Aye. I imagine the vast majority would agree with you here.
Luka Modric
- Thread starter Successful
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Aye. I imagine the vast majority would agree with you here.
So you don't think some midfielders are much better suited to a three than a two?
Would you play Sneijder or Ozil in a two?
I do think that.
Makelele played for France in a midfield 2 in their 4231.
So clearly we need to sign midfielders who are good in a two right? And by good I mean they compliment Carrick who's clearly going to be our mainstay for the next two years or so at least barring a huge drop in form/injury.
Carrick's a player who guards the back four and creates moves from deep. So clearly we need (and by need I mean if we were to sign someone) a player who is mobile to cover Carrick's lack of mobility and who plays a bit futher forward but not so far forward as a Sneijder/Ozil and still contributes defensively.
I suppose I could possibly see an argument for Wanyama since we don't know how good his passing is, but Strootman looks to be a younger left footed Carrick. But as has been said, I don't think the ability to play in a midfield two is as difficult as a lot of people make it out to be.
To be fair Spurs didn't seem to think he could (despite him doing it fine in euro 2008).
Meaning he played in a three with Zidane and Vieira. It's basically the classic three man setup, you have a holder, a playmaker and a box to box guy.
Rafael's played in a midfield two for us but Wanyama? Nah, no chance. We'd probably see some form of spontaneous combustion if that happened.
Some would even say that Makelele was like a third CB
Playing 2 midfielders just won't cut it in Europe nowadays.
Phil Jones can do it, Park can do, O'Shea can do, but not Strootman, I think h'd melt....
Obviously he can walk out on the field and play in a midfield two but it's not the best use of his talents and nor is it the best kind of player to partner Carrick for Man Utd to win football games.
When we do it we essentially have a third in Rooney.
How would that be different to a 442 with Rooney drop deep?
This is of course unofficial and at a very early stage. My informer has told me that we're taking the first baby steps to see where it could lead. As it stands now not everyone at Madrid was convinced about the move in the first place, and if we could offer a similar contract with bigger chance of becoming a first choice player he is going to take it. The problem with Real Madrid is that they buy players unwilling to be squad players. They just can't sink that low to sign a player with that kind of status. Do you think it's healthy to have a player like Kaka on the bench?
So this rumour going on in the club is now given to me. Last time I was handed the Scholes rumour and didn't know what to do with it and just posted it on here. Turned out to be true. Now we're doing it again, this time it's Modric. But us wanting to sign a player is not automatically the same thing as doing. What we can assume now is that we're trying to massage the right spots on Real Madrid.
Because Zidane is way more creative than Rooney, meaning his midfield partners can be less creative because it's not needed as much and also Zidane played a good few yards deeper than Rooney does, although Rooney probably contributes more than Zidane defensively, especially post Juventus.
As well Makelele is in this instance partnered with Vieira, an extremely different kind of midfielder to Carrick.
Right, so you're saying it's situation dependant. So Makelele could in fact play in a midfield 2, in the right set up. Same goes for any midfielder.
Then you're wrong yet again.
Vidal has been immense and one of the best midfielders in world football over the last year. Vidal was as important as Pirlo for Juventus last season and is possibly the biggest work horse midfielder around right now. Verging on sensational in every aspect of the game. There's really not many more complete midfielders than Vidal right now. And believe me, I'm in love with Pirlo, he's been out of this world over the last year plus, but Vidal has been arguably as immense as he has for Juve.
Even with his current form, I would take Modric in a heartbeat. We all know how good he is, and how he can play. He's brilliant, despite his form at Madrid.
Whatever......Fletcher wasn't the only problem, Carrick was scratching around for form and Rooney was sporadic in his brilliance. Fletcher and Scholes in a midfield two was the issue in the first few months of the season.....Scholes being the bigger problem.
The examples you give are totally different to Fletcher's situation at that time....his legs were not fecking shot, he was able to keep up with play...he just wasn't playing very well. It was a full year before he indulged in some rest related to his condition.....sort your timeline out.
My timeline.... hmm now let's see.
Tottenham 0 - 0 United, 16-jan 2011
Wolves 2 -1 United, 5-feb 2011
Fletcher doesn't play another game from March 2011 onwards, finding out that he has been suffering from ulcerative colitis.
sort your timeline out.
