Nani

I find the notion that Young is even comparable to Nani completely and utterly laughable. He's not even close, nevermind good enough to warrant suggestion as to how he could replace Nani or limit his first team opportunities.

I mean, some journalists really are fecking thick. It wouldn't be as annoying if most of the footballing population weren't equally thick as to digest the crap that they're consistently fed by the papers and Twitter.
 
There's about 10 miles difference between the players. I don't mind Young, I think he's a decent player, but I can't see us getting him, and can't see the point either.

Nani is clearly many levels ahead of him, we possess cover already, so why would we be interested?
 
KingEric7 said:
I find the notion that Young is even comparable to Nani completely and utterly laughable. He's not even close, nevermind good enough as to warrant suggestion as to how he could replace Nani or limit his first team opportunities.

I mean, some journalists really are fecking thick.
Click to expand...

I don't see it. I don't think Young is as good as Nani but I also don't see how if it's true we are interested in a player in a certain position, then it may limit the player who usually plays in that position, of starting opportunities.

I don't think Rodwell is as good as Carrick or Anderson, but logically speaking if we did sign Rodwell, he would further limit first team starting opportunities for people who start in the same position he does.

I know others disagree with me on this but I don't see Nani as the 'immovable object' in the United team as some others on here do. I think he's more likely than not to drop to the bench in favour of Park during the big away games, especially in Europe, and I don't expect him to start vs Barcelona either.

Now that isn't to say that this means I think Ashley Young is a better player, I don't, but for many of the big games Nani already is no longer first choice since the return of Valencia. I know he started away vs Arsenal but he also missed out in the first leg against Chelsea and the first leg of the semi-final.

I just don't see it as that much of a stretch to say that the addition of another player in the same position may further limit opportunities of someone whose opportunities have already been limited in the second half of the season with Park and Valencia regaining fitness anyway.

None of that is saying Young is a better player than Nani or Park is a better player than Nani or Rodwell is a better player than any of our central midfielders or anyone else we may sign is necessarily going to be better than anyone else who also plays in the same position. But whoever we sign, will get at least some games and obviously limit, at least to some degree, the starting opportunities of the person they share the position with.

if Cleverly comes back next year I expect him to get at about 10-15 games all told in a season. Doesn't mean that for those 10-15 games he'll be 'better' than the person he plays in place of, but there's only 11 spaces on a field you can fill at any one time.
 
Personally I think Vidic was comfortably our best player this season as Nani's been poor since after Christmas. But he's still contributed at times and was outstanding in the first half of the season.
 
Hectic said:
There's about 10 miles difference between the players. I don't mind Young, I think he's a decent player, but I can't see us getting him, and can't see the point either.

Nani is clearly many levels ahead of him, we possess cover already, so why would we be interested?
Click to expand...

i don't think it's the case of who is 'better'. As I said above, if Cleverley returns and gets around 15 games a season, it won't necessarily mean he's 'better' than the person he gets picked ahead of for those games, but the fact he is there will likely limit that person's starting opportunities.

It's often so much more than 'who is better' any way, as the inclusion of Park shows you. I don't think he's a patch on Nani as a player but in terms of the specific job he does, especially in the big games, he is liable to limit his chances at starting.
 
I think everyone understands the concept of more players, more competition for places aaron.

But, why would we go for Young, when we already have two excellent wingers, the best in the league. We have an array of cover for both players, both young and old, so is there a reason to get Young and keep him in the squad for the majority of matches?

If they are both fit, Young will not start of Nani will he, that doesn't make sense. Valencia I can understand because he can only play on the right, whereas Nani can adapt his game to both sides of the field, so it wasn't Valencia replacing Nani, but utilising players positions and getting the most out of having two excellent wingers on the pitch, rather then just one who may play better on the right.

I can't see Nani taking a back seat in big aways either. The fact is he's one of our best players, and has the ability to change games. I think the games we saw him take a back seat was down to a slight dip in form, coming back from a horrible injury and resting him. I'm not sure I believe that we replaced him because he is a doubt on that side. Fully fit and in full form, I think he is a starter, especially given the defensive side of his game has improved so much.
 
