong and you should take your own advice of " Use your ****ing eyes like".

You are bang on with the para underneath it. Rooney however did not play anywhere near good enough. Though the chances were few and far between he did not win one ball last night. He allowed at least three headers go uncontested. Lescott and Kompany owned him. He did not get a sniff of either. It was a straight up man marking job on him and he was schooled.

Orando Broom · 01-05-2012 02:46PM

me-skywalker wrote: »

If we win the league ill be effing delighted be one of the greatest league victories ever. Hopefully we can do our own job right first though, knowing us we'll lose to John O'Shea.

Its strange because its not like we have never not won the league, Arsenal came, Chelsea came and Liverpool got a horn for one season now the Arsenal B team are the top team we need to compete with. We’ll recover and rebuild as we always do but let’s see what happens with these last 2 games.

We’ve done well this season considering the injuries, the lack of top quality or options in the centre and Fergusons brain farting with his “tactics”.

In my mind we need to get rid of Mike Phelan and get Queiroz back he’s the one who got Fergie to double think his European plan and modernise his training regime. Now we need another model and another variance to our play again. I like Rene but he doesn’t seem like he can grab Fergie by the collar and tell him what needs to be done.

I was saying to a colleague that John O'shea has been a massive loss for United this year. Massive.

Lord TSC · 01-05-2012 02:47PM

I'll reiterate.

I am not saying "Rooney is useless. He cost us the game/title. We should drop hom cause he's bad."

I am saying, hypotetically, should we cash in on him now with the long term intention of strenghtning the team with the money we'd make; could we get enough for him that we could get another top level striker AND something towards a top level CM we need. Not getting rid of him cause he's bad but because we could get stronger if we bought tactically...

Blatter · 01-05-2012 02:56PM

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

I'll reiterate.

I am not saying "Rooney is useless. He cost us the game/title. We should drop hom cause he's bad."

I am saying, hypotetically, should we cash in on him now with the long term intention of strenghtning the team with the money we'd make; could we get enough for him that we could get another top level striker AND something towards a top level CM we need. Not getting rid of him cause he's bad but because we could get stronger if we bought tactically...

Name me a striker that is as good as or better than Rooney that could be gotten for significantly less money than what we'd receive for Rooney?

Backstreet Moyes · 01-05-2012 03:03PM

Orando Broom wrote: »

Relax, the forum or it's mods DO NOT have the power to sell Rooney. He will remain a Man United player.

Is hypothetical discussion no longer allowed? The talk of the sale of Rooney is not because of a poor game but as a follow-on theory that perhaps United need a seachange to compete with City. It is interesting to see what people have to say on it. It would be a huge deal WERE it to happen (it's not happening).

Is that fair enough or do you want to send us a prescribed list of topics on which we can discuss?

can people do the following, type a post; breathe and engage the brain. Read what they were responding to, breathe and relax, re-read thier own response. edit/amend accordingly and then post it. Thanks. Less of the brain-dead reactions.

Selling your best and most important player when he is entering his prime should not be laughed at? A brain dead reaction? Wanting to discuss a topic that you admitted wont happen would be classed as more a dead brain reaction than somebody suggesting it is plain weird to talk about selling Rooney.

United need a centre midfielder or two to match City not to sell their best player.

Kylo Ren · 01-05-2012 03:08PM

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

I'll reiterate.

I am not saying "Rooney is useless. He cost us the game/title. We should drop hom cause he's bad."

I am saying, hypotetically, should we cash in on him now with the long term intention of strenghtning the team with the money we'd make; could we get enough for him that we could get another top level striker AND something towards a top level CM we need. Not getting rid of him cause he's bad but because we could get stronger if we bought tactically...

No. Selling our best player is not the solution to get better.

Orando Broom · 01-05-2012 03:14PM

Blatter wrote: »

Name me a striker that is as good as or better than Rooney that could be gotten for significantly less money than what we'd receive for Rooney?

Yep, ultimatly this is the kernal of any and all arguments about Rooney. I still think he could be a little bit of a problem for United if they buy an out and out attacking midfielder. There is a risk of one marginalising the effectiveness of the other.

Orando Broom · 01-05-2012 03:17PM

Nuts102 wrote: »

Selling your best and most important player when he is entering his prime should not be laughed at? A brain dead reaction? Wanting to discuss a topic that you admitted wont happen would be classed as more a dead brain reaction than somebody suggesting it is plain weird to talk about selling Rooney.

United need a centre midfielder or two to match City not to sell their best player.

I'm not going to keep harping on about this but you can sell an individual, no matter how good and still strengthen your team. Barca, when Pep took over cleared out some big names and made the team better. Selling Ronaldinho and Deco for instance.

