Evidently I didn't delete my earlier post soon enough. Unlucky. It's nice you have now tried to be substantive, though it's a shame it takes being called out for acting like a cnut in order to bring you to the discussion table with something other than "the finger". But hey, kudos anyway. I will not pursue this line of argument with you though, other than to say that statistics are not the measure of a football player. Please give my regards to the Captain, and good day.
Nani
- Thread starter Kaush949
- 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.
Did it get too hot in the kitchen?
I would post a picture of a chicken but I wonder whether you'd think I was calling you a coward or a cock
Good lord the bullshit starts again.
Phew let's start again.
Nani hasnt regressed at all, he just isnt on top form at the moment, that's all.
How can a player regress at the age of 21, without any injuries at a club like United? That's just bull.
Secondly his best matches last year were against top teams, so that point doesnt stand neither, he can perform against big teams just as well as against weaker sides.
On form he is a better player than Park.
Park's on better form right now, that's why he starts, that's fair and reasonable.
Also he is more consistent, which certainly is a very big aspect of a good footballer and that's also why I think he should start against Chelsea.
But Nani will get more chances and he will prove his worth and Park will more often sit on the bench, I'm pretty sure about that.
Ok then, I'll see if I can be 'substantive' and 'reasonable'.
In answer to a comment by me that stated "he's a more productive player than Park", you answered:
Allow me to give you some facts.
Nani:
Four goals
Three assists
Park:
One goal
NO ASSISTS
These are stats for just this season. Park, who you tell me is "better" than Nani, has contributed not one single assists this season. Here was me thinking that assisting goals was the main objective of a winger. Nani, who you are quick to point out hasn't played much this season, has three assists and four times as many goals as Park. It would seem that my comment that "he's a more productive player than Park" seems quite reasonable.
You also state "As for not being an attacking threat...that's simply not true". Well I do believe the facts above simply contradict your statement. Thus my comment that "Park brings very little to the team in terms of an attacking threat." would seem to be true. And just for the sake of it I'll use your own words against you:
Substantive enough yet? Ok I'll continue.
As for the Champions League games, Park was started in the away leg at Barca because he'll harass their players for 90 minutes of what is a tough away game. Fergie rarely plays open attacking football in such big games so it would make sense to include Park in the starting XI.
I don't know what you're trying to prove by saying that Park was 'rested' for the Chelsea game so he'd be fresh to face Barca. Both Park and Nani started the Barca game so the fact that Park didn't play against Chelsea proves only that Nani was preferred ahead of Park in what was a potential title decider. Nani also started more games last season.
How is he supposed to have played well when he hasn't been on the pitch? You're judging him in games that he hasn't even playing in
You got the names the wrong way round clearly. The stats prove it and so does common sense.
Im not a Park basher in any way, I just hate the way everyone rounds on Nani and expects miracles from him in every game. He's young, his decision making is poor at times, but he's still got a hell of a lot more end product that Park. Don't confuse work rate with quality.
Goddamn now this is what I call a bashing post
Quality tbh
Yeah surely
Eh, good counter-argument there mate.
Your post says it all really
The whole team was shite in the Super Cup final, but you single out Nani.
It's so predictable....and booooring. I bet Nani also caused the credit crunch.
It's so predictable....and booooring. I bet Nani also caused the credit crunch.
It clearly isn't as nobody here is bashing Nani. People have merely commented that based on the form shown by both this season, Park is ahead of Nani in the pecking order and deservedly so.
If you find fault in that argument then frankly you're being blinkered.
If you find fault in that argument then frankly you're being blinkered.
The thing about using "facts" in an argument about football is that you need to be able to interpret them.
Consider the standard of opposition Nani has played against vs the standard of opposition that Park has played against and those stats will be put in context.
You should also take into account the fact that Park is a winger who is renowned for his defensive attributes and has made more tackles this season than any other midfielder and suddenly you've got yourself a whole lot more "facts" to be thinking about.
That was in response to Storm's long post btw
The whole team was shite in the Super Cup final, but you single out Nani.
It's so predictable....and booooring. I bet Nani also caused the credit crunch.
Actually Tevez was good, but ignore that.
Is there something wrong with pointing out that it was an awful performance, worse than anyone else in a United shirt I've seen all season?
Park has looked better, albeit with no end product, while Nani has been inconsistent. I don't remember denying that.
Word man
Great, he's made more tackles. How many goals has he scored? His job is to score and assist. That's what he's paid to do.
Eh, as does yours...
At least make some sort of argument for it rather than a meaningless comment.
No Storm it's not at all
The fact that you picked him out of 10/11 awful players for special mention is indicative of the harsh treatment he gets.
