Anderson

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

I'm trying to keep it in mind but the number of posters who wax lyrical about him and decry the injustice of his being played out of his natural position, as if he were born to play in a certain spot gets to me.

Perspective goes both ways, you see.

For those who the shoe fits.

Frankly I don't see any injustice in us playing him out of position. We are training him to be a better player, who would be of best use to us. But the transition isn't easy. What I call injustice however is fans constantly going up in arms because he isn't making Cristiano Ronaldo like progress.

Even when a certain far less talented player named Fletcher went through the same growing pains and is now one of their heroes.

Heck even Scholes at his age was way behind Butt as a midfield player at the time. We all know how that panned out in the long term. Why is it just so darn hard for our fans to be patient with our players? Especially those young and talented enough, who have the right attitude to make it here?

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

For those who the shoe fits.

Frankly I don't see any injustice in us playing him out of position. We are training him to be a better player, who would be of best use to us. But the transition isn't easy. What I call injustice however is fans constantly going up in arms because he isn't making Cristiano Ronaldo like progress.

Even when a certain far less talented player named Fletcher went through the same growing pains and is now one of their heroes.

Heck even Scholes at his age was way behind Butt as a midfield player at the time. We all know how that panned out in the long term. Why is it just so darn hard for our fans to be patient with our players? Especially those young and talented enough, who have the right attitude to make it here?

See, it's the attitude you speak of that I'm questioning more than anything.

He's got some of it but I just don't see any improvement/results if he's putting in work at the moment (which I have some doubt about). I'd like to see him play 90 minutes for his next three starts at least.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

See, it's the attitude you speak of that I'm questioning more than anything.

He's got some of it but I just don't see any improvement/results if he's putting in work at the moment (which I have some doubt about).

That is because you are expecting the result too quickly. Not for any other reason. The same accusations of lack of development was leveled at Rooney when Ronaldo over took him progression wise.

I'd like to see him play 90 minutes for his next three starts at least.

So would I. But He'd be doing that if he was consistently on fire. & if we were not struggling as a team to ensure results ATM. But things are not quite happening the way most of us would like.

He is brilliant one game and laughable the next. & when we are trying to ensure results. He is the most likely candidate to take off if he is on pitch. Because he is still just a kid and a squad player.

 

[Mainoldo]

See, it's the attitude you speak of that I'm questioning more than anything.

He's got some of it but I just don't see any improvement/results if he's putting in work at the moment (which I have some doubt about). I'd like to see him play 90 minutes for his next three starts at least.

Then you'd probably see the effort that he really has been putting in. Most talented players that improve at lesser clubs managed to do so not only because of the less pressure but because their getting 90minutes every week. Even Song and Denilson... you can see their improvemts which is probably because their getting games. Unfortunatley we can't really afford Anderson to have blips which is why he plays one week and out the next plus Fergie hasn't got a 1st choice midfield.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Then you'd probably see the effort that he really has been putting in. Most talented players that improve at lesser clubs managed to do so not only because of the less pressure but because their getting 90minutes every week. Even Song and Denilson... you can see their improvemts which is probably because their getting games. Unfortunatley we can't really afford Anderson to have blips which is why he plays one week and out the next plus Fergie hasn't got a 1st choice midfield.

Very true.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Then you'd probably see the effort that he really has been putting in. Most talented players that improve at lesser clubs managed to do so not only because of the less pressure but because their getting 90minutes every week. Even Song and Denilson... you can see their improvemts which is probably because their getting games. Unfortunatley we can't really afford Anderson to have blips which is why he plays one week and out the next plus Fergie hasn't got a 1st choice midfield.

Nice sentiment but what I usually see is him running out of gas after 50 minutes and being substituted shortly after the hour mark. My apoligies, what I meant is that I'd like to see him get through 90 minutes.

As I mentioned previously, increase the stamina and the rest will start to fall in line nicely. You can't concentrate on what you need to do in a match when you're gassed way too early.

