Is Anderson a doubt for tomorrow?

Originally Posted by The Return of JC

Been there and done what?

He's hardly an established first team regular with a string of memorable match winning performances is he?

There are times when he's come in a done a good job in difficult circumstance. This has earnt a lot of people's respect (including mine) and changed people from thinking he should be sold to thinking he's decent back up in, what is essentially, a squad game.

However, first choice ahead of a vastly superior player who has excelled in the last few weeks and plays an entirely different role to any other player in there? Don't make me laugh. Fletcher's not done that well.

Like I say, He and Anderson aren't even similar. Hargreaves and Fletcher are and having them both in the line up is pointless.

Spot on JC.

Originally Posted by 1MUFC

what i said above is what is going to happen i am telling you. Fletcher isnt hargreaves like for like at all either.

He's more like Hargreaves than Anderson or Carrick and therefore more likely to play instead of him, not with him.

He's Hargreaves but without the pace and just not as good. He's asked to perform the same role, at least.

Last time Fletcher played away at Arsenal he got MOTM. I think we will play 3 in midfield tomorrow btw.

Originally Posted by The Return of JC

'cretin'

'daft oinker'

'@#%&!'

Sharath's getting slayed!

The #@&%!

What ever happened to the original Sharath? The one whose uncle was a football agent and due to that he was clued up with all transfer gossip???????

Originally Posted by Rhodzy

I think we will play 3 in midfield tomorrow btw.

Maybe, if you count Giggs as one of the 3.

Originally Posted by The Return of JC

He's more like Hargreaves than Anderson or Carrick and therefore more likely to play instead of him, not with him.

He's Hargreaves but without the pace and just not as good. He's asked to perform the same role, at least.

We could argue this all day and i cant be arsed, just wait and see who plays tomorrow, them 3 will be picked infront of anderson imo.

Originally Posted by Rhodzy

Last time Fletcher played away at Arsenal he got MOTM. I think we will play 3 in midfield tomorrow btw.

Possibly, but that third will be Carrick or Giggs playing narrowly.

I guess there's chance he'll play because, well, it's Fergie.

But seriously, if he does that then they'd better win!

Originally Posted by The Return of JC

Been there and done what?

He's hardly an established first team regular with a string of memorable match winning performances is he?

There are times when he's come in a done a good job in difficult circumstance. This has earnt a lot of people's respect (including mine) and changed people from thinking he should be sold to thinking he's decent back up in, what is essentially, a squad game.

However, first choice ahead of a vastly superior player who has excelled in the last few weeks and plays an entirely different role to any other player in there? Don't make me laugh. Fletcher's not done that well.

Like I say, He and Anderson aren't even similar. Hargreaves and Fletcher are and having them both in the line up is pointless.

Again, I agree, but the way Fergie will see it is this. Arsenal have 2 real threats, Fabregas and Adebayor, if we stop them we should stop Arsenal playing. By playing Fletch and Hargreaves we should stop Fabregas playing and Vidic and Ferdinand can deal with Adebayor. You then look at United and see Giggs/Nani, Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney who are all major threats who should be able to get us goals without the necessity for Anderson, unlike against teams of lesser quality where we just concentrate on ourselves rather than the opposition.

Originally Posted by 1MUFC

We could argue this all day and i cant be arsed, just wait and see who plays tomorrow, them 3 will be picked infront of anderson imo.

If you think he'll play then fine. You could be right, Fergie likes him.

Are you saying that's what you want to happen, though?

Originally Posted by The Return of JC

If you think he'll play then fine. You could be right, Fergie likes him.

Are you saying that's what you want to happen, though?

Taking into account everything yes.

Originally Posted by Redhod99

Again, I agree, but the way Fergie will see it is this. Arsenal have 2 real threats, Fabregas and Adebayor, if we stop them we should stop Arsenal playing. By playing Fletch and Hargreaves we should stop Fabregas playing and Vidic and Ferdinand can deal with Adebayor. You then look at United and see Giggs/Nani, Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney who are all major threats who should be able to get us goals without the necessity for Anderson, unlike against teams of lesser quality where we just concentrate on ourselves rather than the opposition.

So, you agree that they'd be performing the same job? In that case they're more likely to get in each other's way than actually stop him.

We'd essentially be playing with two sitting players. That's unecessary and detrimental to us.

