Strootman and Sahin
________

Perfect, realistic targets. But Sahin wants to prove himself at Madird.

Maybe he'll change his mind Cameras if Modric arrives, or if SAF asks the question.

Pea

Can I have a condensed version?

It doesn't need to be a choice between one and the other, but crudely speaking, I'd rather have an accomplished footballer who wasn't physically imposing than a beast who was limited with the ball at his feet.

The successful teams of recent years have shown that a team can be defensively very tight without 'destroyers' through formational discipline and hard work. The Spain / Barcelona midfields don't have bruisers (even Busquets is hardly an awe-inspiring athlete) - they have very hard working players who are very well drilled to get the ball back and to outnumber teams in midfield, based on movement off the ball and technique on it.

I'd be delighted to have a young Keane in our midfield, but of course Keane was a superb footballer, not just a warrior. I'd also be delighted to have a younger Scholes, although I think the ideal would be the deep lying Scholes but with a young man's stamina (let's say the 2006-7 version in terms of his game combined with the strength and stamina he had in 2001-2).

For the same reasons, I'd be delighted if we bought any of Martinez, Modric or Sahin (Strootman I haven't seen enough to really comment), as they all very good footballers.

By the way, nice article. No need for the condensed version - I saw your name and thought 'aha, a nice meaty post awaits!'

I've always had the opinion that if the other team are struggling to get the ball off you, they are less likely to score. Which is why i've never really been in favour of a purely "combative" midfielder. To use your example, i'd take Cabaye over Tiote any day.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 3 minutes ago
By the way, nice article. No need for the condensed version - I saw your name and thought 'aha, a nice meaty post awaits!'
______________________

Ha. That was my condensed version!! I have a disease that can't be controlled

Obviously, physical prowess is useful. The perfect midfielder has class on the ball and athleticism. A few years ago Essien was the archetype. I don't want a magician with the ball at his feet who is also a wuss - or has no legs (e.g. Riquelme). But that's not to say that slight players without lightning pace must be at a disadvantage. Xavi is part of a midfield that gives nothing away, and Modric is tough and tenacious.

comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 4 minutes ago
I've always had the opinion that if the other team are struggling to get the ball off you, they are less likely to score. Which is why i've never really been in favour of a purely "combative" midfielder. To use your example, i'd take Cabaye over Tiote any day.
______________

I do see your point, which is why I tried to use 'dominant' when I could, but in 970,000 words combative slipped in as well

Interesting re Cabaye and Tiote, and that's exactly why I was posing the question. How about the Toure v deep Sneijder question? Same sort of answer or does Toure's work going forward compared to Tiote swing it?

I'd prefer Toure given our assets and problems. I'd actually prefer the exact Keane clone to Scholes as well given the same current circumstances. We just need a much more dominant central player imo that yes can drive the team forward, but also disrupt the opposition and protect the side down the middle.

Agree re Essien Red Russian. Exactly what I think we need as the first priority over the more clever player. However that doesnt mean we shouldn't get two!

TWSLP

I think just about every United fan knows we need to replace Scholes with a similar player.

However, one of the reasons why we were shown up last season in Europe was SAF playing 4-4-2 against teams with a midfield 5, and quite often part of our midfield 4 were Giggs and Park who were both poor at retaing the ball.

I have a feeling SAF is going to move away from 4-4-2 this season.

Yaya is a special case. There is simply no other midfielder like him on the planet, of course i'd have him over Sneijder in a heartbeat.

Generally speaking though, i'd prefer the Cabaye type over the Tiote type. Wouldnt mind both though.

Yaya is a special case. There is simply no other midfielder like him on the planet,

....................

Whilst YaYa is a very good player, I think there are plenty of midfielders who are better.

comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 3 minutes ago
Yaya is a special case. There is simply no other midfielder like him on the planet, of course i'd have him over Sneijder in a heartbeat.

Generally speaking though, i'd prefer the Cabaye type over the Tiote type. Wouldnt mind both though.
_________________

Yep I certainly agree that both would be the ideal, especially as replacing Scholes is obviously a good idea, but personally I'd prioritise the Toure, Keane, Vieira type over that given our problems. Easier said than done though!

Whilst YaYa is a very good player, I think there are plenty of midfielders who are better.
________________________

Yes there are midfielders that are better. But there isnt one with his pace, strength, power, acceleration, stamina, very good with the ball at his feet and is useful at both ends of the pitch.

Thats why I dont class him alongside the likes of Tiote. He is a different type of player all together.

Toure, Keane, Vieira type over that given our problems.

........................

I don't nthink that is the area we had a problem Carrick was mostly superb playing that role last season. It is the CM partner to Carrick where we have a problem.

I've noticed when teams press Utd, that's when we really struggle, because not many of our players, especially the midfield are good at keeping hold of the ball very well when teams make us rush. Carrick is great if you give him plenty of time, but when put under pressure, he seems to struggle.

We will continue to struggle especially in the CL if we don't sign a good technical midfielder and continue to play 442.

One way to argue this point is that rather than needing a defensive midfielder to stop us conceding if we had more mature midfielders who are better on the ball and less likely to lose it, it would reduce the number of chances our opponents create. Of course I’m not suggesting we get out and out attacking players but you don’t necessarily require a defensive midfielder as long as the players you do have can keep the ball under pressure. Even barca only have a defensive midfielder as their full backs are essentially wingers

Yes 'aquantum' I was careful not to say 'defensive midfielder' as that's definitely not what I'm talking about as the issue, and I dont see Essien, Toure, Keane etc as purely defensive midfielders at all.

