Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [14th - 19th October 2016]

Martial started plenty of games, didn't have the best start so Lingard was given a shot, he's been even worse so he's been dropped. Martial was excellent when he came on against Stoke. He would have almost certainly started today if he was fit.
 
I have to say, with a squad worth however much it is, I thought that was a really embarrassing gameplan. It was like watching Burnley away or a League 1 side in the cup. Really, really disappointed.
 
Shamikebab said:
Martial started plenty of games, didn't have the best start so Lingard was given a shot, he's been even worse so he's been dropped. Martial was excellent when he came on against Stoke. He would have almost certainly started today if he was fit.
Click to expand...

Again, why did Young play over Lingard? Young can't even get on the bench most of the time and hasn't started a game as you keep saying. You're seriously suggesting that Lingard's gone from being first choice to being behind a player that can't get a game?

Neville's just been talking about it just now - Mourinho wanted his wide players to do a job defensively and that's why Young played and I'd have been surprised if he didn't had any of those others been fit.

And as I've said before, I'd bet that in 12 months time if Martial is a regular in the side at all and maybe not even at Utd. Mourinho will be looking to sign somebody like Willian and I'd be stunned if you don't.
 
BaZ87 said:
Again, why did Young play over Lingard? Young can't even get on the bench most of the time and hasn't started a game as you keep saying. You're seriously suggesting that Lingard's gone from being first choice to being behind a player that can't get a game?
Click to expand...

Hopefully, he's been crap so far and needs to work harder to earn a spot. Why is this so hard for you to understand? His first half against City was one of the worst I've ever seen by a United player. That doesn't mean Young would suddenly be chosen ahead of Martial. That's just you making an assumption to make it look like you had more players out. You keep stating the same thing over and over again as if it's going to make more sense, it isn't.
 
As a complete neutral I agree with baz. Young was in for his defensive capabilities and his crossing. I'm sure martial would have come on if fit, but doubt he would have started given United's gameplan.

Not sure why everyone is getting their knickers in a twist about who would have won if all the players were available - they weren't.
 
His crossing? How many crosses did he do? Were you watching the same game? Have you ever seen Young play? He's hardly an accomplished crosser. Only the fact he had Valencia on the other flank made his 10% getting past the first man look acceptable!
 
Pretty sure that if Martial and Micky were fit and in form we wouldn't have played as defensively as we did, but they're not and it's doubtful we were going to outscore Liverpool if we'd played an attacking game with the wingers we had available.
 
Shamikebab said:
Hopefully, he's been crap so far and needs to work harder to earn a spot. Why is this so hard for you to understand? His first half against City was one of the worst I've ever seen by a United player. That doesn't mean Young would suddenly be chosen ahead of Martial. That's just you making an assumption to make it look like you had more players out. You keep stating the same thing over and over again as if it's going to make more sense, it isn't.
Click to expand...

LOL :D I'm really not that petty and quite frankly don't give a **** about that arguement. My posts about Lallana and Wijnaldum, and about not believing Martial or Miki would play were just honest replies - I'm not interested in who had more players out, it means nothing.

We're going to have to agree to disagree for now and revisit this in a year's time. This is the real Mourinho that you saw today - he will always revert to what he knows best in these games and I've been saying it for years.
 
We played much better with lallana on but utd came for a pt and that's it I mean young even stated in his interview for Christ sake "came for a point" not we wanted 3 etc. As mentioned above that was Mourinho doing his best to not play. I do think if we had lallana on from the get go would have scored and won as he let countinho and mirnho and mane express better, soon as Sturridge is isolated as he was we don't seem to move as well
 
Lol came for a point, ok dears. we had 7 shots to Liverpool's 9, my god what a crazy difference. liverpool fans seem to be turning into the new Arsenal fans "we had more possession therefore we won the game"
 
Shamikebab said:
Lol came for a point, ok dears. we had 7 shots to Liverpool's 9, my god what a crazy difference. liverpool fans seem to be turning into the new Arsenal fans "we had more possession therefore we won the game"
Click to expand...

Well you did and your own player bloody player said it, we could have done better in an attacking sense and should have but baffles me how teams / managers can't just admit it, forget utd it's not like Mourinho doesn't do this he has done it at all his clubs. It paid off we yet again failed to break a team down but it is sure as he'll frustrating watching a team do **** all from the get go but sit 10 men behind a ball not like you had a lead to save or defend
 
At no point did we sit ten men behind the ball. Hell for the first half an hour we had 7 men in your half most of the time. Perhaps you should watch the game again.
 
Shamikebab said:
At no point did we sit ten men behind the ball. Hell for the first half an hour we had 7 men in your half most of the time. Perhaps you should watch the game again.
Click to expand...

I thought the average position thing you post was quite telling. You didn't park the bus first half because you were able to stop us getting foward but equally you weren't committing players forward either.

Second half as we began to get a foothold in the game you did drop deeper and often had your wingers playing almost as extra full backs, leaving Ibra isolated.

I'm not sure about playing for a point but I'd say you were hoping we'd lose it rather than playing to go out and win it. If that makes sense.
 
I think we played conservatively. I think we hoped to get more out of Rashford's pace than we did really. Overall a draw was a fair result but it's dumb to suggest we sat 10 mend behind the ball for 90 mins and just tried to stop Liverpool scoring, we made many attempts to score ourselves and on another day Ibra would have buried that great chance in particular.
 
Yep, BBC and several other places seem to agree "The world's most expensive player was used in a more advanced role and is certainly on the same wavelength as Ibrahimovic, delivering a perfect cross which the Swede should have converted."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom