Chesterlestreet
Man of the crowd
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2012
- Messages
- 19,665
Sticking with the Veron analogy, let's not forget he didn't cut the mustard at Chelsea either. Does this mean that both Chelsea and United lacked the tactical flexibility to accomodate this mercurial genius? or maybe, just maybe he never had what it takes to thrive in English football? I know it's trendy to slag off the standard of football in the Premier League but there are loads of very talented footballers who - for some reason - just couldn't hack it in this league. The pace, the physicality, the refereeing, whatever. It's not always the fault of the club that signed them.
'Tis a far point, that. It was perhaps even more so back then - but I think it's still true that a certain type of player just isn't cut out for a certain type of league. You could argue that the difference between the big leagues of Europe is smaller now than it was, due to players being imported from all over the world* and the consequent loss of a "national" style. But there is undoubtedly still a difference - in terms of speed and physicality.
The analogy is worrying, though. Veron was a top class player who simply didn't fit in. He wasn't found out, in my opinion, as much as it turned out that he just wasn't the right fit. In Europe, where Fergie ditched his regular formation for a three of sorts in the middle, Veron was much better. I suspect Kagawa would benefit from us changing our set-up slightly too - but the reason Fergie didn't change his formation permanently was simple and valid: Veron wasn't the only top class player we had at the time, far from it. We had others, who worked better in a different set-up, and in the end we were better off letting Veron go.
* Which was the case back when we signed Veron too, of course, but to a lesser degree. The equivalent to today's Swanseas and Sunderlands weren't loaded with foreign imports to the same extent, etc.