Central midfield this season...

[Adebesi]

How can you say it's "worked all season" whilst posting in another thread that you think our attacking football has lacked fluency all season?

Point taken.

The wankfest about how great our interchangeable squad was was very much overdone.

Our attacking football has lacked fluency all season, I definitely believe that. And yes, probably part of the reason for that is in central midfield. But I am not sure I would say the lack of a settled team is the principal reason we have lacked our cutting edge up front.

 

[CptMarvel]

You also have to remember that last season, with Tevez and Rooney up front, we had two players who would step back to augment the midfield. While Berbatov seems to enjoy playing deeper, he doesn't get involved in the same way, and a Rooney/Tevez can cover a multitude of sins in the centre of the park through work rate alone.

This season, with Rooney further forward, there's less of that going on. That means players like Carrick and Fletcher will often have one less option to pass to in there. That makes a difference too.

It's true about Rooney and Tevez, but none of our opposition have Rooney or Tevez either, our two men should be able to boss there two men on there own. And the flip side to it last season was Rooney and Tevez going absent from attack.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Point taken.

The wankfest about how great our interchangeable squad was was very much overdone.

Our attacking football has lacked fluency all season, I definitely believe that. And yes, probably part of the reason for that is in central midfield. But I am not sure I would say the lack of a settled team is the principal reason we have lacked our cutting edge up front.

I'm not blaming it purely on the lack of a settled team though. I'm blaming it on the fact Giggs, Fletcher and Carrick have played well (but not frequently enough, for various different reasons) while the players coming in instead of them have under-performed.

We've rotated very effectively in other areas of the pitch IMO, especially in defence.

 

[CptMarvel]

But I am not sure I would say the lack of a settled team is the principal reason we have lacked our cutting edge up front.

The lack of a settled midfield could be argued to be the reason why they rarely look to be on the same page as the attack.

 

[devilish]

We don't need a super central midfielder for the simply reason that its not in our nature to fully exploit such department. I mean even when we had two world class midfielders (Keane and Scholes) much of the creativity used to come from the flanks with Keane acting as the weight that balanced an all attacking midfield and Scholes acting as the third striker. In fact when we did tried to improve things by bring in what was considered the second best playmaker of the time (Veron) the plan failed miserably.

Our central midfield is as good as it is (ie this apply only if Hargreaves returns to his former self). What we need is to follow some basic rules

a) if Carrick is off form he is either replaced by Hargreaves or else we partner him with Fletcher

b) if we are playing 4 - 4 - 2 then we can either have Scholes or Giggs. Not both

c) Fletcher should NEVER play on the flank

d) Park should not be played in a 4 - 5 - 1 team. He is hardworking but he adds little to the creativity spark. Same thing can be said if we are playing with both Hargreaves/Fletcher and Carrick in midfield.

 

[Brwned]

We don't need a super central midfielder for the simply reason that its not in our nature to fully exploit such department. I mean even when we had two world class midfielders (Keane and Scholes) much of the creativity used to come from the flanks with Keane acting as the weight that balanced an all attacking midfield and Scholes acting as the third striker. In fact when we did tried to improve things by bring in what was considered the second best playmaker of the time (Veron) the plan failed miserably.

Our central midfield is as good as it is (ie this apply only if Hargreaves returns to his former self). What we need is to follow some basic rules

a) if Carrick is off form he is either replaced by Hargreaves or else we partner him with Fletcher

b) if we are playing 4 - 4 - 2 then we can either have Scholes or Giggs. Not both

c) Fletcher should NEVER play on the flank

d) Park should not be played in a 4 - 5 - 1 team. He is hardworking but he adds little to the creativity spark. Same thing can be said if we are playing with both Hargreaves/Fletcher and Carrick in midfield.

Park played well against Inter at the San Siro in a 4-5-1.

 

[Adebesi]

I'm not blaming it purely on the lack of a settled team though. I'm blaming it on the fact Giggs, Fletcher and Carrick have played well (but not frequently enough, for various different reasons) while the players coming in instead of them have under-performed.