Aaron said:
I don't see it. I don't think Young is as good as Nani but I also don't see how if it's true we are interested in a player in a certain position, then it may limit the player who usually plays in that position, of starting opportunities.
I don't think Rodwell is as good as Carrick or Anderson, but logically speaking if we did sign Rodwell, he would further limit first team starting opportunities for people who start in the same position he does.

I know others disagree with me on this but I don't see Nani as the 'immovable object' in the United team as some others on here do. I think he's more likely than not to drop to the bench in favour of Park during the big away games, especially in Europe, and I don't expect him to start vs Barcelona either.

Now that isn't to say that this means I think Ashley Young is a better player, I don't, but for many of the big games Nani already is no longer first choice since the return of Valencia. I know he started away vs Arsenal but he also missed out in the first leg against Chelsea and the first leg of the semi-final.

I just don't see it as that much of a stretch to say that the addition of another player in the same position may further limit opportunities of someone whose opportunities have already been limited in the second half of the season with Park and Valencia regaining fitness anyway.

None of that is saying Young is a better player than Nani or Park is a better player than Nani or Rodwell is a better player than any of our central midfielders or anyone else we may sign is necessarily going to be better than anyone else who also plays in the same position. But whoever we sign, will get at least some games and obviously limit, at least to some degree, the starting opportunities of the person they share the position with.

if Cleverly comes back next year I expect him to get at about 10-15 games all told in a season. Doesn't mean that for those 10-15 games he'll be 'better' than the person he plays in place of, but there's only 11 spaces on a field you can fill at any one time.
Click to expand...

That was more a comment regarding Oliver Holt's twitter post. If I am to engage it, I would say that it would be a completely and utterly pointless signing, as Nani is clearly miles better, and that he would inevitable take up a place in the squad that would only hinder Nani's chances further.

I disagree with the statement that he is anywhere near good enough for this to be warranted, not the fact that it would happen should we sign him.

Thankfully, this will never happen.
 
Using that logic, why would we bring back Cleverley?

This season hardly shows that we lack in the area you imagine he'd fit in at. Yet everyone seems to be convinced that he will come back and at least be an integral part of the squad next year.

In fairness if we're on the one hand saying that we don't need anyone else and at the same time saying how good it'd be to see Cleverley back next season, as seems to be the consensus not necessarily what you've ever said, then I think some don't really understand the concept of more players and more competition for places to be honest, as I cannot seem to see a logic within the two positions.
 
We dont need Young because we already have much better starters, good senior cover and young cover in the form of players like Cleverly. The point is we wouldn't be signing Cleverly on a big fee, he is already ours, so why wouldn't we be happy to see him back, especially as he will already perform as a squad player, making the Young signing even more pointless.
 
I think the issue is you seem to be confusing 'we don't need to buy anyone else' with 'we don't need anyone else'.....We could use squad cover, but we already have that coming back to us in the shape of Cleverly. We don't need to buy anyone else, because we already have our first teamers, back-ups and squad backups. Also, I'm not sure anyone is saying Cleverly will be integral to our squad next season, but that he may have some influence over the course of a season, or at least a bigger oppertunity.
 
Aaron said:
Using that logic, why would we bring back Cleverley?

This season hardly shows that we lack in the area you imagine he'd fit in at. Yet everyone seems to be convinced that he will come back and at least be an integral part of the squad next year.

In fairness if we're on the one hand saying that we don't need anyone else and at the same time saying how good it'd be to see Cleverley back next season, as seems to be the consensus not necessarily what you've ever said, then I think some don't really understand the concept of more players and more competition for places to be honest, as I cannot seem to see a logic within the two positions.
Click to expand...

I worry for Cleverley, really. I'm not convinced he's ready yet to play in the centre, especially given that he's been out wide for Wigan a fair bit. There's also the fact that eventually, he will be having to contend with Anderson, Pogba and Morrison, who are all ridiculously talented players, and that's before even moving on to potential new signings and the players we have already.

