We won 3 titles on the trot, Ronaldo scored a freakish number of goals in only one of them, he did not win us all 3 titles with his goals.
Central midfield this season...
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- 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.
We won 3 titles on the trot, Ronaldo scored a freakish number of goals in only one of them, he did not win us all 3 titles with his goals.
Absolute rubbish. Closing down Carrick does just as much as Fletch, he doesn't do crunching tackles, he very rarely gets in the position where he needs to.
I'll give you a clue, Scholesy
It's Zidane. Zidane's better at football than Titus Bramble.
It's Zidane. Zidane's better at football than Titus Bramble.
What bullshit. Closing down has never been a part of Carrick's game. He is an interceptor. Only a mad man like you could start suggesting otherwise. Because in your warped world Carrick is the best and capable of every aspect of midfield play.He was the main reason, not the only reason, that we won the titles. Carrick is not the reason we won the titles, despite your weird love for him.
There is no point in arguing anymore Chief. Some of the shit he comes out with is ridiculous.
I didn't agree with Ronaldo not scoring alot but thus the end result is our whole team helped him score. Our defense was a major factor and thus giving credit to Carrick who stabalised our MF when we haven't won anything for the past 4 years. Ronaldo's peak in form was also another major point.
Correct,
Different positions.
You can compare Gerrard with Carrick if it was like four or five years ago but not now.
Comparing players in a position where as comparing player vs player abilities is a whole different story.
This.
As I said previously, Fletcher is a definite starter in the big games. Definite.
Ronaldo was not the main reason, the defence has been amazing in every season
Gerrard played in centre mid till about a year and a half ago. He played on the wing or in the hole a bit for England but usually centre mid for Liverpool. Where did four or five years come from?
And even if he'd played on the wing his whole life, he'd still obviously be better than, say, Dean Whitehead. Or indeed Michael Carrick.
If you play a three man central midfield, as Liverpool have done in recent times, it gives Gerrard far more freedom to get forward in support of the attack and indeed to score goals which he does regularly, knowing that he has people behind him to cover. In a two man midfield there are less opportunities as the responsibility of defending/covering is just as great as getting forward. I would like to see Carrick getting forward more with someone covering - Fletcher or Anderson. Perhaps in these days of flexible strategy they could alternate but Carrick's strengths are his passing plus the ability to score the odd goal. Surely we should be promoting those strengths instead of getting him to drop back into a holding role most of the time ? I do realise that is his natural game though.
If we are talking about footballers in general, Gerrard/Zidane is better than Carrick/Bramble.
If we are talking about a footballer being better in one position than another then it quite clear than Carrick is a better DM and Gerrard a better AM.
First time I've ever agreed with you.
Someone now actually understands me.
Since Rafa came Gerrard was shifting between right wing and behind the hole since they had Xabi and Hamann, after they god mascherano gerrard moved behind the hole since kuyt played RW so in the end you can't really compare Carrick with Gerrard since they have entirely different roles.
Do you actually believe that Carrick was more important than Ronaldo when it came to our success over the last three years?
Of course he does. He believes Carrick has been the reason for our recent defensive strength.
Counting goal wise, losing Ruud made Ronaldo step up as providing goals, so whether it'd been Rooney or Ronaldo we still asked question like " Where will the goals come from." Luckily Ronaldo stepped up and showed his true potential. While as once our defense settled in, in defense we were like a brick wall. So Let's just say
1. Carrick brought us way more protection to the back four and provided us with great passing and a few goals.
2. Our defense grew incredibly strong, or almost the best defense in the world.
3. Ronaldo stepped up and then scored like crazy.
Mozza didn't state that Carrick was more important but stated the defense which Carrick certainly helped us just like when Roy was at his peak. He protected the back four way better than the likes of Djemba,Kleberson and Miller.
Different roles.
Carrick is universal, hard to imagine midfield without him. Since he signed, we won title after title.
It was almost impossible to find someone after Roy Keane, but there you go...
Underrated player and everybody knows that. Media should really put more light on him.
It was almost impossible to find someone after Roy Keane, but there you go...
