Nov 15
On Manchester United’s ‘Greatest Ever’ Squad
There has been a lot going on these days about United’s greatest squad ever. Depending on which paper you read, apart from the bit on Arsene’s ‘kids’, our squad is the most talked up thing these days.
All this, of course, started when SAF first said that this squad is his best ever. Perhaps he was talking in terms of its potential. But of course, that wouldn’t stop us from asking questions if this is, indeed, our best squad ever. A lazy, but fairly accurate, answer would be to dismiss this question as the answer would be subjective, and grossly unfair. (Cue: All those dodgy best footballers lists.)
But then this is the international week. The most exciting bits of news would be non-football related, at best. So we’d rather spend some time discussing if this squad is the best United squad ever, than trying to bother ourselves watching England take on Austria in another pointless friendly. (Honestly, does anyone think the friendly is worth the effort other than the hope that if they visit Austria now — as opposed to next year for Euro ‘08 — it would somehow act as a good luck charm and get them in to compete in Austria, next year?)
Back to our discussion, though; the talk of the current squad being the best of the lot could be either spot on or terribly flawed depending on the angle one chooses to look at it from.
In terms of potential? It has it all. A perfect blend of experience, especially in defence, and youthful exuberance, in attack, has made this squad play the free flowing style of football that the club has been renowned for. So potentially, with the likes of Ronaldo, Rooney, Tevez, Nani, Anderson… this squad has it all. So is it the greatest ever?
Er, that depends. Which brings us to this; What has this squad won? While we are talking of the squad of 2007/08, we know that much of the starting XI have already won the league title the previous year. But we are talking about results from this crop of players. And they haven’t won anything yet.
There is a fine line between goodness and greatness. That line was crossed in ‘99. Which would mean that was the best squad ever. But again people would argue about the foreign quota robbing the 94/95 squad of key players costing a potential European Cup.
Much of this talk has been about Sir Alex’s best ever squad. And those three squads mentioned stand out as fair candidates for debate. But what about United’s best ever squad? For me, although I’ve never had the fortune to having watched them play, the 1955/56 team that won the title with an average age of 22 comes to mind. That side had potential as well as results to show for the talent. They also did win the title in the following season. More importantly, the depth of the side was underlined in the aftermath of the Munich disaster, when they still managed to finish runners up in the league after losing a good part of their team.
But, of course, times have changed. And memories stem only from recent history. Personally, the ‘99 team with the excellent midfield of Beckham, Keane, Scholes and Giggs and the outstanding pair of Cole and Yorke comes to mind; not to forget Solskjaer and Sheringham, and the rock solid defence policed by the excellent Stam, Johnson, Neville and Irwin, with Schmeichel superb as always, ranks up there with the best.
The current squad is special, certainly. I haven’t felt this good about our squad for a long time. Even last year, I had some doubts when it came to injuries. With this squad, barring two positions, at the most, we seem fairly complete.
Right now, though, it is a bloody good squad. But it is still short of greatness. The reason? It hasn’t won anything, yet.
What do you think?
Related items from Red Rants:- Air Superiority
- Who is your Manchester United’s Player Of The Month for November?
- Manchester United 2006/2007 Season Review
- In memory of United’s greatest
- United’s £100k+ Christmas party, useless Shorey, Arsenal will stumble and of course, Rooney is better than Kaka
Tags: Opinions/Columns
November 15th, 2007 at 10:35
hey good article mate..
in my opinion this squad defenitely has the potential and maybe the best squad in terms of raw natural talent under fergie’s reign..but i still have my doubts if we can conquer europe,and that will determine how great this team will be rated.
no disrespect to the rest of the league but i think that we will win the premiership come May. but the determining factor is can we better our performance, last year in the Champion’s League.
i do hope that fergie doesnt go all defensive in the away legs in the latter stages of the tournament. Dont get me wrong being cautious is ok as long as you dont sacrifice your strenghts in the process. i hope he keeps two strikers on the pitch even against the milans and madrids of this world.
i loved the united team of the 98/99 season and some of the performances during that season used to give me goosebumps and i used to be like “How the hell did we pull that off??”
However the team SAF built in the early to mid nineties was for me the better side. They used to be untouchable in the league and they romped to two doubles in the space of a few years. The Fa Cup final against Chelsea brings back particularly sweet memories….
here’s to….united dominating England and Europe for the next few years and us remembering this current side in a few years as the greatest side SAF ever produced.
