Sir Ryan Giggs

Great pass. Great player. I do hope that people will remember how good a pass he makes if for example, Van Persie didnt slot the ball home. Keep him from retiring for as long as physically possible. Same goes for Scholes, and further down the line, same for Ferdinand.
 
Giggs the winger can still contribute, Giggs the central midfielder not so much.
 
I still maintain that he should only be used as an impact player when we need a goal or two.
 
Poxbo said:
I still maintain that he should only be used as an impact player when we need a goal or two.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because he was awful against Newcastle and especially against Chelsea in the cup.

He can't start every match, but when he's in form and can contribute, I see no reason why he can't start matches. If you are good enough, you are old enough - not if you are too old you can't be good enough.
 
Poxbo said:
I still maintain that he should only be used as an impact player when we need a goal or two.
Click to expand...

You could well be right, though I don't agree personally, but this stuff about him only being of use on the wing is nonsense, and a complete turnaround from the belief a season or two back that he wasn't useful on the wing anymore, and should only be played in midfield. He's very useful in both positions, given the right line-up around him.
 
Poxbo said:
I still maintain that he should only be used as an impact player when we need a goal or two.
Click to expand...

He's shown that he can be effective from the start. I'm inclined to agree in general though. I'd much prefer he was used as an impact sub because he still has the qualities to influence matches, especially late on.
 
I just personally hope that SAF will now continue to use him wisely. I still don't think that he should be starting games, unless he has very energetic players around him that are willing to make up for the ground that he just can't cover anymore.
 
I think when Giggs moved towards a central role it showed how much we lacked a little creative spark in central areas in recent years - something we didn't need as much with Ronaldo. The combinations of Fletcher/Carrick/Hargreaves/Scholes didn't really provide us with the quick 1-2's or running with the ball Giggs was showing. Now Cleverley has stepped up and started showing what he's capable of, we don't need Giggs there taking risks in dangerous areas. Andersons good form highlighted this as well, though he's probably just as likely to have an off day at the moment.
 
A bench with Hernandez and Giggs and Welbeck is fantastic.

Tired defenders having to stop Chicharito's movement, Welbeck's insane pace and workrate, and Giggs' killer passes.

I still remember Giggs' pass to Michael Owen. Giggs still has it.

Bench role is perfect for him.
 
Is it wrong to think Giggs' pass was just as good as RVP's touch and finish?

I take nothing away from RVP's part as it was brilliant. But if you watch the goal again Giggs pulled off that pass so quickly and perfectly. He literally takes one glance up field to see RVP's run.

Even though Giggs had space, if he takes just one more touch or hesitates at all RVP's run would have been useless as a defender was right on him.

I think that's the best goal from United since the charity shield goal against City or the counter attack against Arsenal a few seasons ago.

Brilliant.
 
Fergus' son said:
You no longer think he should've retired then?
Click to expand...

No, I don't think his contribution over the season will be as important as if we had replaced him with a quality winger or central midfielder.
 
Poxbo said:
No, I don't think his contribution over the season will be as important as if we had replaced him with a quality winger or central midfielder.
Click to expand...

One who would be prepared to play as little as Giggs, bearing in mind we are trying to persevere with our other players?

Who fits that bill?
 
RedDevilCanuck said:
A bench with Hernandez and Giggs and Welbeck is fantastic.

Tired defenders having to stop Chicharito's movement, Welbeck's insane pace and workrate, and Giggs' killer passes.

I still remember Giggs' pass to Michael Owen. Giggs still has it.

Bench role is perfect for him.
Click to expand...

I'm not the only one to notice this, I see. Welbeck has a ridiculously high top speed - could probably challenge Valencia. He doesn't always time his runs to perfection though - not like a young Giggsy - how we miss that, if not just for the excitement!
 
Fergus' son said:
One who would be prepared to play as little as Giggs, bearing in mind we are trying to persevere with our other players?

Who fits that bill?
Click to expand...

Why should they play as little as Giggs?


With Nani being out for so long, Young out for periods and Valencia in terrible form there would be plenty of game time for a winger. The only reason Giggs hasn't played more on the wing is because he can't play 90 minutes twice in a row.

In central midfield, we obviously have plenty opportunities for a quality midfielder to get games and competition for places is very healthy.
 
I prefer Giggs at CM to LM, tbh. He offers a lot of penetration through the middle of the field with his running off the ball. He's not static like Carrick or Scholes.