You could be right, ofcourse, but it'd be £#%&!in mad!

Originally Posted by The Return of JC

If you think he'll play then fine. You could be right, Fergie likes him.

Are you saying that's what you want to happen, though?

Fergie will stick with Anderson, he's been playing well and Fergie isn't an idiot.

Originally Posted by 1MUFC

Taking into account everything yes.

See my last post.

It shouldn't take Hargreaves and Fletcher to protect our back four. Considering how much they both run and buzz around then they likely to just crash into each other than anything else.

EDIT: Oh, and Anderson has shown he's more than capable of tracking back. He's combative, aggressive and a good tackler. If a second man is needed to protect in the three then he can do that to aswell as offering pace, skill and guile going forwards (something that Fletcher won't/can't)

Anyone who would rather see Fletcher in the team ahead of Anderson for this game should be banned on this forum. (get to it Armchair!) you're just making a complete #@&%! of yourselves. as roy keane said, some of you can't even spell football. nft.

Originally Posted by The Return of JC

So, you agree that they'd be performing the same job? In that case they're more likely to get in each other's way than actually stop him.

We'd essentially be playing with two sitting players. That's unecessary and detrimental to us.

You could be right, ofcourse, but it'd be £#%&!in mad!

They would be in the team for the same reason, to stop the other team playing, but not to the extent where they will get in each others way. By them 2 sitting it means Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney wont have to concentrate as much on defending, which they have been forced to do in previous seasons in big games away from home, hence their lack of impact in terms of goals etc . . (obviously this doesnt relate to tevez)

Originally Posted by El Calafate

Anyone who would rather see Fletcher in the team ahead of Anderson for this game should be banned on this forum. (get to it Armchair!) you're just making a complete #@&%! of yourselves. as roy keane said, some of you can't even spell football. nft.

I dont think anyone has said they want him to play ahead of Anderson, just that he probably will judging by previous experience. Fergie likes playing him in the big games so I wouldnt be surprised to see him. Carrick/Anderson would be my pick without a doubt, just not sure it will happen

I can understand not playing Anderson against the Dippers or the Bitters, in games that will be 100 mph dirty, niggly affairs. But against Arsenal, a team renowned for being as soft as shit ???

If Fletcher plays tomorrow, it is £#%&!ing scandalous.

Same goes if Mr Lazy plays instead of Nani.

Originally Posted by Redhod99

They would be in the team for the same reason, to stop the other team playing, but not to the extent where they will get in each others way. By them 2 sitting it means Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney wont have to concentrate as much on defending, which they have been forced to do in previous seasons in big games away from home, hence their lack of impact in terms of goals etc . . (obviously this doesnt relate to tevez)

But if they are playing the same role in the same area of the pitch with the same energy then they are bound to get in each other's way or at least one of them will be unecessary.

You don't play two left backs and two right backs so why two players for any other single role?

The only way it would work is if one of them advanced and went wide to spread the play and their influence. That would also pointless because we have other players to play those areas.

I see your sentiment and the need to stop Arsenal but I really don't think you've thought this one through. It's bad enough when Carrick and Hargreaves get in each other's way and they're a different style of player to each other.

Originally Posted by Redhod99

I dont think anyone has said they want him to play ahead of Anderson, just that he probably will judging by previous experience. Fergie likes playing him in the big games so I wouldnt be surprised to see him. Carrick/Anderson would be my pick without a doubt, just not sure it will happen

2 people on this thread at least want Fletcher to play ahead of Anderson. nft.

Originally Posted by The Return of JC

See my last post.

It shouldn't take Hargreaves and Fletcher to protect our back four. Considering how much they both run and buzz around then they likely to just crash into each other than anything else.

EDIT: Oh, and Anderson has shown he's more than capable of tracking back. He's combative, aggressive and a good tackler. If a second man is needed to protect in the three then he can do that to aswell as offering pace, skill and guile going forwards (something that Fletcher won't/can't)

Fletcher isn’t meant to protect the back 4. Fletcher is more than able to spread the ball about and can handle the pressure.

It will be Hargreaves/Fletcher or Hargreaves/Carrick starting the game. And btw if we are getting beat 1-0 in the 75th minute the 'experts' will be out in force giving there 2 pennies worth but the arguement will be toss as usual. It wont be because anderson didnt start, it will be because they simply played better than us.