 

[Mainoldo]

Nice sentiment but what I usually see is him running out of gas after 50 minutes and being substituted shortly after the hour mark. My apoligies, what I meant is that I'd like to see him get through 90 minutes.

As I mentioned previously, increase the stamina and the rest will start to fall in line nicely. You can't concentrate on what you need to do in a match when you're gassed way too early.

True but if your gassed out from playing 90 minutes 3 games on the bouns your body will natural adjust by the 4th game.. but like i said we can't afford for him to be by standard for 10 mins like we might have been able to in 2008!

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

... but like i said we can't afford for him to be by standard for 10 mins like we might have been able to in 2008!

Aye, there's the rub!

 

[MadDogg]

Nice sentiment but what I usually see is him running out of gas after 50 minutes and being substituted shortly after the hour mark. My apoligies, what I meant is that I'd like to see him get through 90 minutes.

As I mentioned previously, increase the stamina and the rest will start to fall in line nicely. You can't concentrate on what you need to do in a match when you're gassed way too early.

He was obviously bad at that in the previous two seasons, there was hardly a match that he played in where he didn't start looking out of gas after 60 minutes. But this season he's improved significantly, and when he's been substituted around that time it's been more because he's been the worst player of the midfield rather than because he looks tired. There's only been the one match I can remember where I thought he looked tired.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

He was obviously bad at that in the previous two seasons, there was hardly a match that he played in where he didn't start looking out of gas after 60 minutes. But this season he's improved significantly, and when he's been substituted around that time it's been more because he's been the worst player of the midfield rather than because he looks tired. There's only been the one match I can remember where I thought he looked tired.

Spot on.

 

[anything about now]

I think whats even more worrying is that after 2 years we still dont even know what his real strengths are...

His passing is so hit and miss its unbelievable, for every 60 yard perfect pass, he'll play 10 odd crap balls that just go straight out of play/to the opposition

Youngster in inconsistency shocker.

His shooting as we all know is just shocking,

I don't think it's as bad as some are making it out to be. Composure seems to be his real problem, which is also evident when he is under pressure and makes the wrong decision or overhits a pass. He can strike a ball very well, he just needs to learn to calm down and let it flow.

He's quite strong is the tackle I guess, but then again, if he's supposed to be a ACM then that really shouldnt be a redeeming feature.

His stamina is still questionable imo. And so is his positional sense.

He does have very good strength and pace, and can dribble very well. But he tends to use his pace and strength chasing and harrying oposition players, rather then dribbiling past people (apart from the odd run here and there.)

Really, he has fantastic physical attributes (Pace, Strength etc) but lacks in the technical side of the game (Passing, shooting etc).. I also, worryingly, think its becoming clearer and clearing why he plays so well in the big games, and doesnt in the small games.

It seems like I'm really having a go at Anderson, but I'm not. I really like the lad but thats just an honest assesement of him so far.

Besides his stamina, your assessment of him is eerily similar to the description of a certain Scot who was also once unwanted and been given up by many fans .

 

[Anderson Searl]

Careful no aan, there's some of us who want Fletcher dropped

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Besides his stamina, your assessment of him is eerily similar to the description of a certain Scot who was also once unwanted and been given up by many fans .

I really wish people would stop with the Fletcher analogies.

So one young player who many doubted turned out to be better than expected. Big deal.

For every Darren Fletcher there are dozens of young players who came through the rank at United, didn't look good enough at 20-21 years old and - shock, horror - still weren't good enough a few years later.

We also spent a tonne of money on Anderson, while Fletcher cost us nothing. So it's not unreasonable to have hoped that Anderson's career trajectory would be a little steeper.

I know I'm like a broken record on this but I do genuinely believe Anderson has the potential to be a very good player. This isn't guaranteed though, simply because Fletcher proved doubters wrong. He is still young but he's definitely progressing slower than most of us would have hoped. There's no need to sell him and we clearly need to be patient but he needs to improve a LOT before he even starts displacing players like Carruck and Fletcher, never mind becoming the talismanic creative we badly need (which some people on here seem to think he already is).

