Carrick's passing

Originally Posted by Lazarus

If we'd had Hargreaves at the Emirates and brought him on for the last 20 mins (or he'd started) we would not have lost and I highly doubt with him closing out the match we'd have conceded one.

Mind you if Bennett (cyber spits) could actually spot a foul we'd have won.

Options is what it is all about. This season we seem to be far more flexible in our approach - different formations,players swapping positions and interchanging. Hargreaves will be a further weapon in our armoury and he can play as a defender if needs must.

Agreed. People moan about having options "but Carrick and Scholes play, what would happen?".

Well, firstly, one could get injured. That's a good enough reason alone, but then there's the fact that Scholes could have a rest, getting even more out of him, we could play all three when needed, we could bring one on depending on the situation, need a goal, Carrick or Scholes, to see the game out, Hargreaves. It would be brilliant options and over the course of the season all three would get similar time on the pitch.

Originally Posted by Jez Quigley

Photoshop - well MS Paint and a copy/paste function.

Wes Brown

I knew he was a good passer Laz just not THAT good, Spurs are a shadow of how effective they were last season without him

agreed on his positional play as well, it's fantastic and his discipline in that role is something we've not had since Keane at his peak, ie a good few years ago

he reads the game superbly and both times against the Mickeys this year our so called 'weak' midfield has made clowns of them

am sure Stan Tier 2 agrees with all of the above posts

I was a Carrick sceptic, I was certain that he would be an upgrade on Fletcher/O'Shea but didn't think he was an ideal signing at all. My main concern was that the Scholes-Carrick partnership wouldn't have the legs to cope with stronger/fitter/faster players. While I think that has been an issue on a couple of occasions, particularly against teams playing with an extra man in midfield, overall you'd have to say that my concerns were misplaced.

I think Scholes has adapted his game superbly to deal with playing with Carrick, as well as his declining physical attributes. He has transformed himself from someone who was effectively a second striker playing midfield (the main facet of his game was the the timing of his runs to support the forwards) into a midfielder with increased tactical-defensive and playmaking responsibilities.

Carrick's positional play during both the offensive and defensive phases is excellent. Because of this he is usually available as an outlet behind the play to maintain ball circulation and to break-up or slow down the opposition's counterattacks during the transition phase. He also has an excellent range of passing and his decision making is of a very high standard.

Because of this intelligence, both on an individual and team-tactical basis (something quite unusual for two English players), as well as the positional play and work rate of the team as a unit during the attack-defense transition and defensive phases they have been much more effective as a combination than their attributes as individuals might suggest they would have been.

Basically I think you'd have to say this is a triumph for Fergie. He picked the right player to purchase, he believed in Scholes despite his injury problems, and he has got the collective intelligence and motivation of the team to the point where the majority of the weaknesses of the players as individuals have been overcome.

Top post Serenity!

Hargreaves is over rated, I would be disappointed if we signed him.