November 15th, 2007 at 10:40
sorry, not at all related to the article but there’s a piece of news by the Telegraph that Spurs wants Carrick back..so, what do u guys think? Personally, i think this stuff is made up but who cares, given the 2 week of no football (Euro aside) i’ll take whatever news i can get
November 15th, 2007 at 11:00
ok the 99 squad won the champs l once and the premiership 3 times. Thats fantastic record but at that time was hard as today to win the league Today in the premiership there is so much quality and there r no easy games 38 battles.Its much harder to win the leage in than to win the champs l b cause its a cup and a cup 50% down to luck ETC when the scoucers won the champs l and they came 5th in league 30+ points under chelsea.I dont want to compare players beckam/ronni stam /ferdi schols/anderson etc.but on think i have to say does becks had the pontancial as roni at 22 does schols at 19 as anderson does york at 22 like tevez does cole at 21 like roony the only one that had potancial at 20 was giggs .the 99 team we had no world class palayers individual more team work but we hadd one my friends peter schimcil the best goli in this 30 yrs so for me that was half of the potencial of the 99 squad .THIS IS MY OPENJON FRIENDS
November 15th, 2007 at 11:00
aits true, this is a best squad ever
November 15th, 2007 at 11:17
As far as results go, you’re spot on. In ten years’time, we can say how great this side was. In terms of squad size, depth and quality, this is the best. In 99, we had 2 great pairs of forwards and 4 very good central defenders Stam/Johnsen/Berg/May. Otherwise the reserves pool was quite weak. Only Butt and Blomqvist to cover midfield and Phil Nev to cover both fullbacks. Doing the treble only highlighted the quality of the first eleven. As for selling Carrick, he, Hargreaves, Scholes and Anderson are the four required central midfielders. No-one is surplus to requirements, so forget it.
November 15th, 2007 at 11:30
Its got to be the treble winning squad. The fact that most of the midfield is still considered good enough for the bets clubs in Europe and now the US,and the kind of experience and stability we had in defense, it would be folly to discredit an achievement that no others have….
This squad has the potential, but since that is such an over used term, I would rather wait if our boys come even close….
November 15th, 2007 at 11:31
i wouldnt sell carrick for all any amount of money…i am a big fan of his calming influence that he brings to the table. Anderson is a great young talent but he’ll still be a bench player who gets a few starts for a year or two. again scholes will also be used sparingly. i’m a massive fan of the idea of having a carrick hargreaves partnership in midfield. hargreaves for me is the best english defensive midfielder right now and probably in the league. Carrick for me is the best passer in the league along with scholes,alonso and fabreagas.
he may not dominate games but his consistent displays keep the ball rolling. i think people are especially unfair to him because of his jersey number constantly craving for him to grab a game by the scruff of its neck like keane.
He still keeps the side ticking. while everyone glows over ronaldo,rooney, tevez and co. but i hope that ferguson tells ramos to fuck off regardless of the amount of money they offer us.
but knowing fegie he wont sell a guy who he claims along with hargreaves to be the future of this club.i’d be devastated to lose a player of the quality of carrick just a few deluded individuals (no offense..but thats just my opinion)unrealistically hope that he turns out to be someone that he isnt.
lets just look at his performances last year in the big games…thats what really matters you know-
Chelsea (home)-he was our best player…and thats according to SAF
liverpool (away)- kept his head defended his heart out kept a hold of the ball while scholes lost his head
Roma (home)-people kept raving about ronaldo but for me carrick was at the heart of everythingunited did that night.
Arsenal (away)- again according to fergie although we lost the match because of 8 mins of madness, he said that carrcik was ou best player
so i really hope that thus guy stays with us for many years to come…
November 15th, 2007 at 11:57
Yes, the ‘99 team had the better starting XI, there’s no point denying it, but this squad has the potential to deliver Fergie the second European Cup he craves to fill cover the last blemish on his CV.
November 15th, 2007 at 12:38
all the best united sides are going to be slightly biased based on what your remember
but this is MY united team, the one i’m going to spend my best years rooting for, so for me, they damn well better end up being the best united team haha
November 15th, 2007 at 15:22
I feel this team could be the best.what we need is that bit of luck because when u have anderson-19,nani -20,ronaldo and rooney 22.tevez 23.u are going to be there and there abouts come the end of the season.what we have is players that are going to mature together and these guys r playing pretty well now but when theyre 25,26,27 and at their peak i feel they could conquer the world.luck is needed though
November 15th, 2007 at 15:30
[RedRanter]
“More importantly, the depth of the side was underlined in the aftermath of the Munich disaster, when they still managed to finish runners up in the league after losing a good part of their team”
Erm…we kinda got players ‘donated’ on loan for the remainder of the season. Our major benefactor was none other than Liverpool.
I know that the 99 squad is generally viewed as Fergies’ greatest squad, but, personally, I love the Cantona-and-the-kids squad. Mainly because of Cantona. That said, to me, the current squad has much more potential than any of the previous squads.
Is it just me being negative, or is anyone else also a bit pissed of at Rooney for not including his own team-mate Ronaldo in his 5-a-side squad? Here we are, screaming our asses off at why Ronaldo should get the ‘title’ as apposed to Kaka, and he, ‘wonder boy’ says that he’ll rather have Messi, Kaka, Ronaldinho and Rio in his team…
I really love Rooney to bits, but, his IQ I feel is loosely on par with that of Gerrard.
November 15th, 2007 at 16:40
Though one to call really, because the sides are so different when it comes to strengths and weaknesses.
The early 90’s side had an almost complete first eleven, but in my view they lacked strength in numbers. That side did not have double coverage on every place.