Also arguably we need a system or type of player(s) that can compete with the barca style of play / personnel, so rather than trying to copy to challenge them and most likely falling short, maybe a counter approach would be more fruitful. Mourinho has moved to a slightly different approach to do just this, but this doesnt mean copy Madrid either.

I do agree with Mr Tea that we struggled badly when teams pressed us last season, and our midfield also got overrun so badly on numerous occasions, either because SAF was using 2 against 3 or using only 2 players that just weren't quick and strong enough to cope without the ball. With the ball any new players clearly need to be able to retain possession, but the times when we are without the ball is a problem for us centrally.

I do agree too that Carrick is great with time, and was arguably our best CM last year, but without time he stuggles, and he lacks the dynamism to be one of two main men at the very top of the world game. If he's one part of a two and has midfielder(s) ahead of him then fine e.g. 4-2-3-1 but playing 4-4-1-1 then we get out gunned by the big boys when they push into the midfield and beyond.

Basically our current midfield is too brittle for my liking and a light weight clever creative mid alongside Carrick in a 4-4-1-1 wont solve the key problem imo, despite bringing some benefits.

I agree with Mr Tea's and aquantum's comments.

I think defensive solidity provided by the midfield is above all about the game plan and shape, rather than having a specialist defensive midfielder. Teams may require a 'destroyer' when they are gung-ho in attack (think of Makelele at Real) but if the front six work as a unit and the midfielders are all disciplined and hard working out of possession, I'm not so sure a big, strong man is such a prerequisite.

...especially if they are not playing 4-4-2.

One thing re your comment above RR - Would you say that our 'front six' last season didn't 'work as a unit' and the midfielders were not 'all disciplined and hard working out of possession'?

I only ask this as I would say they were those things, but for whatever reason certain teams still found it relatively easy to break us down and we were regularly out played centrally in key games, which left us ultimately pretty exposed at the back.

There must be another reason for this, and I'm 100% not suggesting we lacked a dog or war. God help us.

For the sake or debate would we have been better off if Toure was one of our midfielders in those games or an Essien at his peak, or a Keane at his peak etc? If so, why?

I haven't got a secret answer btw

Mr Pea

You raise an interesting point. I do think we suffered partly from a deficit in quality in midfield - partly due to lack of options and experienced cover when injuries kicked in. A world class defensive midfielder probably would have made us better. Then again, if Scholes had been five years younger, that would have made us better too.

Above all, I think teams that play with two in the middle will always find themselves outnumbered in midfield and exposed at the back against teams that deploy three, especially when they also try to play expansively and take an initiative in attack. (By contrast, Hodgson's 4-4-2 was defensively pretty solid at the expense of creativity and ball retention.)

So I wouldn't say the players failed to work as a unit last year but that the structure didn't help them particularly. I'm not convinced that playing 4-3-3 would have been the best way to utilise our resources, given that we had a surfeit of wingers and our best player was more a second striker than a number 10.

However, the recruitment of Kagawa I think gives us an opportunity to shift the balance. Kagawa can play at the front of a three in the middle. Rooney can be the spearhead striker or (an idea I'm increasingly warming to) play slightly wide of centre, a la David Villa. I do think the effectiveness of Rooney in the hole has been an asset with some negative knock-on consequences. He's great there but as a result the shape of the team suffers.

...whether Fergie sees things my way I have no idea.

Essentially what we are looking for, i'd have thought, would be a technically gifted player with 'all-round capabilities'. So, Scholes 6 years ago would have been perfect. But i think there is another avenue to explore...

I feel that (my hunch here is to say since Quieroz left but i can't say for certain) we approach too many games with a lack of a real tactic. We used to press and hound teams higher up the pitch - i distinctly remember several years ago Hansen doing a piece on MOTD of this.

Then more latterly, we were devastating on the counter-attack, with Ronaldo, Tevez, Rooney... Even the likes of Park and Saha going back slightly further.

Now however, at least it seems to me - we're a little neither here nor there. We don't really press teams aggressively, but we don't sit deep and break either. (at least not as often and obviously).

Given that, despite lacking a genius (ignore Scholes for a minute) in the middle of the park, we seem to score and create regardless (mostly wing play), then might we toy with the idea that - and i think recent discussions are heading this way, largely due to the signing of Kagawa - that it is a change in system/tactic that might address some of our problems? That isn't to say a CM singing isn't required - i think it is - but that they 'type' of player in there might not be as important as is being made out?

Any thoughts...?

Pea – to be honest and without sounding pessimistic I don’t think you could shove (one of) a Keane or a Scholes in their prime into our current team and see us wipe the board winning trophy after trophy. Whilst we still have a very good overall squad our starting 11 for me is nowhere near as strong (or consistent) as teams of the past. I suppose to a degree we were spoilt with players of the quality and desire of Keane, Neville, Scholes Beckham, Butt etc all coming through at the same time but we also developed Ronaldo, Giggs, Evra and Vidic into top players.

It actually hurts my head racking my brain trying to think of a viable midfielder we could realistically sign (and afford) I am certain SAF and his scouts have been searching high and low for this individual and part (but not all of the reason) we have not signed that person so far is they haven’t found exactly what they wanted. There’s still another 2 months or so till the window closes so I remain confident

I also agree with what Berbaking is saying – although I feel this may be down to the overall age of the team and perhaps slightly less hunger? It must be hard to keep players motivated season in and season out to play at their optimum every game – combine this with the increased quality, intensity plus better tactics employed by opposition teams and managers means that there will often be upsets and bad performances. I think some fresh blood, a slight tweak to our tactics and losing our title to city may see a better ethic next season