Mikeyt086 · 01-05-2012 03:32PM

Orando Broom wrote: »

the first paragraph is stupid and wholly unnecessary. Nobody suggested he do that. You are the only one. It is a completely invalid position to take.

The bit in bold is wrong and you should take your own advice of " Use your ****ing eyes like".

You are bang on with the para underneath it. Rooney however did not play anywhere near good enough. Though the chances were few and far between he did not win one ball last night. He allowed at least three headers go uncontested. Lescott and Kompany owned him. He did not get a sniff of either. It was a straight up man marking job on him and he was schooled.

The first part was me at loss as to what people wanted from Wayne Rooney. "Completely invalid position" er... ok.

The bold bit was hyperbolic, although he was only ever marked by 2 players at a time, his complete detachment of a support system meant it was as if the entire back 4 could focus on stifling Rooney.

I genuinely cannot think of one player in World football who could have played where Rooney did, with our midfield and tactics last night behind him, and would have not been "schooled" by Lescott and Kompany.

Your Airbag · 01-05-2012 03:34PM

Blatter wrote: »

Name me a striker that is as good as or better than Rooney that could be gotten for significantly less money than what we'd receive for Rooney?

RVP

Pro. F · 01-05-2012 03:34PM

Orando Broom wrote: »

Relax, the forum or it's mods DO NOT have the power to sell Rooney. He will remain a Man United player.

Is hypothetical discussion no longer allowed? The talk of the sale of Rooney is not because of a poor game but as a follow-on theory that perhaps United need a seachange to compete with City. It is interesting to see what people have to say on it. It would be a huge deal WERE it to happen (it's not happening).

Is that fair enough or do you want to send us a prescribed list of topics on which we can discuss?

can people do the following, type a post; breathe and engage the brain. Read what they were responding to, breathe and relax, re-read thier own response. edit/amend accordingly and then post it. Thanks. Less of the brain-dead reactions.

Of course hypothetical discussion is allowed. Nobody is controlling what you say. People are just letting you know that what you are saying is a completely fùcking retarded over reaction.

Orando Broom wrote: »

The bit in bold is wrong and you should take your own advice of " Use your ****ing eyes like".

You are bang on with the para underneath it. Rooney however did not play anywhere near good enough. Though the chances were few and far between he did not win one ball last night. He allowed at least three headers go uncontested. Lescott and Kompany owned him. He did not get a sniff of either. It was a straight up man marking job on him and he was schooled.

Absolute bollocks. You do not have a clue what you are talking about. Even on the most basic level of understanding of how defending in football works you are clueless.

Just because there was one defender close to him most times does not mean he was only dealing with one defender. Saying that it was a ''straight up man marking job'' would imply that he only had one defender to deal with. He didn't. When two CBs are dealing with one striker, one stays close and one gets on the cover. There was always at least one other defender on the cover, often two. There were also always defenders either in position or close to position on whatever few other options Rooney had about him.

Rooney is not a big or fast striker. Of course he didn't win long balls or have success on through balls off Kompamy or Lesscott, that's not an area of strength for him and it is for them and they were 2v1 constantly.

Rooney was being supported by Park last night. Park could barely stay on his feet when running in a straight line let alone pass. Giggs was nowhere, he didn't have the legs to keep up with the play. Nani got forward quickly on the break to support him, but he was the only one. So on the break where it was one central and one wide player against three, more often four, and sometime five, defensive players Rooney had trouble. No fùcking shìt.

When the team got forward in numbers we had two fullbacks who couldn't cross and two central midfielders who were sitting deep and were getting progressively more and more knackered (to the point of complete uselessness in the Scholes/Giggs case). Yes Rooney wasn't at his best when a very few small opportunities came his way, but operating for the vast majority of the game as isolated as he was will wear out a striker so he should be cut some slack.

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

1. Its not one bad game. Rooney has been playing poorly for a while, scoring a goal and doing little elsebfor the rest of the game. Im not basing this off one game but many.

2. I look at it in a way where now is when we'd get the most cash for him. My point wasnt "he is useless. get rid of him". Its that if we sold him now, we'd be able to reinvest it in as good a striker and still have cash left to address other areas. Its not just about dropping Rooney; its looking at a bigger overall picture and team...

Rooney hasn't played badly for many games. It's three recent games at absolute most. The problems lie in midfield, last night that was compounded by an awful team selection. Rooney's performances on the pitch are not the problem.

Orando Broom · 01-05-2012 03:35PM

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

The first part was me at loss as to what people wanted from Wayne Rooney. "Completely invalid position" er... ok.

The bold bit was hyperbolic, although he was only ever marked by 2 players at a time, his complete detachment of a support system meant it was as if the entire back 4 could focus on stifling Rooney.