Maybe it’s just because of my relative young age and bad memory. But as far as I recall the 92-94 squad was small compared with todays. Take away Cantona or Hughes and we had only McClair as cover. In midfield I feel that side had good cover in the centre of the pitch and also on the left with Sharpe and Giggs, but who could replace Kan Kan on the right?
The defence of the 92-94 side was a rock, but again they did not have the strength in numbers there as the 99 side and todays squad had and have. Irwin could play both wide positions, but who could step in if Irwin got injured? Parker was exellent, but the rest wasn’t up to the standards we expect of todays squad. Central def. was rock solid, but did not really have any backups. Thankfully Bruce and Pally almost never got injured. And Schmeichel was of course our best goalkeeper of all times, but behind the big dane there was no one to step in. Gary Walsh? Don’t think so!
Now the 99 treble winning side had better coverage than the 92-94 side, but even that side never came close to equaling todays numbers.
York and Cole was one of the best striker pairing we’ve ever seen at United and with Sheringham and 20LEegend provided exellent cover. All in all the striking department of the 99 side was much better than todays squad. Behind the strikers we had Scholes, Keane, Beckham and Giggs, with Blomquist and Butt as the most potent backups. I will never feel that Blomquist was good enough for that side. But gave us enough cover in midfield but we saw in the CL final when both Scholes and Keane was out that we didn’t have good enough cover. We were very poor all through the 99 CL final and in the end it was lady luck who decided in our favor. Lady luck and the never say die attitude of that side. An attitude I doubt we will ever see again in any side.
In the 99 side we can’t complain much about coverage. We had Berg as cover for Johnsen and Stam, and p. Neville to deputize both for Irwin and his brother.
Now todays squad. We lack the numbers of the 99-side upfront and that together with lack of cover on LB is this sides main weakness. Central mid is better covered today than it’s ever been. If 92.94 side got the injuries in midfield that todays squad have I doubt the would have coped with it, and the same goes for the 99 sides.
All in all the first 11 is very hard to compare as the sides had very different strengths, but based on backup I must say that fergie is right. This is the best squad he has ever put together. The only thing left for them to do is prove it.
November 15th, 2007 at 16:46
karl .. would beg to differ .. Ronaldo may have the ‘title’ due to his consistent performances and all other reasons what may be but it has to be reckoned that in terms of ability, Kaka leads him comfortably and so when we generally name our dream teams, we generally choose players on their best possible form or their ‘peak’ of abilities .. Kaka’s peak is higher I must say while Dinho, right now quite jaded, his peak I believe tops all of them that play this game. Only place to be decided is Messi vs. Ronaldo then
.. which Rooney gave to Messi for his reasons .. so I would say his IQ is quite good plus he is being very honest in his opinion, not being PC, which I admire. Agree on Gerrard’s IQ though 
November 15th, 2007 at 16:51
What is all this talks about Carrick back to Spurs??. I want Carrick to stay considering the 50-50 state of Hargreaves..Carrick will have a key role to play in the central midfield along with Hargreaves in tough European games.
November 15th, 2007 at 17:38
messi, ronaldinho and kaka aint selfish players, they’re excellent team players which 5 aside football usually requires. simple (:
November 15th, 2007 at 18:04
To be fair to him, Ferguson called this his STRONGEST squad, not necessarily his best or greatest. He acknowledged they need to win trophies before they can be classed as great, but I think his intention was to express that he has more quality options than ever before (and to steal some of the headlines Arsene’s young whippersnappers have been enjoying!)
November 15th, 2007 at 18:10
Nice Article Red Ranter. It really hurts me to pick a team that doesn’t include King Cantona but I too have to go with 1999. The squad was not as strong on paper as 94 or 2007 but what they can claim is a Treble for their hard work. Yes the 94 team had restrictions on foreigners but does that mean they would have been better than they were had the League lifted that restriction? For all we know, maybe not. Busby’s Babes have to be considered as they fielded a side with greats like Best and Charlton etc.
Our current side has got unlimited potential but they also have the largest bridge to climb in order to claim the prize. The competition today is much greater both in the EPL and at the very top in Europe. Look back to the 90’s Real, Barcelona, Bayern, Juve, Milan, Inter etc, none of these sides except Juve had the squads they have now. They are all spending record amounts of money and will do anything to win the CL. In 1999 United faced Bayern Munich in the final. That was a good Bayern side but that side wouldn’t have a chance today. Today the top Spanish, English and Italian rosters are packed with all stars. No position is ignored.
1999 Has to be considered the best because they simply earned it. If the 2007 team can even win a double, they may dethrone them on the basis of sheer talent, but not until they win at least a double. 99 had a lot of talent but for me they are class personified because of a great midfield in it’s prime, 4 top class strikers adding depth and variation and the greatest goalkeeper of the past 30 years in my opinion. Schmeichel was a God.
