Marouane Fellaini | 2013/14 Performances

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fellaini has yet to establish himself as first choice, Cleverley has proven a lot more since he's come in.
 
Man-United said:
He didn't. Not against Palace and not against West Brom.
Click to expand...

Against both Palace and West Brom he was a second half substitute. I didn't say he started every game, I said he played in every one.

He has been involved in every game he could have since he signed, bar the Liverpool cup game where we played our second-string.
 
Man-United said:
He didn't. Not against Palace and not against West Brom.
Click to expand...

Came on as a sub against both.

Just thinking back to that Shakhtar game... I feel it sums him up. One successful tackle, EIGHT fouls, zero interceptions.

Passing:
Carrick - 61/65 (94%)
Cleverley - 49/57 (86%)
Fellaini - 34/39 (87%)

Dispossessed five times (to Cleverley and Carrick's none)
Aerial duels won - 5 (to Cleverley's none and Carrick's one)

I'm sure people will claim this to be somewhat misleading, but over the course of the season you'll see the stats aren't misleading; this is how good he is.
 
Or, over the course of the season he will get better because so far he's played a total of 3 games for United?
 
Fellaini has a lot to prove, and deserves time in which to prove it.

To suggest he's one of the first names on the team sheet is wrong though, he's definitely not.
 
Kid Cunto said:
Fellaini has yet to establish himself as first choice, Cleverley has proven a lot more since he's come in.
Click to expand...

It hasn't helped Fellaini that he's been thrown into the tough fixtures. Realistically you'd have wanted to play him in the easier games but the way the fixtures have gone how long it took you to buy him things haven't worked out as well.
 
Why has Liam started talking about Fellaini as if he's an authority on the matter when he's just regurgitating popular criticisms of Fellaini?
 
Liam147 said:
Came on as a sub against both.

Just thinking back to that Shakhtar game... I feel it sums him up. One successful tackle, EIGHT fouls, zero interceptions.

Passing:
Carrick - 61/65 (94%)
Cleverley - 49/57 (86%)
Fellaini - 34/39 (87%)

Dispossessed five times (to Cleverley and Carrick's none)
Aerial duels won - 5 (to Cleverley's none and Carrick's one)

I'm sure people will claim this to be somewhat misleading, but over the course of the season you'll see the stats aren't misleading; this is how good he is.
Click to expand...


Did you watch the Shakhtar game? You can't hold his foul count against him in that, of those eight fouls half of them if not fewer were just the ref being a knob.
 
Ainu said:
Impossible. It's well known that players don't improve their game when they move to a bigger team. Never happens.
Click to expand...

True, and it helps to judge him on the worst performance too, especially so early into his career. Of course using positives from the Palace or Leverkusen match would just be insane and pointless.
 
I don't subscribe to the "glad he's injured" brigade.

However from Fellaini's point of view I don't think it's horrific timing. It will get him out of the spotlight and will allow him more time to settle in and get to know hsi team mates and surroundings. He'll be coming back from an injury, which naturally would allow him more leeway in terms of performances once he's back and the memory of his hugely inflated price tag will not be as fresh in fans' minds.

Likewise I wouldn't say a squad needs to be as large and rotated as much pre-xmas as post-xmas so I don't think it will be particularly damaging in that sense (save an injury crises). I also do feel that his price tag means Moyes would inevitably feel pressured into playing him regardless of form (at the expense of continuity with Cleverley, who is looking good).

Overall I'd say if there was ever a time to be out for a month or so; now isn't the worst time in the world.
 
SilentWitness said:
It hasn't helped Fellaini that he's been thrown into the tough fixtures. Realistically you'd have wanted to play him in the easier games but the way the fixtures have gone how long it took you to buy him things haven't worked out as well.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and to be honest I expect Fellaini to eventually establish himself as Carrick's partner, especially with our current midfield options. But at the moment he's done nothing to warrant a spot ahead of Cleverley, or even Anderson, in the pecking order.
 
I believe -- or at least hope -- that Fellaini will improve. I said it before: we know he can be better than this because he was never this bad for Everton. I reckon his problem has been that he was immediately thrown in the deep end by Moyes and expected to perform; that's the reason I was pointing out that he's been involved in every game he could have been since signing. Like any player coming to a new team, he needs time to adapt to us. Normally a good chunk of this happens during pre-season, but he missed that thanks to us fecking around with our transfers. What he didn't need was to be playing in every game and given the responsibility of being expected to instantly perform. Not everyone is Robin van Persie.

I'm not one of those glad that he's injured. He needs to be fit and ready so that he can be eased in. If he's going to get better -- which he will -- then being out for two months is the last thing he needs.
 