 

[devilish]

For those who the shoe fits.

Frankly I don't see any injustice in us playing him out of position. We are training him to be a better player, who would be of best use to us. But the transition isn't easy. What I call injustice however is fans constantly going up in arms because he isn't making Cristiano Ronaldo like progress.

Even when a certain far less talented player named Fletcher went through the same growing pains and is now one of their heroes.

Heck even Scholes at his age was way behind Butt as a midfield player at the time. We all know how that panned out in the long term. Why is it just so darn hard for our fans to be patient with our players? Especially those young and talented enough, who have the right attitude to make it here?

If I am not mistaken Scholes wasn't even a midfielder during that time. He was played as a midfielder because his role clashed with Cantona's and after Cantona left, SAF felt that we needed an experienced head to cover his role. Since keeping Scholes on the bench was a waste, SAF decided to play him in midfield and he clicked in that role straight away.

At 21 years of age, Scholes scored 10 goals. Quite amazing for 'Butt's cover' isn't it?

 

[devilish]

Anderson was brought to OT as an attacking midfielder. He was supposed to add creativity spark to the team and get into areas where he is able to score. Unfortunately he didn't developed in the way he should, mainly because we didn't actually played him in that role. If you take a young attacking midfielder and start playing him deep where his job mainly consist of winning the ball and hassling opponents then you simply can't expect him to develop into a world class play maker.

I believe that United need a quality playmaker. Stating that, selling Anderson would be a mistake. First of all Scholes and Giggs won't last forever and therefore we need him to stay (whether as a first teamer or as cover). Secondly we would probably get a fragment of the fee we paid for him.

 

[Scholesy]

I really wish people would stop with the Fletcher analogies.

So one young player who many doubted turned out to be better than expected. Big deal.

For every Darren Fletcher there are dozens of young players who came through the rank at United, didn't look good enough at 20-21 years old and - shock, horror - still weren't good enough a few years later.

We also spent a tonne of money on Anderson, while Fletcher cost us nothing. So it's not unreasonable to have hoped that Anderson's career trajectory would be a little steeper.

I know I'm like a broken record on this but I do genuinely believe Anderson has the potential to be a very good player. This isn't guaranteed though, simply because Fletcher proved doubters wrong. He is still young but he's definitely progressing slower than most of us would have hoped. There's no need to sell him and we clearly need to be patient but he needs to improve a LOT before he even starts displacing players like Carruck and Fletcher, never mind becoming the talismanic creative we badly need (which some people on here seem to think he already is).

Nice post Pogue.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Anderson was brought to OT as an attacking midfielder. He was supposed to add creativity spark to the team and get into areas where he is able to score. Unfortunately he didn't developed in the way he should, mainly because we didn't actually played him in that role. If you take a young attacking midfielder and start playing him deep where his job mainly consist of winning the ball and hassling opponents then you simply can't expect him to develop into a world class play maker.

At the end of the day, we expect our midfielders to attacke and defend and they get plenty of opportunities to do both, especially in a midfield two. Bearing in mind that Anderson has showed pretty much zero aptitude for the attcking side of the game why the feck do people STILL try to claim that a) this is what he does best and b) the reason he offers little in the final third is because he's being stifled by the manager. It's an absurd suggestion, it really is.

Why does nobody ever suggest that maybe, just maybe, his dozen or so games as an "attacking midfielder" came when he could exploit the wide open spaces of youth football and the slower paced Portugese league? He's clearly a lot less suited to the congested, frantic pace of the Premier League, where attacking player need to be masters at finding space where there is none and picking passes almost without thinking.

feck knows what his best position will be eventually but he's blatantly not suited to the role of a PL midfield schemer like Scholes or Fabregas.