November 15th, 2007 at 18:11
I personally believe that we can only call this squad the greatest ever when it enjoys success over a number of years like the 94′ and 99′ squads. I actually think we have potentially more talented individual match winning players than before but the only worry could be possible inconsistency. However, this normally goes with age and experience so this squad could definitely be the best.
November 15th, 2007 at 18:17
I for one would be happy to see Carrick leave. He’s a good player who seems to struggle with consistency for us. Perhaps he is like many fine footballers who just have a problem playing for top three clubs. He needs to go where the pressure to perform is high but not as high as it is at United. This will take a lot of the pressure of his shoulders and he will begin to excel like he did for Spurs.
Sorry Carrick supporters but I just don’t think he is United material. Good player, but we want great players. Anderson is a great player who will become something incredibly special. Carrick deserves better than to sit on the bench at his age. For his sake, send him to a team that will focus their midfield attack around him. Also, the money gained can go to get a player we could really use like another striker, a RB or LB. I say let him go, but not until the season is over. Right now he does serve a vital role coming off the bench or having the occasional start.
November 15th, 2007 at 18:46
i do not believe that united should sell carrick.he was important last season when we won the tiltle.even though anderson is playing good. i beleive that carrick is important player who can help anderson.anderon and carrick played good in the champions league game.hargreaves knee is still giving problem so it best to keep him at united.carrick passing is great just like scholes.
November 15th, 2007 at 19:52
The ‘99 side has to go down as the greatest as it simply achieved something no other team has ever done. Its that simple really. Lets see how this side compares though, eh? And see where it can improved etc.
Schmeichel Vs EVDS = Schmeichel
Neville Vs Neville = Erm ….Neville? Although Undoubtedly he was better in 99, and not just because he hasnt played yet this season!
Stam Vs Ferdinand = Ferdinand. A toughie, Ferdinands lapses in concentration are world famous, where as Stam simply wasnt at the club long enough to find out just how good he was. Rio gets it through longevity.
Johnsen Vs Vidic = Vidic. Easily more commanding and although less intelligent in terms of reading the game, Johnsen was always too Injury prone.
Irwin Vs Evra = Irwin. Evra is more effective going forwards, no doubt, but Irwins FK’s and Pens were vital as well. Plus Irwin is a United legend and Evra hasnt even been at the club for 2 years yet.
Giggs Vs Giggs = Giggs, but in ‘99 though. Could you honestly see him scoring a goal like he did against Arsenal in the FA cup replay for us this season?
Scholes Vs Scholes = Scholes of ‘99. In those days he used to cover the most ground in a match, bar none. Sadly these days, I often wonder if he’ll make it back for half-time.
Keane Vs Hargo/Carrick = Keane. Obvious really, both of them combined probably couldnt match Keane at his peak.
Beckham Vs Ronaldo = Umm, Ronaldo. Just. Whilst I think Beckham should have got European Player Of The Year anywhere between 1999-2001, I think Ronaldo could be looking at a Ballon D’or. If he could just do it in the biggest games….
Yorke Vs Rooney = Rooney. He just offers more. Powerful, athletic, faster than you think and can play the killer ball. Perhaps not as fast from brain to foot as Yorkie though.
Cole Vs Tevez = Tevez. Cole had more goals in him tho Im quite confident Tevez is a better footballer, if not a better finisher.
Cole & Yorke Vs Rooney & Tevez = Cole & Yorke. Surprising but they more goals in them than I think Tev/Roo do, plus in ‘99 Yorke had just as many assists as Beckham. Quite important, Id say. I think Tev/Roo could be better though.
So that makes it 6-5 to the first team of ‘99. What perhaps Fergie is talking about is this though…
Subs bench
99 Team
Van der Gouw
May
Berg
P. Neville
Butt
Cruyff
Blomvist
Sheringham
Solksjaer
07/08 Team
Kuszczak
Foster
Brown
O’Shea
Pique
Silvestre
Carrick
Anderson
Park
Nani
Saha
Its still pretty close but I think the current squad just shaves it. More in numbers if anything. There were other squad members in ‘99, obviously Brown is a survivor from that time, but most of them are forgettable. Curtis, Greening etc. I dont think Nani or Anderson will quite go the same way.
If we had a regular goal scorer that wasnt made of glass, Id say the current squad was as good, but right now, as mentioned, this current squad is all about potential.
Lets hope it gets fulfilled!
November 15th, 2007 at 21:18
Grognard: How can you underestimate the importance of Carrick after witnessing us win back the league. He played a pivotal role last season and supporters have been blinded by Andersons glare and ignore what Michael did.
November 15th, 2007 at 21:32
[Karl]
So you mean to say it’s very simple really to lose 9 first teamers replace that with some borrowed players, (who would have been reserves essentially. Pool wouldn’t have donated their main players would they.) and then shrug off the memory of an air crash like it was a sore thumb and get on with things like nothing happened and finish second the following season behind Wolverhampton without having to consider issues like bedding the newcomers, building team chemistry and so on.
Yes it quite simple really, innit? Either that or the rest of the league had players from pub teams.