We've rotated very effectively in other areas of the pitch IMO, especially in defence.

Right-ho.

Im not sure what my opinion on this is to be honest. It seems to me that all the players you cite - especially Giggs and Carrick - have blown hot and cold a bit this season. Mostly hot, but with off games. Scholes has had a couple of great games, but been cold more often than would be expected from him. It is the most important area of the park so it stands to reason that problems there would manifest themselves elsewhere - in this case in our lack of fluency up front. But it hasnt struck me as obvious until now that this was what was going on. I will pay particular attention to it in the next few games.

 

[devilish]

Park played well against Inter at the San Siro in a 4-5-1.

Im talking in general here. Inter possess one of the most hardworking midfield in the world so in that case it makes sense to play Park.

 

[Brwned]

Im talking in general here. Inter possess one of the most hardworking midfield in the world so in that case it makes sense to play Park.

Give some basis to it then.

When has playing Park in a 4-3-3 been a bad decision?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Right-ho.

Im not sure what my opinion on this is to be honest. It seems to me that all the players you cite - especially Giggs and Carrick - have blown hot and cold a bit this season. Mostly hot, but with off games. Scholes has had a couple of great games, but been cold more often than would be expected from him. It is the most important area of the park so it stands to reason that problems there would manifest themselves elsewhere - in this case in our lack of fluency up front. But it hasnt struck me as obvious until now that this was what was going on. I will pay particular attention to it in the next few games.

Yeah, I'm just throwing it out there to be honest.

I had kind of assumed our midfield was performing very well all season but the defensive errors against Liverpool kind of glossed over the fact we got owned in midfield. Same thing happened against Fulham (even before Scholes' moment of madness) and that got me thinking back to the season as a whole and that got me thinking we've had more problems in central midfield than I first thought, especially against quality opposition.

Liverpool dominated midfield at Anfield, Chelsea did the same at Stamford Bridge, Arsenal ran rings round us at the Emirates and we had to do a major re-shuffle to stop Inter bossing the game against us at Old Trafford. I think Carrick has been superb at times this season and his performances have given us a foot-hold in midfield in games where his partner hasn't been up to scratch.

The performances of Giggs have also made things look better than they actually are, the problem with this being that Giggs is no longer able to play more than one or two games in a row.

 

[CantonaVeron]

Yes the midfield is a problem, constant changes have contributed to us not playing as well, having so many midfield players which should be great is turning into a disaster, as we try and fit them all into the side for enough games during the season. From now on I would just put Carrick and Fletcher together and say make a partnership, we have the flair around them that just needs the base to perform. It might mean Anderson, Scholes and Giggs not playing that much football but they can also come on and make a central three if we are getting overrun or a little cameo at the end of the match.

 

[Adebesi]

I would go back to what Sincher said in post #20. Carrick and Fletcher looks nice and solid and perhaps typifies why we have until recently been inpenetrable, but from the perspective of our attacking fluency, it is not necessarily the most inspiring pairing.

Scholes is getting on, as is Giggs although he has been more consistent this season, and Anderson is not doing what it says on the tin, as far as developing into the box to box maestro that I (prematurely?) thought he would be.

Perhaps we need someone with more attacking panache. Or maybe Anderson will come good. Or maybe I am selling Fletcher short, as he is trying to work on this side of his game.

 

[Godfather]

Very good points Pogue.

In my opinion, and I don't know if it has already been discussed in this thread, it is very difficult though to play a system in which rotation doesnt play such a big role with a big squad as we have him right now.

It's a bit ironical, on the one hand it's a very good thing to have such a big squad in which you can replace players that a need a rest with at least as good ones but on the other hand no one will get a good run of games and into great form.

Not only in CM we got problem though, same goes for our wings.
Park has an incredible season, and Ronaldo will probably never be dropped so the likes of Nani won't get too many games as they haven't been in such great form and probably will struggle to do so as there are players with better form to replace them.