Yup, Juve's resurgence is as much to do with signing Vidal in 2011 as it does signing Pirlo. He doesn't have the same influence no, but you can't have two generals in midfield, one has to defer. Vidal is as brilliant a player as you can get for that Juve midfield, gives them all the legs they need.
I'm not sure the notion that playing with better midfielders makes you seem better either. If anything it brings out your deficiencies more often than not. For example, it became clearer than Fabregas(good as he is) isn't as good at passing as Xavi or Iniesta when he moved to Barca, Mascherano sticks out like a sore thumb in the Barca midfield, and another player that is struggling to stand out while playing in a better midfield is well...actually Modric.
Mascherano never plays in midfield for Barcelona ever. He basically played centre back as soon as he joined them, I think Pep signed him as a centre back.
Wut? All top European teams play 4231 except Barca (cos they got Messi and can feck about).
He had a couple of stints in midfield soon after joining and looked a clunky fit.
Yes which, as several people have pointed out above, means a three man midfield - the 2 and the central man in the 3. Unless you think Oscar, Cazorla, Kagawa, Giaccherini etc are strikers?
There's really no such thing as a two man midfield in top-level modern football any more, so the whole debate is academic. What people really mean by 'can he play in a two man midfield?' is 'does he play in the 2 of a 4231, or in the 3?'
4-2-3-1. Two players in CM and three in advanced midfield positions, plus a striker.
Juve don't (but they could easily change to it if needed.)
He did the first few weeks of joining them. He never plays in midfield for them anymore because they realized how out of depth he is when he played there, which was my point.
So more than two men in midfield, no? Did you not understand my reply?
Ramires Lampard
Mata Oscar Hazard
Torres
Mata Oscar Hazard
Torres
Torres is a striker. Mata and Hazard might be considered wingers, or at least wide attackers. But at the very least, that's a three man midfield: Ramires, Lampard and Oscar. So, like I said, there's really no such thing as a proper old-fashioned two man midfield in top level football any more.
Loads of players are shit when they join a new club, usually we say give them a season to settle in and you're not even giving him a few weeks?
How would Vidic and Evra be if we wrote them off after a few weeks?
You don't need to do a 30 week research to know that Mascherano doesn't fit Barcelona well as a defensive midfielder. It's not about fitting in stylistically/tactically. He just doesn't have enough technically to excel as the defensive midfielder of that team, not if they were planning on winning a lot of things anyway. They realised this and shoved him to the back.
I meant an orthodox 4-4-2.
Yes I did, I was trying to point out that the central midfield is contested by two players in the main with three playing higher up the pitch for the most part (and with 'inside'-forward skills as you illustrate with your choice of 'counter'examples).
Ah, I see. So when you talk about 'midfield', you just mean a much smaller piece of the pitch than everyone else does. Gotcha.
To think that I've been saying that Arsenal don't have enough decent strikers and all along Cazorla was one. Or maybe he's a winger. Anything but a midfielder, right?
I have no problem, and it wasnt specifically aimed at you.
I just find it strange that when discussing the relative merits of a player, in this case whether he'd be a valuable addition to United's squad the thread moves to "he's not one of the ten best in the world", as if that's a reason not to bother.
Given that non of those ten players play for United, and that its unlikely we'd actually have a chance of signing any of them it just seems a moot point.
I'd say he's at least as good as Carrick and currently better than both Anderson (who I doubt will ever do anything of note at United) and Cleverly (who I think could have a big future). On that basis, while I'd rather probably have other players over him if it were possible, I certainly would be unhappy if the club did make a move for him.
Wilshere has performed much better against much better opposition (see Barcelona as an example) at 18 or 19 than Modric has his entire career. I also disagree with Ozil, I certainly wouldn't say he's a Rooney. He's an attacking, creative central midfielder. It's annoying how you seem to be trying to create so many different categories of someone who plays centrally between the defenders and strikers, just so that Modric becomes one of the best. Ozil can't be counted as he plays a little too far forward, Martinez can't as he plays a little too far back. How about we just say he's the best central midfielder in the world whose first name is Luka?
If you need a few more then Busquets, Fabregas, De Rossi are better and the likes of Bender, Moutinho are of a similar level and younger, so would be preferable. As I said I don't think he's a great player when it matters, I'd have Dembele before him.
I also still stand by the fact that it would be very difficult to accommodate Modric and Carrick, without sacrificing our formation. They would recycle possession very well, but we'd be very vulnerable and would be even more heavily reliant on our wingers than we are now.