My point is this, it was not just the squad depth (mind you in the makeshift squad some more kids from the reserves were pushed up in the first team) It was also the courage shown by that team to come back that makes that squad special too. Remember when we won our treble in 99 we needed that mental fortitude to come back from hopless situations. That’s what makes teams great.
November 15th, 2007 at 21:53
red Ranter. Met thinks you are mixing the word squad with team. There i ius little doubt that this current squad is the strongest we’ve ever had under SAF. It’s depth of quality and numbers is unmatched even by the 99 side. But in terms of a team it still has to prove itself. The strongest teams we have had and SAF were the 1994 crop of the Cantona’s and possibly the greatest team in our history. The treble winners of 1999. Squad wise they lacked the depth of the current crop. But as a team they proved themselves in battle. Which we hope this current crop will do.
November 15th, 2007 at 23:56
Just1n; I’m not underestimating anyone. In my opinion and through my eyes Carrick is simply not good enough to be starting over Anderson, Scholes or Hargreaves. That said, he is certainly good enough for 16 other clubs in the EPL. United are a team that strives to put a World Class talent at every position or at least someone with the potential to be World Class. Rooney, Ronaldo, Hargreaves, Giggs, Scholes, Vidic, Ferdinand and Neville are those kinds of players. EVDS, Evra, Nani, Anderson and Tevez are just a step below and what I would categorize as International Class. Carrick could eventually be in that category but if United are to conquer Europe, they need a true offensive talent with exceptional skills (similar to Kaka, Riquelme, Ronaldinho etc) to guide the center of the midfield. Carrick is quite simply not that player.
Too many of you put far too much emphasis on character and hard work but the most important attributes in today’s football are pace and multi-dimensional skills with the ball. Carrick is not quick, he is a good but inconsistent passer, lacks the courage to really attack and exploit a defense and more often than not takes the safe way out. You do not beat Milan and Barcelona buy constantly making the safe back pass.
Sorry we disagree on this but the guy just doesn’t light my fire. In fact I’ll be totally honest with all of you. Michael Carrick bores me to tears. I’d rather watch Fletcher and even O’Shea play than Carrick. That doesn’t make him a bad player, but just not a player that I feel is United material for the starting eleven. Especially at the price he was bought. United needs a maestro in the midfield. That may well be Anderson in a few years. Lets hope so.
November 16th, 2007 at 0:20
Grognard: You say that Utd strive to put a world class player in each position. Well he isn’t in the starting 11 at the moment so selling him would just serve to weaken the squad. It has taken since 2002 to put the central midfield back into proper shape. Now consider the fact that there are still doubts over Hargreaves ability to be consistently fit, Anderson is still young and some inconsistency is to be expected while Scholes is getting on in years. If we are unlucky then the midfield could suddenly begin to look undermanned again very quickly and we could end up putting out patched up combinations again. That won’t beat Barca or Milan either.
On the other players you mentioned, none of them play in the same way or area of the pitch as Carrick does. They all play higher up the pitch and would probably necessitate formation changes to integrate into the team. None of them would be direct competition to Carrick’s place. What midfielder would you suggest and how would you integrate him into the team? It is all very well saying such and such should be the midfield maestro but the practicalities of the situation need to be taken into account as well.
November 16th, 2007 at 9:06
JB; I know your views on Carrick and to be honest I find your protection and support of him as frustrating as you probably find my lack of support for him. So give it a rest. Your argument smells fan bias. Carrick isn’t good enough to polish Hargo’s cleats. There are absolutely no doubts about Hargo’s abilities, just his health. Hargo has been around for quite a while now and he was a star at Bayern and a savior for England. Carrick was a bench warmer for United and a decent player for Spurs. Enough said? Well, as expected, I’m just getting warmed up.
Carrick needs to move because he is too good to be sitting on the bench. However, he is not good enough to start for United. Not with the team we have now and the style we play. He looks like a fish out of water out there.
What midfielder would I use instead of Carrick. Jee if I haven’t already made a case for Anderson then I guess I’ve been writing in Chinese. Anderson is the man, end of story. Whether you like or not, is not my concern. We all have our favorites or our preferences. Consider us differing on this one. You enjoy yourself in that rapidly dwindling Carrick camp and I’ll be glad to see you come over to Anderson within the year.
Consistencies???? You speak of Anderson and his inconsistency. I don’t see it. I think he has been very consistent considering his age and limited role. It’s Carrick who has not been Consistent. In a season and a half I can count the number of excellent games Carick has played on one hand. I just don’t care for people’s blue collar evaluation of Carrick’s contribution. “Hard worker”, “safe passer”, “big heart”. Who the frak cares. I want results that blow me away like Kaka, Ronaldinho, Riquelme, Fabregas etc. I don’t want mediocrity at AMF, I want World Class. This is Man Utd, not Spurs or West Ham. Anderson has the potential and the skills to possibly be that man. Carrick does not. Would Milan, Barca, Real, Bayern or Inter start this guy? A big fat NO would be the correct answer.