It's a difficult issue and probably the reason of some of our defeats

 

[Raven Blade]

I agree that we need to go back to basics and get some consistency back in central midfield. Fletcher and Carrick have been 2 of our most reliable midfielders all season and we should trust in them for the few games ahead. Giggs has also been exceptional but he cant play twice in a week so we should choose whether he will be involved against Aston Villa or Porto.

 

[Godfather]

I agree that we need to go back to basics and get some consistency back in central midfield. Fletcher and Carrick have been 2 of our most reliable midfielders all season and we should trust in them for the few games ahead. Giggs has also been exceptional but he cant play twice in a week so we should choose whether he will be involved against Aston Villa or Porto.

Agreed. But what to do with Scholes or Anderson? Will they be happy sitting on the bench for the rest of our matches? Will Fergie do this anyway after rotating the whole season?

I don't actually think so tbh

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Agreed. But what to do with Scholes or Anderson? Will they be happy sitting on the bench for the rest of our matches? Will Fergie do this anyway after rotating the whole season?

I don't actually think so tbh

I think both Scholes and Anderson will be brilliant players to come off the bench when the game is stretched. Anderson to run into the wide open spaces, Scholes to stretch the game even more with his long-range passing.

For me it's Fletcher and Carrick to start every league game, with Giggs sharing the burden in Europe.

 

[OneUnited24]

Agreed. But what to do with Scholes or Anderson? Will they be happy sitting on the bench for the rest of our matches? Will Fergie do this anyway after rotating the whole season?

I don't actually think so tbh

There is still a job that can be done by both, this season Anderson has played his best stuff when hes been in a midfield 5 so when we want to close games off he can come on for that. Scholes i feel has dipped in form quite a bit since he returned, while hes had brilliant games (against Fulham at OT) hes had games where he hasnt got hold of the game and his passing has been off. Honestly if we need to win our next few games i cant see SAF losing much sleep if he picks Carrick and Fletcher as both have been outstanding when they have played and got the best out of the people around them too - also i reckon the reason why SAF chopped and changed a bit was to rest players for this final run of games hopefully it will pay off.

 

[Godfather]

I think both Scholes and Anderson will be brilliant players to come off the bench when the game is stretched. Anderson to run into the wide open spaces, Scholes to stretch the game even more with his long-range passing.

For me it's Fletcher and Carrick to start every league game, with Giggs sharing the burden in Europe.

That could be a possibility yes and in Europe, as you've mentioned, where we play with 5 midfielders anyway Giggs as well as Scholes or Anderson could play their part as well.

We will see what will happen but some consistency in our midfield can't be wrong.

Also we have to consider injuries or suspensions

 

[Godfather]

There is still a job that can be done by both, this season Anderson has played his best stuff when hes been in a midfield 5 so when we want to close games off he can come on for that. Scholes i feel has dipped in form quite a bit since he returned, while hes had brilliant games (against Fulham at OT) hes had games where he hasnt got hold of the game and his passing has been off. Honestly if we need to win our next few games i cant see SAF losing much sleep if he picks Carrick and Fletcher as both have been outstanding when they have played and got the best out of the people around them too - also i reckon the reason why SAF chopped and changed a bit was to rest players for this final run of games hopefully it will pay off.

Agreed apart from the last bit.
He has rotated from the start on and I don't think that he had the final run of games in mind back then.

It's certainly because he wants to keep our players happy as well as the fact that also Scholes, Anderson or Giggs in the middle can do brilliant jobs and depending on the opponent can be even more effective than a Carrick-Fletcher midfield.

But now that the final run in is here he will certainly let our players in form start the league games

 

[OneUnited24]

Agreed apart from the last bit.
He has rotated from the start on and I don't think that he had the final run of games in mind back then.

It's certainly because he wants to keep our players happy as well as the fact that also Scholes, Anderson or Giggs in the middle can do brilliant jobs and depending on the opponent can be even more effective than a Carrick-Fletcher midfield.

