Tbf to your mum, he's way cooler than Hazard will ever be.
Oops, spelt Shephard wrong, she meant this bloke
Not so cool now...
Eden Hazard | "I am signing for Chelsea"
- Thread starter jdmufc
- 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.
- Status
Oops, spelt Shephard wrong, she meant this bloke
Not so cool now...
No I don't think it would which I've already said, but there seems to be a number of illiterates on here who can't read.
Kagawa would clearly play through the middle, however, if we also signed Hazard then that would have an effect on Nani, Young and Valencia, which is my point. I don't think that buying Hazard or Kagawa has an effect unless they are both signed, then I think Nani or Young will suffer, and I fear it would be Nani. Although there's no way to tell if Hazard will indeed be so good that he gets himself into the first team as first choice.
I get why you think that if both are signed it would affect our wingers, of course it would, it's extra players to play in 2/3 positions. What I don't understand is why you reckon Nani will be the one to suffer when he is a vastly superior player to Young.
Yes can't you read. I've already said I've seen both play. I've watched all of Dortmunds games on ESPN this season and seen Hazard play a few times in Ligue 1 but mostly in Europe.
You should also check out zonal marking regarding the positions both play, and you'll see hat you are wrong.
I don't see what the problem is, all I am saying is that if we signed both Kagawa and Hazard then ultimately Nani and Young would suffer and I fear that Znani may suffer more, despite his superior talent. This is assuming that Hazard lives up to his reputation.
I don't think we would sell Nani, (don't know how some moron read that into my posts) but I do think he would get less starts and in a game that needs seeing through then I believe SAF would look to someone like Young as a second half sub than Nani.
And for the last time, I do not under rate Nani, I love the guy. But that doesn't mean I can't see where he might suffer if we signed both Kagawa an Hazard.
Because as I've just said above, if Nani and Young were not starting a match I think SAF is more likely to bring on a player like Young to close a game out than Nani. Nani is either a starter or a player to change a game.
Believe me, I would not hesitate to get rid of Young over Nani.
What the feck do those last 2 lines mean?
Nani is better and is a starter or a game changer.
But Nani is more likely to suffer if another good player arrives because we're more likely to bring on Young to close out games?
How fecking often do we bring players on to "close out games". You're having a nightmare today. Absolute train wreck of a post.
But you single out Nani which is bizarre.
If both Kagawa and Hazard were to arrive the following players would be affected, not just one:
Kagawa
Hazard
Young
Valencia
Nani
Scholes
Rooney
Welbeck
Cleverley
But yeah, just keep singling out Nani. Odd.
Most unnecessary denial ever?
it really makes no sense.We want to close out the team so ... I'll bring on the player less likely to win it for us or score goals, who isn't as good!
v Benfica away;
Valencia--Fletcher--Carrick--Giggs--Park
----------------------Rooney---------------
v Basel home;
Valencia--Carrick--Giggs--Anderson--Young
---------------------Welbeck-----------------
v Galati away;
Valencia--Carrick--Anderson--Nani
----------------Rooney
-------------------Welbeck
v Galati home;
Valencia--Rooney--Anderson--Nani
---------------Berbatov
-------------------Owen/Hernandez
v Benfica home;
Valencia--Carrick--Fletcher--Nani
-----------------Young
-------------------Berbatov
v Basel away;
Nani--Jones--Giggs--Park--Young
---------------Rooney
Amazing that the only time we played our best attacking 4 this season in Europe was the game we won
Which simply highlights why further strength in depth and competition for places is necessary.
I am sure Hazard is a player who would be covered that once-every-two-seasons special talent fund we were promised by the Glazer's but haven't seen yet.
I am pretty sure his acquisition would not affect funds for CM and Kagawa.
I am pretty sure his acquisition would not affect funds for CM and Kagawa.
Quick question for you, Sir:
If Malcolm Glazer promised to give you 10 pounds every friday so you could buy some crisps and sweets at your shop for you and your friends, just for the hell of it - would you believe it?
Why would you believe it?
Do you think Malcolm is the real Santa Clause?
Do you think he would ever lie?
Do we have a "special talent" fund.... oooh I like that.
Is that still tucked away in the war chest?
Is that still tucked away in the war chest?
So SAF has never brought on a player when we're winning 2-1 to ensure we hold that lead?
In such as situation Young would be a better option to bring on for someone like Hazard. He is better defensively than Nani but still offers in forward areas. Bringing on Nani would be like for like, what would the point be in that?
It's you who's having a nightmare. You're constantly missing the point and showing your lack of tactical understanding.
Pft, yeah, where has that been? I hope they don't think that Jones, De Gea and Young count that would be 6 years worth right there!