Count Orduck said:
Whilst it's never nice to see a United player injured, do people not see where the "glad he's injured" brigade are coming from? Can't say I agree with it, but I understand it. He seems to be a key player in Moyes's plans, playing every game even though he's been awful in every single one. You could argue his presence makes us worse as a team. If his being injured is the only way Moyes won't pick him, then it's hardly surprising some people are glad he's injured.
Click to expand...

There's no reason to believe he would've picked Fellaini regardless of form to the detriment of the team given he was dropped just last weekend against West Brom following his performance against City.
 
finneh said:
I don't subscribe to the "glad he's injured" brigade.

However from Fellaini's point of view I don't think it's horrific timing. It will get him out of the spotlight and will allow him more time to settle in and get to know hsi team mates and surroundings. He'll be coming back from an injury, which naturally would allow him more leeway in terms of performances once he's back and the memory of his hugely inflated price tag will not be as fresh in fans' minds.

Likewise I wouldn't say a squad needs to be as large and rotated as much pre-xmas as post-xmas so I don't think it will be particularly damaging in that sense. I also do feel that his price tag means Moyes would inevitably feel pressured into playing him regardless of form (at the expense of continuity with Cleverley, who is looking good).

Overall I'd say if there was ever a time to be out for a month or so; now isn't the worst time in the world.
Click to expand...

Wait... this is an actual thing? What fecking idiots or on this brigade?!?
 
Liam147 said:
Came on as a sub against both.

Just thinking back to that Shakhtar game... I feel it sums him up. One successful tackle, EIGHT fouls, zero interceptions.

Passing:
Carrick - 61/65 (94%)
Cleverley - 49/57 (86%)
Fellaini - 34/39 (87%)

Dispossessed five times (to Cleverley and Carrick's none)
Aerial duels won - 5 (to Cleverley's none and Carrick's one)

I'm sure people will claim this to be somewhat misleading, but over the course of the season you'll see the stats aren't misleading; this is how good he is.
Click to expand...

Vs Leverkusen:

- Won 4 aerial duels, one less than Smalling/Vidic.
- Had more touches (102) than any player bar Carrick, who played 10 mins longer.
- Made 84 passes with 87 percent completion
- Recovered possession 12 times
- Two tackles and Four interceptions (Highest combined on either team)
- Four headed clearences
 
Do the same people want Buttner injured as Evra would have to play every game, Rio injured because he's been bad this season, Valencia and Young injured?

Shame on you.
 
Liam147 said:
Strictly speaking about the first team here AN, do you not think it's good that he's out of the team? Or would you rather he played above Cleverley?
Click to expand...

I can't understand this for a number of reasons.

He isn't an automatic starter, for one.

And we already have limited options in centre mid, we don't need injuries there.
 
Liam147 said:
Strictly speaking about the first team here AN, do you not think it's good that he's out of the team? Or would you rather he played above Cleverley?
Click to expand...

I don't ever think it is ever a good thing that someone is injured.

Also, we're so thin in midfield that we frankly can't afford injuries, do you honestly think Fellaini is so bad that he is of no use to us at all?! Even if you think that Clev should start before him, wouldn't Fellaini be of use on the bench?
 
Brwned said:
There's no reason to believe he would've picked Fellaini regardless of form to the detriment of the team given he was dropped just last weekend against West Brom following his performance against City.
Click to expand...

Was he? Or did Moyes just figure an easy home game against West Brom was a good game to play Anderson in? And let's not forget he still came on as a sub.

Again, I'm of the belief he's played too much. He needs to be eased in to get used to his new team-mates and our style of play. Being injured for two months (or whatever it is) doesn't help that, but nor does playing a part in nearly every game regardless of form. Both are pretty far from ideal.

Edit: Got my fixtures muddled up.
 
Hectic said:
Vs Leverkusen:

- Won 4 aerial duels, one less than Smalling/Vidic.
- Had more touches (102) than any player bar Carrick, who played 10 mins longer.
- Made 84 passes with 87 percent completion
- Recovered possession 12 times
- Two tackles and Four interceptions (Highest combined on either team)
- Four headed clearences
Click to expand...

Yeah he was pretty good against Leverkusen. They're not an especially good side though, and we wont quite comfortably in the end.

Annihilate Now! said:
I don't ever think it is ever a good thing that someone is injured.

Also, we're so thin in midfield that we frankly can't afford injuries, do you honestly think Fellaini is so bad that he is of no use to us at all?! Even if you think that Clev should start before him, wouldn't Fellaini be of use on the bench?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. I've said on here on a number of occasions that our squad is stronger with him than without. Our first team on the other hand...
 
Count Orduck said:
Was he? Or did Moyes just figure an easy home game against West Brom was a good game to play Anderson in? If Moyes dropped Fellaini because of his poor performance against City, then why did he play midweek against Shaktar - a more difficult game, and also the one immediately following the City game?

And let's not forget he still came on as a sub against West Brom.

