I genuinely don't think it is a coincidence that the most barren period of SAF's career was when RVN was (arguably) the star player.

He, unfortunately, was a dated footballer even by the time he joined the PL. Henry (to a lesser extent Shearer & to an extent Anelka) showed that a forward needed to have more to his game than being a pure goalscorer. Had RVN been about 10 years earlier then he would have been perfect for that generation of football - especially when you consider how easy it was for Fowler/Cole/Sutton/Wright

RVN had very good hold up play. Not like Zlatan’s but still very good. The whole RVN shackling us thing is a bit overplayed as well. There was far more to it than RVN leaving and us exploding the following season.

Yeah that’s ballacks. RVN was far from the issue as to why we didn’t win that much back then.

I'm always trying to work out why we only won just the one PL title with RVN in the side, I think he came at a time we went under a period of transition and Fergie was also changing his tactics in Europe.

I think it isn't overplayed. With Saha/Rooney/Ronaldo your game changed in that you had 3 forwards that played all three positions as they were such versatile players, something RVN never was. Again I don't think he was bad, but I think he was a striker who was a bit unfortunate in the era he peaked. Would have suited 90s football way better.

It's a shame statistics from his era aren't around anymore, but I would be interested in seeing if he averaged more than 10/11 passes a game while at Utd. My guess would be not.

You overlook the most crucial part of it. Carrick signing and Scholes coming back. Ronaldo also had a huge point to prove after the world cup. Vidic and Evra settled and we finally had a back four that could push up higher.

Saha made a difference but he was often injured and Solskjaer and Smith would deputise, they weren’t particularly dynamic in the way Saha was.

I’ve always maintained that it was a perfect storm rather than simply RVN leaving that made that side what it was.

You do not simply change a striker and all that happen at once without lots other factors coming into play. I’m surprised you are naive enough to buy into that, Edin.

In fact, if we were to simplify strikers roles in terms of generic titles (Sturridge = Poacher, Kane = Target Man, Tevez = Runs the channels)

Him and Vardy must be the only strikers in a PL winning side this Millennium to win a title?

Arab, it’s not that difficult to work out. We sold Beckham and didn’t replace him. Keane got old, Giggs and Scholes’ form dipped as a result of both those things and Scholes had his eye problem. Rio got banned. Silvestre played for us. Neville wasn’t playing as much. We had crap keepers.

Chelsea got bought by Roman and Arsenal were unbeatable for a season.

But yeah RVN was the reason. Some people actually believe that stuff.

There was probably a whole host of reasons, including Arsenals insane XI and Mourinho reinventing the British game (Makelele role, tactical fouling etc) which didn't help SAF.

Yet I genuinely don't believe Utd would have had the same success had RVN stayed. His style wouldn't have suited the new dynamic the team had created. I'm not saying his attitude off the pitch or anything would have affected him, clearly he is a favourite of yours as you are getting very defensive. I'm just saying that him leaving opened the way for new performers to flourish, which ended up way more beneficial for Utd.

Oh and his first season it’s well documented the collapse we suffered after Fergie announced retirement.

Which, going full circle, is why I would have Zlats over RVN quite comfortably imo.

Edin, no I don’t disagree with that. I disagree with the importance placed on his inclusion in the team having the effect on our barren period and how him leaving was the main factor in our evolution the following season.

It’s not so much about getting defensive about RVN rather knowing what was happening at the time. The sale wasn’t just to do with the dynamic of the side either. There was the big falling out with Ronaldo and Fergie backed the right horse.

I wonder how much difference the off-the-field ego stuff had to play as well. It seems like he was the martyr to pave a new way. Again, I still maintain the type of striker he was wasn't suited to his era.

To an extent I wouldn't say Aguero first title win suited the PL either. As prolific as he was, he was a lot more limited back then to the player he is now.