Either way, you're misunderstanding me. Cleverley is already a part of the squad that was taken into account - adding Young would create a problem in terms of having too much depth, and too many people wanting to start in the first team. So far, the genius of Sir Alex Ferguson has been such that he's managed to build the strongest squad he's ever had, whilst keeping the vast majority of players integral to the success of the club happy.

He's managed this by finding a balance between youth (young players do not expect to start), versatility (making it easier to give players game whilst making them feel valued) and fecking good man-management.

Young would ruin this. He is not good enough, nor is he young enough or versatile enough to make his signing worthwhile. It would clearly be at the detriment of Nani if he were to be signed, and it doesn't need clarifying any further how silly it would be to hinder a talent like Nani. He has been in the top bracket of wingers on the planet this year and, along with Berbatov, has kept us in the title race in an attacking sense until Rooney and Valencia came back from injury.

Young simply isn't that good.
 
Also, Cleverly is 21, Young is 25. Their expectations will be entirely different, one has come through our youth and will wait for his chances whenever they come, the other won't be so patient, having been brought. Cleverly can serve as decent squad backup, as well as positioning himself for the future. Can Young say that? He's not going to get starts over Nani or Valencia if they are fit, we already have better back-up in the shape of Park and Giggs, competition for them in the form of Obertan and Bebe - although let's not include them for the sake of the argument. Then the youth coming up as well. It doesn't make sense for Young, or us. Certainly makes sense for us to be happy about Cleverly coming back though, his return is nothing like signing Ashley Young.
 
Hectic said:
Also, Cleverly is 21, Young is 25. Their expectations will be entirely different, one has come through our youth and will wait for his chances whenever they come, the other won't be so patient, having been brought. Cleverly can serve as decent squad backup, as well as positioning himself for the future. Can Young say that? He's not going to get starts over Nani or Valencia if they are fit, we already have better back-up in the shape of Park and Giggs, competition for them in the form of Obertan and Bebe - although let's not include them for the sake of the argument. Then the youth coming up as well. It doesn't make sense for Young, or us. Certainly makes sense for us to be happy about Cleverly coming back though, his return is nothing like signing Ashley Young.
Click to expand...

This is why Fergie is such a full-on, 100% genius. He knows that young players don't expect to walk into the first team, and will stress everyday to them how much work there is to be done.

I do worry about Cleverley, like I say, but he's another one that this applies to, whilst also being versatile enough to do a job when required.
 
That's what I love about him too.

We don't have that issue that Chelsea had, or Arsenal and Spurs have, where we are buying too many players who compete for the same position as existing players and youth, meaning there is either upset at a lack of starts, or a lack of match fitness, or too much rotation. We have it just pefect with the blend of youth, current form in the mid-range players, and senior.

We have competitions for each spot, and the majority of starts are mid-aged, the back-up can be another mid-aged, senior, or youth player. It's pefect because you keep healthy competition at the top, then you can put in a senior member for experience, and the rare game for the youth. It keeps our squad happy, allows us good rotation and invaluable experience for the young guns.

I'm not 100% Cleverley will make it for us either, but his versitality could be key.
 
#MUFC away from home in the PL 2010/11: after Vidic, Nani attempted the most tackles in the entire squad with 120 (Vidic attempted 125)
 
cina said:
Has he feck been inconsistent.

Unless you've just watched the last 2 months and not the 6 months before that where he dominated teams almost every game.
Click to expand...

He is inconsistent within games. He can be brilliant for ten minutes, go missing for twenty, brilliant again, and so on.

Why do you think Valencia has played most of the time since he has returned? It is because he is consistent. He provides the same kind of stuff throughout 90 minutes. Nani can do better things than Valencia, but he does not do it throughout games.

Who do you think is going to start the CL final so?
 
wr8_utd said:
#MUFC away from home in the PL 2010/11: after Vidic, Nani attempted the most tackles in the entire squad with 120 (Vidic attempted 125)
Click to expand...

thats an interesting one lol, i bet if park played more he would have been in there with a shout too
 
wr8_utd said:
#MUFC away from home in the PL 2010/11: after Vidic, Nani attempted the most tackles in the entire squad with 120 (Vidic attempted 125)
Click to expand...