How many of those teams would shell out big money to gt Anderson if he was available? Try all of them plus others. Only clubs in the EPL and Scotland would want Carrick.
Practicalities? CHRIST JB, this is football, not rocket science. Anderson has already proven to be more dynamic and interesting to watch than the stale white bread approach of Carrick. He also tracks back well so we cannot knock him for his defensive effort. And lets face it, he has far greater pace that matches up better with the Ronaldo’s, Nani’s, Rooney’s, Tevez’ and Hargo’s on the club. This team is built for speed. Carrick slows things down. That suits a team like Chelski, not United.
Ask yourself this very important question. When Ronaldo came over, did Fergie bench this brash, immature and selfish player? NO! He played him and encouraged him while slowly instilling the United way of doing things. And today the kid is gold. He will do the same with both Nani and Anderson.
Anderson has the potential to be in the top five players in the world three years from now. He needs to play now and play a lot and I think Fergie realizes it. So JB, you are fighting a losing battle. Not with me, but with the realities of the situation. If Carrick is fine with his role on the bench then fine. But I somehow doubt it. Don’t be surprised if he asks for a transfer at the end of the season. His only chance of staying is if Hargo’s injury becomes greater and he misses many games. I’ll give you this though JB, at least you are loyal to a fault when you take to player. I’ll give you that.
November 16th, 2007 at 9:10
Andrea Pirlo, he could play right beside hargreaves and dictate the play, and with all of the problems in Italian football there could be a few players leaving Italy, although I doubt Pirlo would ever come to England. I have to agree with Grognard that although Carrick is good at many things, we are changing our style of play and his way of playing doesn’t is just too slow, he has unbelievable long passing ability but if we can get anything over 15m I’d be happy, possibly anything over 12, but if no-ones willing to pay that much then I don’t have a problem for him being a back-up in case of an injury crisis.
November 16th, 2007 at 9:46
[Grognard]
Carrick came at a time when our ball retention in central midfield was at an all time low. Having a makeshift midfield of O’Shea and Giggs towards the end of the 05/06 season did the job, but wouldn’t have cut it against better opposition.
Carrick was excellent last season. No second thoughts about it. He was very consistent then. Keep in mind that one would have expected a certain amount of bedding period in a new club, in a new system which was not built around him.
This season his inconsistency was borne out of a lack of direction. It was obvious at the beginning of this season that Carrick and Hargreaves was how our midfield would be in the long term. Anderson’s signing was an afterthought — a signing that was out of the blue. Even then he was never expected to play that much this season anyway.
Point is Carrick was expected to take the more advanced role with Hargreaves staying back. Of course Scholes was meant to be phased out gradually. But this presented a problem when Scholes was paired with Carrick this season. Both got in each others’ way. And at the start of the season the whole team was generally out of sorts (barring the defence). It was the return of Ronaldo and Rooney that started the revival, with Anderson’s forced arrival.
Anderson did much better than expected. Hence the aura created around him that people start comparing him with Fabregas and Riquelme. Give me a break! The lad is talented, but your saying that he will be good has much less logic than JB would say that Carrick was consistent.
Point is we all smell of bias as fans. The word bias is one of the most unnecessary words in a Man Utd fan blog. We all have our likes and dislikes and we all think that our thoughts are perfect and unbiased. If JB could defend Carrick to a fault as you say, so would you on Riquelme.
And I don’t understand why lack of speed should be an issue for a midfielder. At the risk of digging up buried things, doesn’t Riquelme lack pace. (If you have any Riquelme related rant, email me. Not on this thread please.) The calm of Carrick is good for us. He is a good player in my books and that is my opinion. There is nothing at present that would change it, until I have seen a enough of him this season. I am willing to give time to judge both Carrick and Anderson.
PS: Grognard, if you have anything to say on this to counter/convince me in particular, email me. I’ll be glad. Of course, if you have to reply to others continue on the comment threads.
November 16th, 2007 at 10:05
Reread my comment or are you blind, I said he isn’t in the first 11 but selling him would weaken the squad. I’m not arguing about Andersons inclusion, he has played his way into the first team, irrelevant of Carrick’s form. What I am asking, your worship, is if you sell him who do you replace him with in the squad. Once again you read what you want to read not what is actually there.
You take about wanting this player and that player well there are practicalities, what about transfer fees, playing style etc. Has Pirlo shown any inclination to leave Milan, what would it cost to get Kaka, is Ronaldinho’s form in chronic decline, would Riqueleme be happy in England, would playing any of these require a formation change, who would we drop from the current first 11, would they be happy on the bench, what are the wage demands, would they adapt to English football.
Anderson is still young and more than likely there will still be good and bad days, just like Ronaldo and Rooney have went through, it is part of a footballers maturing process. Hargreaves made approximately 50% of the possible appearances in five years at Bayern so there are valid reasons for concern on his injury record. On Ronaldo, he was never intended to play anywhere near as much as early as he did.