He's a good option to have at that position
 
Poxbo said:
Why should they play as little as Giggs?


With Nani being out for so long, Young out for periods and Valencia in terrible form there would be plenty of game time for a winger. The only reason Giggs hasn't played more on the wing is because he can't play 90 minutes twice in a row.

In central midfield, we obviously have plenty opportunities for a quality midfielder to get games and competition for places is very healthy.
Click to expand...

Ah, but you don't plan for injuries or loss of form at the beginning of the season. In fact, I'm pretty sure a new winger is the last thing many people wanted in August... so that sort of reasoning really doesn't fly. Fact is, you don't spend money on a 4th choice winger, so for someone who is going to do a good job when called upon, you won't find much better then Giggs.
 
Poxbo said:
Why should they play as little as Giggs?


With Nani being out for so long, Young out for periods and Valencia in terrible form there would be plenty of game time for a winger. The only reason Giggs hasn't played more on the wing is because he can't play 90 minutes twice in a row.

In central midfield, we obviously have plenty opportunities for a quality midfielder to get games and competition for places is very healthy.
Click to expand...

Because if they are to play more than what Giggs does now, they aren't really replacing Giggs, they would be attempting to replace Nani etc or Cleverley etc.

Giggs is good when we need to rotate, we have injuries, or need untold experience combined with quality, this is his role. A signing wouldn't replace that.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Ah, but you don't plan for injuries or loss of form at the beginning of the season. In fact, I'm pretty sure a new winger is the last thing many people wanted in August... so that sort of reasoning really doesn't fly. Fact is, you don't spend money on a 4th choice winger, so for someone who is going to do a good job when called upon, you won't find much better then Giggs.
Click to expand...

And this.
 
Mojo_pin said:
I prefer Giggs at CM to LM, tbh. He offers a lot of penetration through the middle of the field with his running off the ball. He's not static like Carrick or Scholes.

He's a good option to have at that position
Click to expand...

Would you take out Carrick or Cleverley for him?
 
Fergus' son said:
Because if they are to play more than what Giggs does now, they aren't really replacing Giggs, they would be attempting to replace Nani etc or Cleverley etc.

Giggs is good when we need to rotate, we have injuries, or need untold experience combined with quality, this is his role. A signing wouldn't replace that.
Click to expand...

That's nonsense. No club has a player in their 25 man squad that can't play more than 90 minutes every week and is only really useful as an impact player. It's a luxury we can't afford.

Annihilate Now! said:
Ah, but you don't plan for injuries or loss of form at the beginning of the season. In fact, I'm pretty sure a new winger is the last thing many people wanted in August... so that sort of reasoning really doesn't fly. Fact is, you don't spend money on a 4th choice winger, so for someone who is going to do a good job when called upon, you won't find much better then Giggs.
Click to expand...


Actually I called exactly that in the summer:

Poxbo said:
It's not only when you have a "big injury problem" though. A big injury problem is 8 defenders out and using Fletcher and Carrick as CBs.

Having 3 wingers for two positions isn't enough. Pretty much every week last season either Valencia, Young or Nani were injured. One injury and you would then have to reconsider your whole game plan to get a player who should be playing centrally to either start on the wing or on the bench so he can come on as a winger.

FWIW Kagawa isn't a "United" winger. He's wasted tracking back and helping his fullback and when he played wide for Dortmund and Japan its on the left of a 3 in a 4-3-3 and in that system it's the spare player in the middle 3 who offers himself as support to the fullback while Kagawa offers himself centrally.
Click to expand...
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Ah, but you don't plan for injuries or loss of form at the beginning of the season. In fact, I'm pretty sure a new winger is the last thing many people wanted in August... so that sort of reasoning really doesn't fly. Fact is, you don't spend money on a 4th choice winger, so for someone who is going to do a good job when called upon, you won't find much better then Giggs.
Click to expand...


Funny old game isn't it. When Moura and Hazard were being persued, a lot of us on here were wondering what on earth was going on, as winger didn't seem a priority at all.

Who'd have thought all 3 wingers would have under performed half way through the year?
 
Poxbo said:
That's nonsense. No club has a player in their 25 man squad that can't play more than 90 minutes every week and is only really useful as an impact player. It's a luxury we can't afford.




Actually I called exactly that in the summer:
Click to expand...