The person who tweeted that has made the same Guardian Chalkboards mistake everyone makes since for some bizarre reason the Chalkboards and Opta lump tackles, aerial duels and dribbles all under the same header of Tackles. So the 120 number is probably mostly dribbles, some aerial duels and some tackles.

According to WhoScored.com (who get their data straight from Opta but list actual tackles rather than "Tackles") Nani completed on average 1.5 tackles per away league match this season, so about 22-26 tackles in total.
 
letranger0 said:
The person who tweeted that has made the same Guardian Chalkboards mistake everyone makes since for some bizarre reason the Chalkboards and Opta lump tackles, aerial duels and dribbles all under the same header of Tackles. So the 120 number is probably mostly dribbles, some aerial duels and some tackles.

According to WhoScored.com (who get their data straight from Opta but list actual tackles rather than "Tackles") Nani completed on average 1.5 tackles per away league match this season, so about 22-26 tackles in total.
Click to expand...
Do the total number of tackles include tackles on the player as well as tackles made by the player. If that's the number Nani's been "involved" in then it's probably right.
 
The Chalkboard Tackles and the WhoScored.com tackles only count T/tackles made by the player and not tackles on the player as well. I don't know how many times Nani has been tackled (or someone has attempted to tackle him) this season. WhoScored has some data on how often he is fouled and dispossessed from which you could try and extrapolate if you wanted to.

One small correction to my previous post: the 1.5 tackles per match is actually successful tackles whereas the original Twitter comment referred to tackles attempted, so his actual tackles attempted in away league matches this season is probably somewhere in the 32-40 range depending on his success rate, which I don't know.
 
Brophs said:
Personally I think Vidic was comfortably our best player this season as Nani's been poor since after Christmas.
Click to expand...
That's nonsense. His dip in form came much later. He was our best player in February for instance.
Name Changed said:
He is inconsistent within games. He can be brilliant for ten minutes, go missing for twenty, brilliant again, and so on.
Click to expand...
Sure. Ronaldo is inconsistent too, still the second best player in the world, though.

Why do you think Valencia has played most of the time since he has returned? It is because he is consistent.
Click to expand...
Many other better reasons. Nani has played a lot, Valencia is fresh. Nani is out of form. Valencia offers things Nani doesn't.
 
Nani's inconsistencies, as have been said, omit themselves over a single game, not only over a period.

Nobody expects brilliance every time but it is frustrating when he shows what he is capable of one minute with a great bit of play (cross, pass, dribble, shot, whatever) and then for the rest of the half, or the rest of the game, he plays as if someone only taught him how to cross the ball yesterday or as if he suddenly doesn't realise that the other people in the same red shirt as he is wearing, are actually team mates.

I'll get stick for this opinion but all too often for me Nani, still, is a 'highlight reel' player. He does stuff that looks brilliant on youtube or a moment that'll be recorded in posterity, but that does hide his inconsistencies throughout a game.

It was interesting the bosses comments yesterday at the press conference where he spoke of the maturity Nani is 'starting to show'. There's a man who chooses his words carefully whenever he speaks to the press and I think it shows that even within the club they think we're only just starting to see some maturity from the player and that does indicate that he perhaps isn't the 'best in the world' or whatever title people wish to bestow upon him, just yet.

I realise people think I'm too harsh on Nani but I think the rush to crown him a superstar, when he isn't ready, could be far more harmful to his development as a player when he still has a lot of stuff to learn or to master or even to just get right. He just blows hot and cold with an alarmingly high level of fluctuation for my money. As other's have said elsewhere, he's either a 10/10 or a 4/10 and that degree of inconsistency needs work before he's lauded or crowned 'best of' anything, in my opinion.
 
Nani is not inconsistent at all.

And everyone does that 'brilliant for 10 minutes, missing the next 10'. Only playmakers ala Scholes are consistently great more often than not. Wingers and attacking players will always drift in and out of games.