But now that the final run in is here he will certainly let our players in form start the league games

Thats why i believe he left Carrick on the bench for the whole 90 on Saturday, because if he doesnt play for England (and i sort of hope he doesnt!) then he would have the benefit of 2 weeks with trainning which should put him in good stead for the Villa game, and hopefully Fletcher doesnt get injuried so we can rely on them for the next couple of games. My concern is with the fixture list, it says we will play Villa on Sunday at 4 then Porto in the UCL on Tuesday... not really ideal

 

[Godfather]

Thats why i believe he left Carrick on the bench for the whole 90 on Saturday, because if he doesnt play for England (and i sort of hope he doesnt!) then he would have the benefit of 2 weeks with trainning which should put him in good stead for the Villa game, and hopefully Fletcher doesnt get injuried so we can rely on them for the next couple of games. My concern is with the fixture list, it says we will play Villa on Sunday at 4 then Porto in the UCL on Tuesday... not really ideal

Certainly not ideal no, but we have to cope with that.
And against Porto I think that also the likes of Giggs, Anderson and Nani will play their part, whereas against Villa we will certainly need the likes of Carrick and Fletcher in CM, although Villa are in a pretty shite form recently as well.

 

[OneUnited24]

Certainly not ideal no, but we have to cope with that.
And against Porto I think that also the likes of Giggs, Anderson and Nani will play their part, whereas against Villa we will certainly need the likes of Carrick and Fletcher in CM, although Villa are in a pretty shite form recently as well.

Cue the Pre-Match speach by O'neil that gets them all fired up to hold on for a draw... I get the feeling that after trying to play open vs Liverpool they will see the errors of their ways and go back to a 4-5-1 to fustrate us and get us on the counter. But we have to deal with it if we want to be champions

 

[Ole_Gunnar]

A couple of seasons back, when Scholes was in his pomp, I reckon the Scholes-Carrick partnership was world class. Carrick has improved slightly since then but - unfortunately for us - this has coinicided with a decline in the form of Scholes, as age finally starts to catch up with him.

What the fook is wrong with you!


Don't say that..

 

[Rowem]

What the fook is wrong with you!


Don't say that..

Its true though. Hes had a poor season.

Injuries havent helped mind.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

What?

Scholes isn't having a poor season?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Its true though. Hes had a poor season.

Injuries havent helped mind.

Yeah, injury didn't help. But he was poor long before the injury and he's been poor long after.

I still think there's some life in the old dog yet but I'm convinced this season is the beginning of the end. Had to happen at some point anyway.

 

[Godfather]

Not sure though.
He certainly shouldnt be used as often as few years back but when I look back to the Fulham game where he didnt misplace one single pass and controlled the whole match and had probably the best game for a long time I still think that, if wisely used, he is one of the best, but as Pogue has mentioned age and injuries slowly come to show

 

[Ole_Gunnar]

He's the best central midfielder I've ever seen and played his best football AFTER that eye injury when some of you were ready to call it a day for him. He strokes a football better than ANYONE in world football, so there's reason why he can't go on for a few more years. The injury's just messed up his season, we need to see him next to Carrick, give them two a consistent run of games maybe taking Paul of towards the end and that will be the solution.

 

[Ole_Gunnar]

Why is Giggs being so selfish with his fountain of youth map !!!

 

[Rednails]

This is a really interesting thread. Whatever happens this year, midfield strengthening is got to be a priority for next season. Giggs and Scholes cant go on much longer and I'm afraid we lack the overall quality of Liverpools midfield.

 

[BaldwinLegend]

Does anyone else think we are lacking fluency due to the lack of a settled and on-form central midfield?

You've hideously over-simplified things here. The idea of a club settling on two central midfield players and playing them throughout the season is just no longer viable. We're well stocked in that department and part of being a modern footballer is the ability to deal with coming in and out of the team - no one expects SAF to pick two players and declare them as his first choice CM partnership. His aim is to play the right players in each match and keep them constantly fresh and hungry.

He's done that brilliantly all season until the last two games which has led to another of your muppet knee-jerk threads.