You're making no sense. How is it a 'luxury' when you are so against it? Who cares what other teams have, they would give anything for players like Giggs and Scholes.
 
Fergus' son said:
You're making no sense. How is it a 'luxury' when you are so against it? Who cares what other teams have, they would give anything for players like Giggs and Scholes.
Click to expand...

It's a luxury we could afford if we were already aptly stocked in those positions.

As it is we chose to go into the season with Scholes and Giggs as options rather than luxuries, therefore they are players we "can't afford".
 
Poxbo said:
It's a luxury we could afford if we were already aptly stocked in those positions.

As it is we chose to go into the season with Scholes and Giggs as options rather than luxuries, therefore they are players we "can't afford".
Click to expand...

BS. Fergie was going after Moura who is a winger, and he still wasn't about to let Giggs go.

No other clubs have a 39 year old playing at Giggs' level - that's why you can't compare. Sure, he doesn't play 90mins every week, but why does he have to? Fergie is also a believer of rotating to keep the players fit and ready. This have payed of numerous times, so to have an experienced veteran like Giggs as a supersub or the occasional starter can only be a bonus. He is never going to stand in the way of a new signing, not at this stage.
 
Poxbo said:
It's a luxury we could afford if we were already aptly stocked in those positions.

As it is we chose to go into the season with Scholes and Giggs as options rather than luxuries, therefore they are players we "can't afford".
Click to expand...

So they aren't luxuries at all?

Anyway, its silly logic. We could afford to keep them if we had more cover according to you, which goes against the common notion that they are needed and useful because we don't have sufficient cover. What's the point in keeping them if we are 'aptly stocked'?
 
Poxbo said:
That's nonsense. No club has a player in their 25 man squad that can't play more than 90 minutes every week and is only really useful as an impact player. It's a luxury we can't afford.




Actually I called exactly that in the summer:
Click to expand...

Well, what you're saying is 3 wingers for 2 positions isn't enough... a false statement immediately when you consider we actually had 4 wingers. Also, you're not saying at any point we need a quality winger to displace any of the ones we currently have. I think if you asked someone then if we needed a better winger then Nani and Valencia in the team, they'd probably have given you a funny look. Ultimately, you'd be asking for a winger to sit on the bench and only come into the teams in (what you'd have expected to be) limited times of needs, and I don't see the point in that when you have the quality (and free) option of Giggs available already.

Ultimately, we started the season with Valencia Nani and Young as our immediate wing options, with Giggs, Kagawa and Welbeck all there in worst case scenarios. It surely would have been a waste of our limited transfer resources to go out and buy a winger when we were in greater need elsewhere.
 
Brwned said:
Yes but when he has started recently he's been just as good - it's just been in another position so people can still cling onto those doubts.
Click to expand...

right I meant starting in midfield. He wasn't great on the wings earlier in the season. i do feel he is better coming off the bench as was shown on Saturday. My main premise is as good as Giggs and Scholes are, they should be impact players in our squad. As Giggs said himself, being ready when called upon.

They have a part to play but it's not as before where they can consistently start games and have a telling influence throughout. oh and they shouldnt start together.

Personally, I think this is Scholesy's last season. Ability-wise he can play forever but I do worry about his physical limitations and I think he'll go before Giggs because in terms of physical condition and longevity, Giggs is an anomaly.
 
RedDevilCanuck said:
Is it wrong to think Giggs' pass was just as good as RVP's touch and finish?

I take nothing away from RVP's part as it was brilliant. But if you watch the goal again Giggs pulled off that pass so quickly and perfectly. He literally takes one glance up field to see RVP's run.

Even though Giggs had space, if he takes just one more touch or hesitates at all RVP's run would have been useless as a defender was right on him.

I think that's the best goal from United since the charity shield goal against City or the counter attack against Arsenal a few seasons ago.

Brilliant.
Click to expand...


There are few players in the world that would attempt that pass let alone complete it. As with many of our players his ability and contribution to a team that consistently wins games is undervalued, strangely enough, especially by some of our own fans.
 
Majestic. Not afraid and very pleased to say I was wrong.
 
Christ, why do I ever doubt the man.

This is what we need to do, give him rests for a week or two and then unleash him in cup games. Unbelievable tonight.
 
Cina said:
Christ, why do I ever doubt the man.

This is what we need to do, give him rests for a week or two and then unleash him in cup games. Unbelievable tonight.
Click to expand...

He can easily play in the league, why just cup games?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.