Nani simply can't win with some. He's had a blinder of a season and been chosen as the best United player by his team mates. Still people ride the 'inconsistency' bandwagon.
 
If he had a blinder of a season. He's had a much improved season from where he was. And if he wasn't inconsistent, he'd be starting all the big games, but he doesn't.


I know with some games it is a case of 'needs must' vs a certain opposition, but if a player is as brilliant as Nani plaudits would have us believe, he'd be the first name on the team sheet but often, he isn't.
 
It's like complaining that Ronaldo is not as consistent during a game as Park. Of course he isn't. Park is more a team player whereas Ronaldo decides games through sheer ability and moments of brilliance. Nani can get better but so can Rooney, Hernandez, Berbatov etc. Within a game Nani is more likely to produce pieces of magic than almost anybody we have, just like Ronaldo was.

How inconsistent can Giggs' passing be? There are times when he tries 5 audacious things but you have to have more patience than you would with Park because he capable of making the 6th decide the game.
 
Aaron said:
If he had a blinder of a season and wasn't inconsistent, he'd be starting all the big games, he doesn't.

I know with some games it is a case of 'needs must' vs a certain opposition, but if a player is as brilliant as Nani plaudits would have us believe, he'd be the first name on the team sheet but often, he isn't.
Click to expand...

His form has dipped post his injury and a very very dangerous tackle. For majority of the season he was magnificent. It's a pathetic stick to beat him with. 3 or so months back he would have been one of the first names on the team sheet.

A couple of months of bad form doesn't make one an inconsistent player. In that case Rooney is the most inconsistent player we've ever had given he went from pure turd to very good over the course of a season. (and pure turd for a very good bit of time too)
 
Oh, Aaron, was the one with the irrational hatred for Nani. Why did I bother.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
It's like complaining that Ronaldo is not as consistent during a game as Park. Of course he isn't. Park is more a team player whereas Ronaldo decides games through sheer ability and moments of brilliance. Nani can get better but so can Rooney, Hernandez, Berbatov etc. Within a game Nani is more likely to produce pieces of magic than almost anybody we have, just like Ronaldo was.

How inconsistent can Giggs' passing be? There are times when he tries 5 audacious things but you have to have more patience than you would with Park because he capable of making the 6th decide the game.
Click to expand...

Why the comparison of Nani to Ronaldo? If Nani played for any other side we'd rightly laugh at the comparisons with someone who is, arguably, one of the top five players of the last 20 years.

Nani is not a kid any more. We shouldn't be in a position where, more often than not, he makes the wrong decision. Nobody is calling for 100% consistency. No player gives you that. But at least a certain level of consistency where a player does from brilliant for 10 minutes in a game, to looking as if they've just been thrown into the first team and play like a deer in the headlights.

People are making Nani into a superstar player and making ridiculous comparisons to Ronaldo, far, far, far too early and I think it's absurd and won't do the player any good either.

I think the club understand that Nani has some way to go. He's 'starting' (to quote Sir Alex) to show maturity in his game and he's 'starting' (quoting myself) to develop and his consistency is getting better.

That for me is a realistic appraisal of what Nani is right now.

But that's against a backdrop of 'Oh he's brilliant, best winger in the country, similar to Ronaldo' etc. The opinion of some fans and I cannot understand it myself. There's clearly improvement there and he's clearly developing into an excellent player, but to say he is there right now, just seems daft.
 
Inconsistent within games? Pretty much every wide player will be considering most of the ball is in the central third of the pitch during a game. Naturally, as someone who tries to make things happen, sometimes Nani will try something and it'll come off and sometimes it won't.

He's had a dip in form of late, but I hope people don't forget that he and Berbatov carried us whilst Rooney was in the shit and Hernandez was only playing bit-part. The latter two carried us over the line but it was Berbatov and Nani who got the jump-leads out and started the engine.
 
What's daft is your last post which stinks with bias and agenda.