Once again, I am not questioning whether Anderson should be in the first team because he should, it is should we sell Carrick as you suggested and who would replace him. You wonder why you get into arguments all the time, its maybe because of your failure to actually properly read a post before you jump down someone’s throat. One more thing you whinged when a couple of jokes were directed at you, so a request for you, quit being patronizing.
November 16th, 2007 at 12:24
[23. RedRanter]
First off, let me clarify that I do not question the greatness of the team at the time…just contesting your statement about squad depth and 2nd place. I understand what you mean and realise that we can’t totally discard the squad depth in this regard. However, the table-finish of the team imo was mostly down to the exceptional qualities of the manager(s) Busby and Jimmy Murphy (as apposed to squad depth). As far as I know, Matt Busby actually revelutionised football management with his approaches. If the squad really had the depth to cope, we would not have had the need to accept the players on loan from Pool and Forest. The remainder of the squad would have come straight from the youth teams. I’m sure that the loaned players were not total wankers, why then would we have taken them? Surely we had the option to say no? Also, I don’t know what our position in the table was at the time of the incident, but it could be very relevant.
All this said, I agree that the entire club showed real character to recover from this tragedy. This is why I love ManUnited…Character!
November 16th, 2007 at 13:07
Can I point back to my response to the Blackburn gam review post, which was (and I quote):
“The best thing, as Ferguson mentioned and as quoted above, is the strength of our squad. We can now claim, for the first time for years, to have a second team which could compete in the Premier League by itself. Look at this and assume a fully fit squad:
First team (4-4-2):
EVDS - Neville, Vidic, Ferdinand, Evra - Ronaldo, Hargreaves, Scholes, Giggs - Tevez, Rooney
Second team (4-4-1-1)
Kuszczak - Simpson, Brown, Pique, O’Shea - Park, Fletcher, Carrick, Nani - Anderson - Saha
Subs (ie players not used in either team): Foster, Evans, Silvestre, Frazier Campbell, Eagles, Lee, Dong and a few others
This makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. The players on my “subs bench” (Foster excluded) are the sort of players who, in the past, we would have had to include in that second team and therefore been laughed out of the pub when we tried to claim we had a strong squad. Now they are fringe players who will only get a look-in if either (a) they are young and improve significantly or (b) we have a total injury nightmare.
Possibly an article subject, Red Ranter?!”
Oh, and areas to strengthen? These should be pretty obvious - striker and left back. Those are the only positions where we might look in any way stretched if one of our regulars picked up a long term (eg cruciate ligament) injury.
November 16th, 2007 at 13:20
I agree the squad/team important is important. But while previous squads may not have had the same strength in depth they also did not seem to have as many injury prone players as this squad has. Last season we lost our entire defence, the previous season our entire midfield. There is no way previous squads would have been able to deal with that.
I agree success is the best criteria.
But the early 90s squad had it a lot easier than the other squads. In those days all the money was in Spain and Italy and the Premier League was a lot weaker than those league. Each season one team stole a march on us but ended up blowing it. Nobody gave us anything like the run for our money that Chelsea did last season and the season before. Our European record was poor. And as the foreigners rule applied to all the other clubs we cannot really use that as an excuse.
The 1999 squad was definitely the most successful. Although the gods were most definitely on its side, especially in the latter stages of the Champions League. And they did not go on to dominate Europe and lost dominance over the league to Arsenal.
This squad is fairly new and definitely strengthened from last year. But remember last year we got to the FA cup final, Champions League semis, won the league. And this was a season when Chelsea had emerged as a force backed by Abrahovitchs millions, Liverpool had shown in the Champions League that on their day they could beat anyone, Arsenal while not invincible anymore were no pushover, and the rest of the league had been strengthened by an influx of foreign money.
Imagine how much better we could have done last season if we had a fit Hargreaves and Tevez, and Nani and Anderson to take the burden off the senior players. And if we had not lost basically our entire backline against Milan, and played to our potential.
This squad is most probably the strongest (although the 1999 first team perhaps shades it) but to becomes the greatest it needs to do what previous squads have failed to do: dominate Europe. We should be winning the Champions League at least twice over the next five years.
November 16th, 2007 at 13:56
I agree with RedRanter on the Carrick/Hargo/Anderson issue.
SAF got Carrick in order to pair him with Hargo. The fact that he ’seems’ inconsistent is in essence due to Scholes. With Scholes in the team, Carrick is forced to play a Hargo type of game. Carrick should come into his own when teamed with Hargo. The fact that our midfield clicked so wonderfully with Carrick and Scholes, actually speaks in Carrick’s favour.
).
Anderson’s signing as RR said was pure afterthought. No one could really have predicted that he would shine so soon. Now that he has, we should not forget that he is still way inexperienced and young. I disagree though with RR’s Fabregas comparison. ANDERSON IS GOING TO BE BETTER THAN FABREGAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Note the caps lock…I know I’m biased as hell
Anderson’s performance can also easily be ‘first season brilliance’. We can’t take that risk yet. Carrick is still much needed and can still offer much. SAF actually have a big problem in midfield…’Should I stick with my original Carrick/Hargo?’ Or should I give this wunderkind a chance to shine. The fact that Mr Glass II is not always available should make the decision a bit easier for him.