Again, I'm of the belief he's played too much. He needs to be eased in to get used to his new team-mates and our style of play. Being injured for two months (or whatever it is) doesn't help that, but nor does playing a part in nearly every game regardless of form. Both are pretty far from ideal.
Click to expand...

Because Ando was dreadful against WBA, and we played 3 midfielders against Shaktar... which is a perfectly sensible way for Fellaini to come back into the team.

Considering then that Cleverley was probably our best midfielder out of the 3 on Wednesday, I can definitely see Moyes sticking with him on Saturday and dropping Fellaini back to the bench.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Because Ando was dreadful against WBA, and we played 3 midfielders against Shaktar... which is a perfectly sensible way for Fellaini to come back into the team.

Considering then that Cleverley was probably our best midfielder out of the 3 on Wednesday, I can definitely see Moyes sticking with him on Saturday and dropping Fellaini back to the bench.
Click to expand...

I got my midweeks muddled up. The Shaktar game wasn't the game immediately after City; the Liverpool League Cup game was, which he didn't play in.

My only point was that I think he's been playing too much, and what he needed was to be eased in more slowly. But at the same time, his being injured is hardly a bonus.
 
Count Orduck said:
Was he? Or did Moyes just figure an easy home game against West Brom was a good game to play Anderson in? And let's not forget he still came on as a sub.

Again, I'm of the belief he's played too much. He needs to be eased in to get used to his new team-mates and our style of play. Being injured for two months (or whatever it is) doesn't help that, but nor does playing a part in nearly every game regardless of form. Both are pretty far from ideal.

Edit: Got my fixtures muddled up.
Click to expand...


Playing 286 minutes of a possible 540 minutes since signing hardly seems like overkill. If he'd stuck him in the starting lineup from the beginning then I could see where you're coming from but he didn't even start v Palace despite playing well for Belgium a few days earlier. And he nearly scored an equaliser against West Brom at a time when we were trailing, and part of the reason we were trailing was due to Anderson being rubbish and hence needed taking off.
 
Maybe the international break has come at a good time. Think we play Stoke during his absence, he'll be missed there.
 
Liam147 said:
Came on as a sub against both.

Just thinking back to that Shakhtar game... I feel it sums him up. One successful tackle, EIGHT fouls, zero interceptions.

Passing:
Carrick - 61/65 (94%)
Cleverley - 49/57 (86%)
Fellaini - 34/39 (87%)

Dispossessed five times (to Cleverley and Carrick's none)
Aerial duels won - 5 (to Cleverley's none and Carrick's one)

I'm sure people will claim this to be somewhat misleading, but over the course of the season you'll see the stats aren't misleading; this is how good he is.
Click to expand...

The stats are interesting, however he was playing further forward than the other 2 midfielders so not directly comparable.
Also the fouls were mostly the clueless ref. The only worrying bit for me was the amount of times he lost the ball.

And the most important stat you missed out: 1 assist!
plus I think it is no coincidence that we conceeded after he went off.
 
Liam147 said:
And that best side in the world taught a footballing lesson to the side who taught us a footballing lesson.

One off results aren't the be-all.
Click to expand...

When it's your first ever start for one of the biggest clubs in the world, in a competition you've never played in, against a good side (they are better than you're making them appear and could have scored more in the second half).
 
Ainu said:
What about one off performances by a player then? They seem to count just fine.
Click to expand...

My point was that, in my opinion, that wasn't a one-off performance. That was his standard. I was never impressed with him in midfield for Everton, and neither were many of us on here. I'm not suddenly going to change that on the back of a performance where we won 4-1 at home in our first CL group game. If he consistently performs, then fair enough, but I do not think he's cut out for United.
 
SilentWitness said:
When it's your first ever start for one of the biggest clubs in the world, in a competition you've never played in, against a good side (they are better than you're making them appear and could have scored more in the second half).
Click to expand...

Pretty certain he played there for Liege. Not that it matters; he's played in Europe before (for you), and he's an international. The step up (if it is a step up) to CL football isn't so great it should negatively impact his performance. The new club thing might though.
 
Huh? I'm not saying it had a negative impact on his performance. I'm saying he was thrown straight into the deep end and had a very good display against a good side.

The fact that you believe it is good he is injured when it's a position which you have shite depth in tells you all you need to know about your agenda against him.
 
SilentWitness said:
Huh? I'm not saying it had a negative impact on his performance. I'm saying he was thrown straight into the deep end and had a very good display against a good side.
Click to expand...

You're using it as a factor as to why he could've played badly or as a reason to further commend him for playing well. I'm saying that this 'CL debut' thing (which it wasn't) isn't a reason to give extra praise or exclude him from criticism.
 
I don't think I've ever seen people write off a new player so quickly on here before. It's mental.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.