Why the comparison to Ronaldo? I thought it was bleeding obvious that I was trying to make a point regarding players who rely more on individual brilliance (Ronaldo) as opposed to a greater emphasis on team play (Park). But people with biases usually see such references as a direct comparison of ability.

Nani has just been voted the best player by the players of the champions. I could go on about how terrific he was for most of the season but it's frankly too much of a waste of time to say something to blatantly obvious.

And he is the best winger in the country. The only other person contending that is Valencia. So rather than that being a great exaggeration it's something that's more or less spot on and one that's hard to argue with.

If Nani isn't brilliant, then I wonder what that makes the rest of the champions squad who were worse than him this season.
 
A brilliant player plays in all the big games. Nani doesn't.

Rooney plays them. The two centre backs play them. Ronaldo played them. Giggs played them. Scholes, Keane, Beckham etc...

Nani doesn't. Nani won't play Saturday. Do you honestly leave 'best winger in the country' on the bench for all those games?

Or does Ferguson have an irrational hatred of Nani too?
 
He's inconsistent, but then again he's a traditional winger, it's natural.

Has a blinder of a season for the majority but has fallen off a bit for the last few months.

Player of the year could have gone to him, Vidic, or Chica, Rooney was closing in on them though.
 
Aaron said:
A brilliant player plays in all the big games. Nani doesn't.

Rooney plays them. The two centre backs play them. Ronaldo played them. Giggs played them. Scholes, Keane, Beckham etc...

Nani doesn't. Nani won't play Saturday. Do you honestly leave 'best winger in the country' on the bench for all those games?

Or does Ferguson have an irrational hatred of Nani too?
Click to expand...

:lol:

Did anyone say 'if you don't pick Nani for the next game you have an irrational hatred for him' ?

You just made that up didn't you?
 
Aaron said:
I'm not wound up at all I just think anyone over the age of 14 should be beyond trying to talk to someone for the purposes of impressing someone else.
Click to expand...

Impressing someone else? :wenger:

I think someone over the age of 14 should make some sense.
 
Is anyone expecting Cleverly to return and get into the squad? His career path strikes me as somewhat similar to Chris Eagles'. Well regarded on the forums, but never to see much action at OT due to all the first team talent we have.
 
Boss said:
He's inconsistent, but then again he's a traditional winger, it's natural.

Has a blinder of a season for the majority but has fallen off a bit for the last few months.

Player of the year could have gone to him, Vidic, or Chica, Rooney was closing in on them though.
Click to expand...

I think wingers are, as you say, naturally more inconsistent but even within that framework, Nani seems more inconsistent than most. Valencia has bad games too but generally his level of performance is maintained throughout a match, or throughout a run of games.

This isn't to say that he never goes missing in games or doesn't put in poor crosses at all. But I think with a Valencia you know, generally, what you'll get. With Nani, you can either get brilliance or waste. It's like that nursery rhyme. When he's good he's very, very good, but when he's off form he has a stinker.

I think it's because Nani perhaps is a very individual player, in the sense that so much of what he does depends on himself, if you see what I mean. Valencia, to an extent, can have the inconsistent moments masked by the team, as his involvement in the games are often as part of a team movement.

Nani, on the other hand, is much more autonomous in that respect. If he has a poor game or poor form, it notices a lot more, simply because that is the way he plays the game. I think that we have to judge him by this. Whereas Valencia's mistakes can be masked by the team, Nani's cannot be so his mistakes and inconsistencies tend to stand out more.
 
Raoul said:
Is anyone expecting Cleverly to return and get into the squad? His career path strikes me as somewhat similar to Chris Eagles'. Well regarded on the forums, but never to see much action at OT due to all the first team talent we have.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure to be honest. I think sometimes we fans lack a sense of realism when it comes to our young players coming back and establishing themselves, but Cleverley has had a very good period with Wigan and has had a lot of games and developed in a very good player. Perhaps unexpectedly so.

I'd expect him to come back and get around 10 games a season. Problem is if that'll be good enough for him. When you go from being a first team regular to bench warmer, it's fine when you're in your 30s, but at his age? I'm not sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.