Maybe it's a brilliant sort of catch 22, Uncle Malc agrees to buy any player in the world, but we have a wage cap of 120,000 or so and thus no player costing more than about 30 million would agree to our maximum wage!
We'll never make a transfer more expensive than Berbatov again!!!
Fair amounts of certainty there, considering every bit of it is based upon totally unsubstantiated speculation!
It's extremely rare that's for sure. SAF isn't Mourinho.
Like for like? god you're daft.
So Nani will suffer most because Hazard will play instead of him and Nani and Young will just be subs, and Young will be used more because we always bring players on to close out games? We never make attacking substitutions.
Do you not realize how fecking stupid you sound?
Recently it is but then we don't have a single defensive midfielder. We used Fletcher in the past to secure results as well as Hargreaves and O'Shea before that.
So.....has he signed yet?
So.....has he signed yet?
In a word....No
How often even in the past? the point is, it's rare.
More often than not we make attacking substitutions or bring on the best players from the bench to replace the players who need a rest or are not playing so well.
In the big games we used to do it fairly regularly. We really haven't had a player who can do that for us for a while. We needed it against Basel and Benfica and we needed it against Everton granted we don't need a specialist but someone who can deputise in that position would be a big help but securing those results would have both won us the League and qualified us for the UCL knockouts.
Right we're getting closer to my point about it being "rare"
How many big games per season do we play in? in percentage?
Maybe 10% of our games? Stretch to 15-20%?
Right we're getting closer to my point about it being "rare"
How many big games per season do we play in? in percentage?
Maybe 10% of our games? Stretch to 15-20%?
There are quite a few times this season when We've brought Giggs, Scholes, Nani or Young off for a more defensive player and dropped Rooney deeper.
And many many more times when we've brought on an attacking player or just made a simple "common sense" substitution of "best player from the bench on for the player looking most tired/off his game".
Which shoots your silly theory to pieces.
One of the biggest problems this season has been making more defensive substitutions than we used to and therefore resting on our laurels instead of trying to kill off teams and pump loads of goals past them like we used to do.
If we're bringing him off for a more defensive player then why are you talking about bringing him on as a defensive player to "close out games"?
It is Ashley Young we're talking about here, as the defensive mastermind to be brought on to help us hold out in tight matches, right?
Ashley Young, the new Franco Baresi.
No, but if you've got Nani on the pitch, we're 2-1 up and you want to freshen things up but not lose your width then Ashley Young is an obvious choice. He's better defensively than Nani and still provides an attacking threat. Park has played this role in the past. I'm not saying Young is as good as Park defensively but he's going to more useful than a tired Nani.
Now you've lost me, I thought Nani had been edged out by Hazard, so what's he doing on the pitch in the 1st place?
Totally disagree with this. The games I mentioned above, Everton, Basel and Benfica which along with Newcastle and Stoke were the only games we dropped points all season. The Basel and Benfica games were heavily criticised for naive attacking, the Everton game you can accuse of the same.
Come on Colin, it's not hard to understand. We'd be playing Hazard on the left wing even though he's not a left winger and he's not as good as Nani, and we'd be replacing him with Young, who is also not nearly as good as Nani but is a little better defensively which means he would be a much better option for closing out these games, all the while keeping Valencia on the right for the entire 90 minutes and not subbing him at all for anyone else because he's immune from that as he's our automatic first choice on the right, as well as using Kagawa who despite playing through the middle all the time in practically the same role as Rooney is actually keeping Nani and Young out of the team.
Keep up man!
Naive attacking? Whut? It was our shambolic defending that cost us against Everton, and that had feck all to do with the wings, that was because our full backs were pitiful and our central midfield was completely overrun.
Don't forgot, more often than not we make defensive substitutions to close out games. We rarely make attacking subs or normal "common sense" subs if you like, just negative substitutions.
In short... Nani cant defend, so he's fecked.
It could be Nan or Hazard playing from the left, that's part of my point. Nani and Hazard are the real talent, the two players that can change a game with something special. Young is the back up player IMO. If we only signed Hazard, and not Kagawa also, then Hazard plays central then Welbeck and Hernandez are the players who miss out more. However if we signed Kagawa also then he's surely playing in the centre, so Hazard competes with Nani. Then it's a case of who is better.
I just wonder if we really are looking to sign both Kagawa and Hazard, either or would make sense and Valencia, Hazard, Nani playing behind Rooney would be superb.
So wait, Young is actually the backup player and behind Nani in the pecking order?
Ok then genius. Enlighten me as to where Hazard would play if we signed Kagawa as well. What's your best starting 11?
His hattrick
Says Chelsea is a possibility
Says Chelsea is a possibility
- Status