 

[Brwned]

At the end of the day, we expect our midfielders to attacke and defend and they get plenty of opportunities to do both, especially in a midfield two. Bearing in mind that Anderson has showed pretty much zero aptitude for the attcking side of the game why the feck do people STILL try to claim that a) this is what he does best and b) the reason he offers little in the final third is because he's being stifled by the manager. It's an absurd suggestion, it really is.

Why does nobody ever suggest that maybe, just maybe, his dozen or so games as an "attacking midfielder" came when he could exploit the wide open spaces of youth football and the slower paced Portugese league? He's clearly a lot less suited to the congested, frantic pace of the Premier League, where attacking player need to be masters at finding space where there is none and picking passes almost without thinking.

feck knows what his best position will be eventually but he's blatantly not suited to the role of a PL midfield schemer like Scholes or Fabregas.

You really think so?

I don't think he's an 'attacking midfielder' but I think he's quite a talented attacker.

 

[Boss]

Anderson at his best

 

[Shimo]

Anderson has been the only of our central midfielders I've seen (outside of Giggs who right now is still a winger) that runs with the ball at defenders.

For now I think he needs to cut out the long through balls - the slid passes, running at defenders, supporting players on each wing and keeping things simple otherwise is what he needs to do.

Very harsh to say he has shown zero aptitude in his attacking game - for me has definitely got the ideas on what he wants to do but, the ideas translating into actual passes that come off. Rein in the high risk, high reward balls and he'd be a lot more consistent. If he is at midfield - don't go for the ball over the top or threaded through 3-4 players - take the easy route or run at the heart of the defenses - that is where his strength is.

 

[kouroux]

I don't think it's as bad as some are making it out to be. Composure seems to be his real problem, which is also evident when he is under pressure and makes the wrong decision or overhits a pass. He can strike a ball very well, he just needs to learn to calm down and let it flow.

If he can never (or very rarely) get composed when he's about to take then I think it's a very bad problem.There aren't many worse shooters than him in the league

 

[Alex]

If he can never (or very rarely) get composed when he's about to take then I think it's a very bad problem.There aren't many worse shooters than him in the league

That is not necessarily true, surely there are a lot worse shooters than him in the league, he ends up on free kicks and corners often enough

 

[Pogue Mahone]

You really think so?

I don't think he's an 'attacking midfielder' but I think he's quite a talented attacker.

In terms of being regularly able to make defence-splitting passes and/or score goals he's been sorely lacking, yes.

He takes so long to pick his passes they're easily read - even when it's the rare pass which isn't massively overhit - and the less said about his goal threat the better.

I think he has certain aspects to his game which could be honed into making him a decent attacking midfielder but he hasn't looked particularly well suited to it yet. IMO, a top PL attacking midfielder is someone similar to Scholes or Fabregas - who is brilliant in very tight spaces, unlike Anderson.

Apart from them he could maybe aspire to be like Gerrard or Lampard but he'll need to beg, borrow or steal some shooting boots first.

You've made the Iniesta comparision before and I kind of agree but I can't remember anyone like Iniesta thriving in the PL and I'm not sure Anderson will ever have the same close control and dribbling skills.

Hopefully he can develop into a really good, all round, aggressive athletic, box to box (yes, I said it) midfielder but I just can't see him becoming a genuinely top class specialist attacker.

 

[Scholesy]

The new Didier Zokora.

 

[kouroux]

That is not necessarily true, surely there are a lot worse shooters than him in the league, he ends up on free kicks and corners often enough

1 goal since he signed is ridiculous tbh.Don't give me that's it's not his role to score because obviously it's true.The guy is so bad at it that he doesn't try it anymore in matches

 

[Raees]

Anyone blame the debts for Andersons lack of playing time? the constant need for results means the likes of him and nani are not afforded a consistent run of games to acquire experience.

Hence the need for them to be in top form every single game just to even get some playing time and the constant chopping in our first team.

 

[Brwned]

You can't just blame the debts for everything.