The other players were poor, he was awful.
Nothing to do with harsh treatment.
You've gotten overly defensive of him now.
Of course it is, unless you have a different definition of a winger.
No, you're being overly critical.
Played much football, have you?
No it's not. He's paid to do, whatever SAF tells him to do, which is something neither of us knows. Also you cannot measure a players attacking input in a side merely through assists and goals. Simply keeping the ball in the final third of the pitch is important, and Park's passes in the final third always tend to find a red/white/blue shirt. How about a run across the box that drags defenders and opens space? Park's off the ball movement is among the best in the team. Assists and goals are simply not the be all and end all, when measuring worth.
Saying that, Park should really be scoring more goals, something SAF has said, and he seems to have taken it on board. We are seeing more shots on goal from him than we used to, and the goals should follow.
Saying that, Park should really be scoring more goals, something SAF has said, and he seems to have taken it on board. We are seeing more shots on goal from him than we used to, and the goals should follow.
There's traditional wingers, and then there's Park and Giggsy(in the last two years) who are unconventional as they don't get up the byline and whip balls in, but they're effective.
Is there any need for subtle insults? Either insult me properly or tell me why you disagree.
Fixed?
It was fine as it was.
What are you doing back in here anyway? You already ran away once
Yeah Pogue, you have to put a Star-Trek-related picher in. This one's my most favoritest, although it's not actually insulting.
It's not insulting you to imply you haven't played football. To each his own. I've never played baseball. I'm absolutely fine with people pointing this out.
It's just that if you had played much football I don't think you would ever do anything as silly as judge a wide midfielder on goals and assists alone. That's all.
It's obviously not goals and assists alone, but they're the major factors because its an attacking position. If they're not contributing to the attacking threat directly then they're not doing their job well enough.
Of course Park has other qualities like his stamina and tracking back, but as an attacking player Nani is already better than him, he's just not as consistent....yet.
And yes I have played football....as a winger
Sorry Pogue but I think you didnt get his point.
Storm said Nani had more end product this year (that means more assists/more goals) and he was told: "wrong".
So how should you better prove it than with that stats?
Some more stats to prove that also your points as far as the opposition that Park played in doesnt really stand:
Our last games:
06.December:
Manchester united vs. Sunderland (hardy a tough opposition is it?)
Park played till the 57th minute, no assist no goal.
Tevez came on, we scored the winner
13th December
Manchester United vs. Tottenham (16th in the league)
0-0
no goal no assist from Park
Manchester United- Middlesbrough (17th in the league)
no assist, no goal Park
01.Nov. Manchester United- Hull (8th in the leauge)
Nani assist
8. Nov. Manchester United- Arsenal (good site alright, but we didnt win anyway)
1-2
No goal, no assist Park
15. November: Manchester United- Stoke (18th in the leauge)
Impressive game by park no doubt, but no goal, no assist
And so on, you will find, that also Park played against really weak sides and Nani in some tough matches and he still managed to get more assist and goals.
But what does it really tell us?
Just that Nani has a better end product, what we all now anyway and I find it pretty amazing that some dont even realise it after one statistic after another.
Park has still been great in most of his matches for us and been pretty consistent, no one has a doubt about that.
His form is great but compared to a Nani on form he just inst as productive
It's obviously not goals and assists alone, but they're the major factors because its an attacking position. If they're not contributing to the attacking threat directly then they're not doing their job well enough.
Of course Park has other qualities like his stamina and tracking back, but as an attacking player Nani is already better than him, he's just not as consistent....yet.
And yes I have played football....as a winger
So we're all pretty much in agreement then?
Nani has bags of potential but hasn't been consistently good enough to displace Park from our first XI....yet.
Bet you were one of those fancy shmancy wingers who never tracked back to save your life and left all us defensive types to do the dirty work
I'm winger by myself and tbh tracking back and helping my fullback is of course important, but I wouldnt be winger if my greatest job woulnt be to get past my defender, and play through balls to my striker, make crosses, take the corners or score.
Football isnt that complicated tbh
So we're all pretty much in agreement then?
Nani has bags of potential but hasn't been consistently good enough to displace Park from our first XI....yet.
Bet you were one of those fancy shmancy wingers who never tracked back to save your life and left all us defensive types to do the dirty work
I was a good player in my early to mid teens, nowhere near professional standard of course, but then I joined the army and messed my knee up pretty bad and haven't really played since, except for the odd 5 a side tourney at work.
That's quite possibly the most peculiar use of "stats" on here I've ever seen
What is it that you find peculiar about it?
Give me reasons pogue, some on here said Park is at least as productive as Nani, you said he played againt better oppositions, my stats show the opposite