Actually, I was reading quite an interesting piece on Henry/RVN and back then RVN was considered the more 'complete' striker as he could finish with his head/better in the air. Whereas now you would consider that ludicrous. I guess they show how the game has evolved.

Also nick overrates that 04/05 chelsea team to a ridiculous degree.

Domestically doesn't mean sh*t in Europe. It's how good you are in Europe that counts, and they were pretty mediocre. Not to mention that it's generally focussing on Europe that detracts from your league form rather than vice versa.

A number of sides staked a far stronger claim to the CL that season.

Deportivo, for example, have stronger grounds for ruing the missed opportunity than Arsenal, having put out both of the previous year's finalists and only bowing out to Porto on a penalty in the return leg at home.

Milan were defending champions and won Serie A with plenty to spare. They had an inexplicable off-night in Coruña after taking what looked like an unassailable lead there.

Real Madrid -the only team to beat Porto in the CL that year- royally facked up their QF tie against Monaco having twice held a 3-goal lead.

Chelsea could rightly feel they blew a marvellous shot at it too.

What to say of Monaco, choking at the last hurdle of an absolutely memorable campaign.

And above all of that, Porto did their second consecutive European/domestic double, and were more than worthy CL champions.

In all likelihood, even if they'd got that far Arsenal would've probably come a cropper against Porto just like everyone else who faced them in the knockouts that year and the year before did.

To say Arsenal "should've" won is just blind, unfounded arrogance.

Real Madrid suck

If you saw us with Smith and Saha up front in 04/05 when RVN was injured compared to two seasons later when they played it was night and day. That was a big reason we did fack all that year, we couldn’t score goals.

I agree that the gane was slowly evolving away fron a striker of RVN’s mould but you are placing a huge amount of emphasis on footballing evolution and systems, and one player’s role within that, in a time at United where the decline of the squad and external factors such as the issues with Magnier and McManus, Chelsea’s takeover and Arsenal’s incredible unbeaten season were having a much larger influence.

ioag, yeah I agree. But Arsenal really did underachive im Europe back then. They should have done so much better with the team they had.

Forgot to mention Fergie’s retirment as well.

comment by Alexis The King Sanchez (U10026)
posted 24 minutes ago
Arab, it’s not that difficult to work out. We sold Beckham and didn’t replace him. Keane got old, Giggs and Scholes’ form dipped as a result of both those things and Scholes had his eye problem. Rio got banned. Silvestre played for us. Neville wasn’t playing as much. We had crap keepers.

Chelsea got bought by Roman and Arsenal were unbeatable for a season.

But yeah RVN was the reason.Some people actually believe that stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yep, like I said he came at a time of transition when a lot of the main stars from the 90's were starting to decline. The experiment with Veron disrupted thins as well. Such a shame.

comment by Alexis The King Sanchez (U10026)
posted 38 seconds ago
If you saw us with Smith and Saha up front in 04/05 when RVN was injured compared to two seasons later when they played it was night and day. That was a big reason we did fack all that year, we couldn’t score goals.

I agree that the gane was slowly evolving away fron a striker of RVN’s mould but you are placing a huge amount of emphasis on footballing evolution and systems, and one player’s role within that, in a time at United where the decline of the squad and external factors such as the issues with Magnier and McManus, Chelsea’s takeover and Arsenal’s incredible unbeaten season were having a much larger influence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah maybe, I dunno I've never been convinced about RVN like everyone else was. Your team also struggled to score goals in his era unlike other Utd teams around then, but that was probably a mix of a few things.

When we won the league in 02-03 we scored a shed load of goals, but we were extremely leaky at the back too.

think RVN also won the golden boot that season with 25 goals in 34 games.

comment by Pablo Emilio Escobar Gaviria (U11781)
posted 33 seconds ago
When we won the league in 02-03 we scored a shed load of goals, but we were extremely leaky at the back too.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You scored 74, which is quite low for PL winners. I actually think that may be the lowest in PL history.