With or without the debts he wouldn't have been getting games constantly because he's not consistent enough, and results/performances come far ahead of developing young players. If you want to see what happens when that's reversed you look at Arsenal.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

If I am not mistaken Scholes wasn't even a midfielder during that time. He was played as a midfielder because his role clashed with Cantona's

And he wasn't the special midfield player he has been for the past 8 plus years, at that time.

and after Cantona left, SAF felt that we needed an experienced head to cover his role. Since keeping Scholes on the bench was a waste, SAF decided to play him in midfield and he clicked in that role straight away.

Aged about 23 in the 97/98 season. & Scholes also never became the play maker we know today until 2003.

At 21 years of age, Scholes scored 10 goals. ......

So what? What does Scholes goal tally have to do with the type of midfielder he was at age 21?

 

[Scholesy]

Chief, do you actually believe Anderson would be better than a 21 year old Scholes?

 

[Raees]

You can't just blame the debts for everything.

With or without the debts he wouldn't have been getting games constantly because he's not consistent enough, and results/performances come far ahead of developing young players. If you want to see what happens when that's reversed you look at Arsenal.

I wasn't saying it as something that I necessarily believe, just making a suggestion.. is results really> development of young players.. when if that youngster if developed right could provide you with a longer period of success in the future..

Arsenal take it too far, we're talking about one individual ..maybe three I can think of in certain positions that could benefit from a prolonged run in the team, wheras the Gunners like to have 11 juniors at the same time, and have totally compromised instant success.

 

[Sam]

I'm sorry, but you just cant compare Anderson to Scholes in anyway. Theres just no similarities. Scholes relied/relies on his technical brilliance (infact brilliant isnt even a big enough compliment) and Anderson relies on his physical qualities.

Thats not saying Anderson cant go on to play centre midfield for us (he may well do) but he wont be 'Scholes replacement', just in the way Carrick can play in centre midfield for us but isnt 'Keanes replacement'.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Bearing in mind that Anderson has showed pretty much zero aptitude for the attcking side of the game.

Seriously that is over the top bs.

Why does nobody ever suggest that maybe, just maybe, his dozen or so games as an "attacking midfielder" came when he could exploit the wide open spaces of youth football and the slower paced Portugese league?

Because his best performances in a United shirt bar 1 have all come with him in his favoured attacking role. It is beyond obvious we are converting him into a deeper lying player, by watching him play. Yet people on here are too impatient and want the results of the transition to be instantaneous.

He's clearly a lot less suited to the congested, frantic pace of the Premier League, where attacking player need to be masters at finding space where there is none and picking passes almost without thinking.

Rather what is clear is he is still learning his trade, in new role in English football. Thus he should be cut some slack. Rather than being dissed every time he shows inconsistency. The hallmark of any young player who isn't of the Fabregas or Messi ilk of player.

feck knows what his best position will be eventually but he's blatantly not suited to the role of a PL midfield schemer like Scholes or Fabregas.

Fabregas is an anomaly for a young player and Scholes never became a the midfield playmaker we all appreciate till he was 28. To write off Anderson aged 22, for that role in the long term, just because of his inconsistencies now is beyond silly.

 

[johnmufc]

I'm sorry, but you just cant compare Anderson to Scholes in anyway. Theres just no similarities. Scholes relied/relies on his technical brilliance (infact brilliant isnt even a big enough compliment) and Anderson relies on his physical qualities.

Thats not saying Anderson cant go on to play centre midfield for us (he may well do) but he wont be 'Scholes replacement', just in the way Carrick can play in centre midfield for us but isnt 'Keanes replacement'.

Agreed. Anderson has no similarities to Scholes whatsoever. I'd like to say Anderson will go on to become a quality player for us, but a decent squad player is the highest level I think he can reach, sadly.

However, I'd like nothing more than to see him prove me wrong and make me look like a fool.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Chief, do you actually believe Anderson would be better than a 21 year old Scholes?