I genuinely cannot think of one player in World football who could have played where Rooney did, with our midfield and tactics last night behind him, and would have not been "schooled" by Lescott and Kompany.

Ah now, here! I think you could think of at least two.

Blatter · 01-05-2012 03:38PM

Your Airbag wrote: »

RVP

I know you're not being serious, but if he was 3 years young he'd be a good shout as he is in the last year of his contract.

I reckon he's City bound this Summer though. Dzeko out, RVP in.

kryogen · 01-05-2012 03:38PM

Orando Broom wrote: »

I'm not going to keep harping on about this but you can sell an individual, no matter how good and still strengthen your team. Barca, when Pep took over cleared out some big names and made the team better. Selling Ronaldinho and Deco for instance.

The comparison is ridiculous.

kryogen · 01-05-2012 03:41PM

Orando Broom wrote: »

Ah now, here! I think you could think of at least two.

No, no way, I assume you are referring to Ronaldo and Messi.

Neither of them played in Rooneys place last night would have done any better.

Your Airbag · 01-05-2012 03:43PM

Blatter wrote: »

I know you're not being serious, but if he was 3 years young he'd be a good shout as he is in the last year of his contract.

I reckon he's City bound this Summer though. Dzeko out, RVP in.

I'm being more serious than not. Rooney outside of England is viewed as one of our leagues if not the leagues star player. I reckon if we sold him to Barca or Madrid (Jose did say give me a call if he wants to leave when Rooney had his strop) we would get a nice sum of money for him that would cover the acquisition cost of RVP, maybe even with a little to spare.

Hopefully the Nasri to City deal has soured relations a little and they would prefer to sell to us. This is all fantasy talk of course.

Lord TSC · 01-05-2012 03:44PM

Better example too me would be a United one - Ronaldo.

We sold him, got a tonne of cash and we're still using it to strenghten the team. We are still winning titles without him.

Can i name one striker better than Rooney? Not easily. But thats missing my point. Losing Rooney but getting a striker ala Llorente, RVP or similiar AND being able to invest in a top strimg CM...one player bettet than Rooney is hard to do but two combined? Easy.

Pro. F · 01-05-2012 03:45PM

Orando Broom wrote: »

I'm not going to keep harping on about this but you can sell an individual, no matter how good and still strengthen your team. Barca, when Pep took over cleared out some big names and made the team better. Selling Ronaldinho and Deco for instance.

Rooney is our best attacking player. Barca had Xavi, Iniesta, Messi and Eto'o who were all better than Deco and who were all less disruptive and more consistent than Ronaldinho.

Blatter · 01-05-2012 03:46PM

Also, I expressed my concerns at the 4-5-1 formation yesterday, specifically the lack of chances we create and poor performances we have seen with it. Coupled with a poor team selection in terms of players, things played out just like I thought they would if we went with it. The players are just not used to it at all and they can't have been expected to just turn it on in a one off game, it takes time to get used to a particular system.

v3ttel · 01-05-2012 03:47PM

Orando Broom wrote: »

I'm not going to keep harping on about this but you can sell an individual, no matter how good and still strengthen your team. Barca, when Pep took over cleared out some big names and made the team better. Selling Ronaldinho and Deco for instance.

You think that selling arguably our important player is the way forward?

You mention Pep selling Ronaldinho and Deco.

In 2008, the Barca first choice 11 (when fit) was as follows (backed up by appearances stats):

Ronaldinho and Deco were not in this.

Now, please, tell me how selling Rooney, our best player, equates to:

1. Pep selling two players who weren't Barca's best players?

2. Or infact, couldn't even get a game when everyone was fit?

3. And completely ignoring the fact that he knew he had Messi coming through?

4. And that Messi had already taken over from Ronaldinho in the starting 11 by the time he was sold?

Is this the same situation that United are in with Rooney? No. Infact, it couldn't possibly be more different.

So please, if you are going to post condescending tripe like below, make sure you are heeding the advice yourself.

Orando Broom wrote: »

can people do the following, type a post; breathe and engage the brain.

Sometimes selling important players can improve the team. Absolutely. But this would be RIDICULOUS in our current situation.

Orando Broom · 01-05-2012 03:48PM

Pro. F wrote: »

Absolute bollocks. You do not have a clue what you are talking about. Even on the most basic level of understanding of how defending in football works you are clueless.

Just because there was one defender close to him most times does not mean he was only dealing with one defender. Saying that it was a ''straight up man marking job'' would imply that he only had one defender to deal with. He didn't. When two CBs are dealing with one striker, one stays close and one gets on the cover. There was always at least one other defender on the cover, often two. There were also always defenders either in position or close to position on whatever few other options Rooney had about him.