Following the Chelsea game where he picked out Giggs and Fletcher to play in midfield weeks before the match, surprising everyone by leaving Scholes and Carrick on the bench, Fergie actually let down his guard in a press conference and spoke at length on how important it has become in these days of large squads to pick the right players for the right matches. He went on to mention how it takes up much of his and his staff's time deciding this weeks in advance.

Carrick has improved slightly since then but - unfortunately for us - this has coinicided with a decline in the form of Scholes, as age finally starts to catch up with him.

I'd be interested to know how you justify saying this, other than spouting on with your usual bollocks about his asthma.

How many threads were there clogging up this site last year with so called experts informing us solemnly that Giggs' career was in decline? And now he's amongst the favourites to win the player of the year awards.

Why does every muppet on here, including you, constantly assume that the minute a 30 plus player exhibits a dip in form he is is suddenly in permanent decline?

I'm probably a wee bit more optimistic than some in this thread in that I think the combination of Fletcher and Carrick (with Anderson and/or Hargreaves in the mix) is probably good enough, moving forwards.

Disagree... That quartet you mention sorely lacks certain qualities which is why Giggs has remained such a vital player. There is no way on earth that Fergie would be happy to go into the future with just those four in central midfield. He'll certainly need a player to replace what Giggs currently offers - something none of those four can.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

I think it's whether you think a settled midfield is more important than Giggs and Scholes starting. I think it is and that until they call it a day they will still have valuable contributions to make from the bench.

My only problem with this is that I can't remember a truly outstanding performance from us over the past 2/3 seasons that didn't have Scholes or Giggs running the show. We've got alot of very good midfielders, but we're kind of in limbo in that we need a settled line up but the two players that can really make the difference in making our attack coherent are too old to play every game. Looking ahead to next season and beyond the success or failure of our midfield depends massively on whether Anderson develops into the player we think he's capable of being.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

You've hideously over-simplified things here. The idea of a club settling on two central midfield players and playing them throughout the season is just no longer viable. We're well stocked in that department and part of being a modern footballer is the ability to deal with coming in and out of the team - no one expects SAF to pick two players and declare them as his first choice CM partnership. His aim is to play the right players in each match and keep them constantly fresh and hungry.

He's done that brilliantly all season until the last two games which has led to another of your muppet knee-jerk threads.

Following the Chelsea game where he picked out Giggs and Fletcher to play in midfield weeks before the match, surprising everyone by leaving Scholes and Carrick on the bench, Fergie actually let down his guard in a press conference and spoke at length on how important it has become in these days of large squads to pick the right players for the right matches. He went on to mention how it takes up much of his and his staff's time deciding this weeks in advance.

All well and good but either he's got it completely wrong in the last two games - which I think is unlikely - or the players he selected have let him down. Either way, it's caused us problems. Scholes isn't having a great season, nor is Anderson and what few problems we have had this season usually revolved around one or other of them struggling (or in the really bad performances, both of them) Rotation only works well when you've got the players to do it effectively. SAF has an amazing squad but our cover in central midfield isn't quite what it could be. Hence my suggestion that it might be an idea to do a little less rotation in this area of the pitch.

I'd be interested to know how you justify saying this, other than spouting on with your usual bollocks about his asthma.

How many threads were there clogging up this site last year with so called experts informing us solemnly that Giggs' career was in decline? And now he's amongst the favourites to win the player of the year awards.

Why does every muppet on here, including you, constantly assume that the minute a 30 plus player exhibits a dip in form he is is suddenly in permanent decline?

In your opinion, is Scholes having a good season?

In your opinion has Scholes declined slightly over the last two seasons? He's still capable of class performances but hasn't come close to the consistency of a couple of seasons back. Inconsistency is as good a sign of a player on the decline as any.

How long does a decline have to go on, in someone who is in their mid-thirties, before we start to worry that it might be permanent?

 

[beergod]

I believe inconsistency to be the biggest issue in central midfield. Anderson has been horribly inconsistent this season and I'm not sure he is well suited to play in a two-man midfield yet, but he seems to perform far better when we have three in the middle. Scholes' decline in fitness leaves him unsuitable to play in a two-man midfield against teams that can match up with us, while he can still be very effective when teams are parking the bus. Giggs has been very good at times this season, but when he is off form he leaves us with massive problems in the middle. At this point, I believe that Carrick and Fletcher are our only consistent players in central midfield and that we may be best suited playing a three-man midfield more often to cover up for this weakness.