It has nothing to do with belief.

At 21 Scholes wasn't a great midfielder. And at 19 he was a striker still in our reserves. While in comparison Anderson was getting plenty of games for the eventual champions of Europe and England in his first season on the British Isles. Against the toughest sides. Filling in for a Paul Scholes, at the peak of his powers, pretty well, when Scholes was out injured.

For those of you who doubt he was filling in well just go and dig into the archives of Anderson threads o here. Then see how opinions have dramatically changed over him. Now that growing pains have surfaced.

A far cry from the current he is no better than Richardson comments.

 

[RedDevilCanuck]

When he has a shit game Anderson is a bust.

When he plays great he is the next big thing.

This is just the way it is.

He is inconsistent, can't shoot and is too ambitious with his passing at times.

He is an awesome dribbler with pace and skill and can get stuck in.

He has a bright future and this future is in our midfield.

Although he is sexy, he needs to lose some wieght.

For his entire career he has likely been more athletic than everyone he has played with. But he is in the best league in the world and fitness means everything. No matter how good you are, try hitting a 30 yard pass in the 70th minute of a game when you are even slightely out of shape compared with the rest of the players. It makes a huge difference.

Anderson should train right next to GIggsy to see how its done.

It is a fitness issue with Anderson, I am sure of it.

 

[Feed Me]

The new Didier Zokora.

I never had a problem with you before, but you really are a spastic.

 

[devilish]

And he wasn't the special midfield player he has been for the past 8 plus years, at that time.

Aged about 23 in the 97/98 season. & Scholes also never became the play maker we know today until 2003.

So what? What does Scholes goal tally have to do with the type of midfielder he was at age 21?

He was as good in midfield as Andy Cole was for the simple fact that up until 21 - 22 years of age he was a forward. In fact, he was our youth academy's top scorer. Scholes was moved in midfield late in his career because SAF believed that United needed an experienced head to lead the forward line. In few words rather then let him rot on the bench he decided to try him as a midfielder and it worked up perfectly.

Those goals were mainly scored during Cantona's suspension where Scholes could play in his natural role (ie that of a forward). Scholes was rated as the second best talent coming out of the youth ranks (after Giggs) and wasn't given a first team place earlier for the simple fact that a certain Eric Cantona used to play in his place. He was NEVER Butt's reserve. They just played in different roles.

Scholes was already an instant hit at age 21, probably scoring more goals than Anderson would do in a life time at United. At age 22 he was expected to change his role (from striker and midfielder) and he did that perfectly, ousting Butt who had been playing there since he was a child. So Scholes story is completely different to that of Anderson.

 

[acnumber9]

Don't you all understand. If Fletcher and Scholes became such good players and Anderson is better than them at that age (apparently) that means he'll definitely become a star just as they have. That's the way it works. The Chief has told us. Franny Jeffers played for Arsenal in his early twentys while Ian Wright didn't play to his late twenties. That's why Franny was by far the better of the two as he was better at a young age plus he naturally of course progressed at the exact same rate.

 

[devilish]

Don't you all understand. If Fletcher and Scholes became such good players and Anderson is better than them at that age (apparently) that means he'll definitely become a star just as they have. That's the way it works. The Chief has told us. Franny Jeffers played for Arsenal in his early twentys while Ian Wright didn't play to his late twenties. That's why Franny was by far the better of the two as he was better at a young age plus he naturally of course progressed at the exact same rate.

Which in my opinion is stupid since every player is different and must therefore be judged on an individual basis. Its like saying that Welbeck would surely do well in midfield just because Scholes did that before him.

 

[acnumber9]

Which in my opinion is stupid since every player is different and must therefore be judged on an individual basis. Its like saying that Welbeck would surely do well in midfield just because Scholes did that before him.

Some can't get their head round that concept. This Fletcher thing is becoming the new Nani is better at this stage than Ronaldo blah blah.