This is wrong. Do you play football? Rooney as a lone striker has really just one job to do, he has take the ball into feet and hold up the play. That is it. For 90 minutes that is all he has to do. Show in front and take it into feet, lay it off.

City last night did not have two men on Rooney. Not once. They didn't have to. Kompany first followed when Rooney came in deep and after the booking Lescott did this. Not once did Rooney take a ball into feet, hold it up and lay it off. Not once. One or other of the full backs would have closed in had there been a need. There wasn't. Nani made over a dozen tackles, Clichy none. Zabaleta attacked most of the match. Not once did a full back have to assist a centreback on trying to contain Rooney.

You are right with the lack of support from midfield, absolutely but not on one occassion when the ball was played to his feet did he show any willingness or desire to get it, take his touch and look for support.

Lescott and Kompany both on different occassions from behind nicked the ball off him and Rooney ceded without a whimper.

On three other occassions a ball was floated into the space Rooney occupied and everytime a city player had a free header to clear. rooney didn't even jump with the player to try and put him off. Three free headers powered straight back down the throats of the United defence.

If you think those are examples of good play fair enough. The few times the ball came near him he made a half assed effort to win the battles.

I don't think your viewpoints are in any way enhanced by your angry, aggressive posts either. Take it down a notch or two.

Jax Teller · 01-05-2012 03:48PM

Probably get slagged off for this but I think Anderson would have done a good job last night in midfield with Scholes and Carrick pity he was injured .

Fergie mustn't trust Cleverley much .

Orando Broom · 01-05-2012 03:51PM

Pro. F wrote: »

Rooney is our best attacking player. Barca had Xavi, Iniesta, Messi and Eto'o who were all better than Deco and who were all less disruptive and more consistent than Ronaldinho.

Again a fair point. But it could be argued that Rooney is hardly a stable force in the squad.

Pro. F · 01-05-2012 03:53PM

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Better example too me would be a United one - Ronaldo.

We sold him, got a tonne of cash and we're still using it to strenghten the team. We are still winning titles without him.

Can i name one striker better than Rooney? Not easily. But thats missing my point. Losing Rooney but getting a striker ala Llorente, RVP or similiar AND being able to invest in a top strimg CM...one player bettet than Rooney is hard to do but two combined? Easy.

Selling your best players and trying to replace them with others is a massive risk - for example there is no guarantee that we would get RVP for less than Rooney, or that he would even want to come to us - and is hugely disruptive to the team.

It's only something that needs to be looked at if you have no money to spend or the player is being disruptive. If you were saying that there is no money to spend or that Rooney is being disruptive then that would be something. But really, what you are actually doing is playing silly bollocks fantasy football after an annoying defeat.

cournioni · 01-05-2012 03:54PM

Coletrickle88 wrote: »

Probably get slagged off for this but I think Anderson would have done a good job last night in midfield with Scholes and Carrick pity he was injured .

Fergie mustn't trust Cleverley much .

I said that to a work colleague today too, I think he would have had the pace and power to unsettle the City midfield. In Carrick, Scholes, Giggs, and Park, United's midfield were slow and too weak for City. Anderson and even Fletcher would have been better options had they been fit.

Likewise Vidic if he was fit, but fact is, they weren't and United struggled to keep with City after they settled into the game. Pity but **** happens, United just have to win their games and hope that City slip up in Newcastle.

Orando Broom · 01-05-2012 03:54PM

Blatter wrote: »

Also, I expressed my concerns at the 4-5-1 formation yesterday, specifically the lack of chances we create and poor performances we have seen with it. Coupled with a poor team selection in terms of players, things played out just like I thought they would if we went with it. The players are just not used to it at all and they can't have been expected to just turn it on in a one off game, it takes time to get used to a particular system.

I think 4-5-1 works better for teams who have good set piece conversion rates. I don't think United are very strong in that department. How many threatening set pieces did united have last night? Frees in or around the box and corners?

Al Capwned · 01-05-2012 03:55PM

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

There was nobody to pass to. Ever. It is the same thing that happened with Bilbao and Barcelona last year, we just had nobody to pass it to. So we pass it around until the pressure is too much and we have to hoof it away.

Exactly.

Smalling -> Jones -> Rio -> Evra -> Rio -> de Gea -> lump 60yards -> ball back to city and we're defending again

The amount of times we saw this (^^) last night, especially in the second part of the first half was remarkable, I thought.

This stands out for me as one of our main problems last night- not being able to keep the ball for extended periods, and as such constantly forcing us onto the back foot.

I accept that City are going to have more of the ball than us, but we need to be able to keep the ball for longer than we demonstrated last night.

Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

Comments