Underrated player and everybody knows that. Media should really put more light on him.
Some people are just not satisfied with what they have.
I would have thought that our defenders would be the main reason for our defensive strength.
Now you are just being ridiculous like Mozza. Carrick is nowhere near Keane at his peak. He is nowhere near Keane full stop. Keane was the best midfielder at the world at what he did. Don't be comparing the two of them.
Defending is a team game - the protection from the midfield (and even the strikers working back) is the key to a good defence. It is far too simplistic to just highlight the defenders as the main reason.
Since Evra and Vidic signed, we won title after title. If we won everything due to our defence as some people have pointed out, then as Vidic and Evra are mainstays in the defence it makes much more sense that they were the reason for winning the titles if that is the way we are looking at things.
He is underrated by some people, not too many. He is overrated completely by some people on the Caf and everybody knows that.
Carrick is no Roy Keane. Roy Keane did not have to play in a three man midfield to be successful against better players. Keane was the best player in the world at what he did. He could dominate players of the likes of Gerrard, Zidane and Davids 9 times out of 10. Carrick wouldn't have a hope of doing so. Keane was an exceptional player and Carrick is nowhere near him. Nobody at United is.
Jesus, obviously defending is a team game but the defence are the main parts of the defence. It's not rocket science. Obviously other people contribute but it is kind of obvious that the defence is the main part of the defence.
Maybe you should try making your points a little clearer before spitting the dummy.
It is fairly clear though. I said defenders are the main reason for the strength of our defence. Main is the key word. That means that there are other aspects to it. I thought it was very clear. I apologise if it wasn't.
Keane defensive wise might edge a bit with Carrick but I still rate Carricks defense almost as good as Keane's. I'm comparing their defensive abilities not all round play.
Carrick is no Roy Keane, Gerrard is no Roy Keane... everyone is no Roy Keane.
Carrick is Carrick. Feel lucky we signed him. He got few more good years ahead of him.
It just seemed that you were emphasising that to try and belittle the contribution of Carrick in particular to the defence. Apologies if I inferred too much.
Carirck is good but defensively he is not near Keane.
This is wrong because Carrick was signed first in the summer while Evra and Vidic arrived in the January transfer window and hardly played a role in winning the 06/07 title.
You are right about Keane, he is a better player but hey were you actually watching us play. Carrick was the main reason we could switch back to 4-4-2 after a disastrous 4-3-3 tactic which was a tactic help with Keane's age. So tecniquly Carrick brought our main 4-4-2 back and was paired with Scholes, and with Ronaldo + Giggs on the wing and Rooney + Saha,Larsson,Ole up front we won our crown back. If we didn't have Carrick I doubt our 4-4-2 formation would be revived.
Keane was far better at Carrick at defending. One of the biggest aspects of Keane's game was that he could tackle and he nearly always won them. People say Carrick doesn't tackle too often but that his positioning means he doesn't have to and he can intercept balls. Keane could do that except better. His positioning was phenomenal. And if we are talking about defending, Keane lost the ball less than Carrick because he played the easy ball and didn't play Hollywood passes. I don't see how Carrick is on a level with Keane in the defensive aspects of midfield. As I said though, that is not having a go at Carrick because Keane was simply the best in the world at it at the time.
Just a little point in relation to interceptions, it's all well and good being able to do this but against better midfielders and better teams, they are too good to simply pass the ball to our deep lying midfielders (I am not saying defensive midfielder because I don't like the term). Therefore you need more than positioning when playing against better players. Keane had that. If you're are playing as the more defensive minded midfielder, you need to be able to do more than intercept at the very top level. You need to hassle and you need to tackle. You need to be able to dominate. Keane was exceptional at it. Vieira did it for a long time. Davids did it for a few years.
Keane doesn't edge it with Carrick defensive wise, he completely edges it, there is no comparison.
Nah I was simply just saying that the defenders are the main reason for the defence but not the only reason. Mozza thinks Carrick is the only reason for our defensive prowess.
I do agree, but why I rated him almost as good is because he brought our traditional 4-4-2 back. Can't argue with that right ? Still Keane at his prime was way better.