November 16th, 2007 at 17:53
First of all JB I can read just fine thanks and my eye sight is more than adequate. Also, referring to me as “your worship” shows your inability to get past our few differences in opinion. Show some class will you! I have no intention on getting in a heated dispute with you as I did in the past. If you are having a problem with my viewpoint all I can say is TOUGH! Deal with it and move on. I read your views and although I sometimes agree, most of the time I recognize an attitude of if it’s not written by JB then it’s just not true. You wreak of attitude and arrogance, so kindly get off your high horse mate. You are not the final word, and nor do I say that I am either. Who ordained you God and says you are always right? Calling me “your worship” and insulting me with this kind of backhanded commented is becoming a consistent pattern with you. Condescension and labeling is something you seem very comfortable in doing and that is beneath you. In the future you should know that if you carry on trying to provoke me like this I’ll just ignore your entire post because it’s the best thing for me and this blog. I may be wordy over sensitive and opinionated but you act like a bully.
If YOU had bothered to carefully read what I wrote, you will have noticed that although I am not a big Carrick fan I did point out that he is still a very good player and that he would thrive on nearly any other EPL club. I also agreed that he would have to spend time on the bench at United but that I wasn’t sure he would like it or if it would be good for him to do so.
Also, if you want to talk about being blind, perhaps you should re read what I had written about certain stars that are similar to what we need at AMF. I wrote,
“I want RESULTS that blow me away like Kaka, Ronaldinho, Riquelme, Fabregas etc. I don’t want mediocrity at AMF, I want World Class. This is Man Utd, not Spurs or West Ham. Anderson has the potential and the skills to possibly be that man. Carrick does not. Would Milan, Barca, Real, Bayern or Inter start this guy? A big fat NO would be the correct answer.”
I expressed that I wanted “RESULTS” that blow me away like those players. I never asked for those specific players to come to United or for their cultural difficulties. It seems to me that Fabregas, Ronaldo, Nani, Anderson, Elano, Xabi Alonso, Torres etc etc etc have no problem playing over here so your cultural argument although not weightless, is plainly wrong. As for Riquelme, ENOUGH ALREADY! He may be slow of pace but his other skills more than make up for that deficiency. Carrick isn’t fit to kiss the man’s feet so get off that rant right now and forever please.
The fact that Hargo only made 50% appearances for Bayern is a very misleading stat. The lad showed up there when he was 16. During his first three years he didn’t play a lot and thus, he didn’t start or play much. If you factor that in to you one sided opinion, you would realize that he probably played closer to 80% of his games with United. And don’t try to correct me on that because I follow Bayern Munich with the same passion and attention that
I follow United. Therefore I think I know a little more about Hargreaves and the way he was used. His injuries really became prominent after the World Cup 06. And he still is dealing with them unfortunately. He did have injuries for Bayern but trust me, he played a lot of games for them once he was mature enough to put on the kit full time.
And finally for your information I take the time to read every comment and reply to my posts. The fact that I don’t always agree or that I see things differently does not mean I cannot read. If I choose to ignore a certain statement means that I can’t always comment on everything. I will say this JB, there was a time I actually enjoyed and looked forward to your posts and replies. Now I dread it big time. You are a nasty piece of work when it comes to attacking me as a persona and my views. In the past I have always shown you respect despite my disagreements in philosophy. Calling me blind, or your worship and accusing me of not reading and being patronizing is just a few of the blatant insults and personal attacks you have leveled on me of late. Kindly do me a favor and refrain from this kind of writing and lack of composure. Show some class mate and stop acting like this blog is your personal property and that your viewpoint is gospel. I am more than willing to accept that I am not always correct and that there are differing viewpoints. I could be wrong on Carrick too. Have you ever been wrong? Somehow I seriously doubt it.
In the future my policy will be to avoid and ignore any replies that are designed to piss me off and insult me. Disagreeing with me is more than fine, but lets do it with some semblance of respect.
November 17th, 2007 at 14:37
For me has to be the 99 team. The midfield was just so strong and the team game meshed perfectly with the players that we had. And im biased because of the great memories i have of the 99 season. all i can think when i see this squad is that this squad has absaloutely got to deliver. And this shoud be the best squad that SAF has ever had seeing as how expensive the team is. It is ridiculous the amount of money spent, not to say we are buying our success as we hve invested alot on youth and developed some of the younger players from raw potential to superstars today. So lets hope that the aforementioned potential is lived up to and the thearte of dreams will be covered in glory for years to come!
May 12th, 2008 at 9:26
You’ve summed it up pretty well; the squad we have at the moment have fantastic talent and potential to really succeed, but, as you say, to prove themselves they have to get some trophies under their belt - they haven’t completed the Treble yet, after all! Though they could well have come close this year (FA Cup semi-final v. Pompey - unbelievable!). They’ve got a good few years to do themselves justice though, and let’s just hope they do!