 

[Eto'odinho]

I had kind of assumed our midfield was performing very well all season but the defensive errors against Liverpool kind of glossed over the fact we got owned in midfield. Same thing happened against Fulham (even before Scholes' moment of madness) and that got me thinking back to the season as a whole and that got me thinking we've had more problems in central midfield than I first thought, especially against quality opposition.

Liverpool dominated midfield at Anfield, Chelsea did the same at Stamford Bridge, Arsenal ran rings round us at the Emirates and we had to do a major re-shuffle to stop Inter bossing the game against us at Old Trafford. I think Carrick has been superb at times this season and his performances have given us a foot-hold in midfield in games where his partner hasn't been up to scratch.

I am just surprised it took a normally sensible poster like you ages to come to terms with that. I have said it all along, we don't play well with a midfield two against decent to good opposition. The thing is, given the calibre of players we have, the only way to play with a midfield two is if we had a monster like Essien patrolling the midfield alongside a tactically disciplined and creative player like Carrick.

However we can still have an effective midfield even with the options we have but we just need to play an extra man in midfield. What is even more impressive is that we never play with a "sitting" defensive midfielder when we employ a midfield three, we usually have a deep laying playmaker in Carrick (recall his outstanding performance at the San Zero), one designated "hunter" (A player who will run around putting pressure on the opposition usually Fletcher or Hargreaves), and a "driver" (Dribblers like Giggs and Anderson).

We have been near unplayable in midfield in the times that we have played with a midfield three. Our attackers have usually been freed from any defensive duties and allowed to express themselves in the best way possible in the attacking third.

We have gotten used to 4-4-2 but put it simply with the players we have, we won't be able to play 4-4-2 against quality opposition.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I agree with most of that but we have got joy this season playing a midfield two against quality opposition. Giggs and Fletcher against Chelsea, for example.

Basically, I think two from Giggs, Carrick and Fletcher can work fine. If we're gonna play Scholes or Anderson as one half of a midfield two then yes, we will get found out against top opposition

 

[Mozza]

I agree with most of that but we have got joy this season playing a midfield two against quality opposition. Giggs and Fletcher against Chelsea, for example.

Basically, I think two from Giggs, Carrick and Fletcher can work fine. If we're gonna play Scholes or Anderson as one half of a midfield two then yes, we will get found out against top opposition

That's rubbish, both those players have been successful as part of two man midfields against top opposition

 

[Brwned]

I am just surprised it took a normally sensible poster like you ages to come to terms with that. I have said it all along, we don't play well with a midfield two against decent to good opposition. The thing is, given the calibre of players we have, the only way to play with a midfield two is if we had a monster like Essien patrolling the midfield alongside a tactically disciplined and creative player like Carrick.

However we can still have an effective midfield even with the options we have but we just need to play an extra man in midfield. What is even more impressive is that we never play with a "sitting" defensive midfielder when we employ a midfield three, we usually have a deep laying playmaker in Carrick (recall his outstanding performance at the San Zero), one designated "hunter" (A player who will run around putting pressure on the opposition usually Fletcher or Hargreaves), and a "driver" (Dribblers like Giggs and Anderson).

We have been near unplayable in midfield in the times that we have played with a midfield three. Our attackers have usually been freed from any defensive duties and allowed to express themselves in the best way possible in the attacking third.

We have gotten used to 4-4-2 but put it simply with the players we have, we won't be able to play 4-4-2 against quality opposition.

And you've been wrong, every single time.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

That's rubbish, both those players have been successful as part of two man midfields against top opposition

This season?

When?

 

[Brwned]

Yeah, injury didn't help. But he was poor long before the injury and he's been poor long after.

I still think there's some life in the old dog yet but I'm convinced this season is the beginning of the end. Had to happen at some point anyway.

How long before?