How on earth is a Hargreaves + Carrick partnership supposed to take the team forward?

Who said Carrick and Hargreaves will be out middle 2 when Scholes has retired?

We might buy an out and out attacking midfielder.

Originally Posted by MUFC One Love

Who said Carrick and Hargreaves will be out middle 2 when Scholes has retired?

We might buy an out and out attacking midfielder.

Which would mean 4-3-3. I thought everyone on here hated that?

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

I personally think they're exceedingly similar, actually.

I agree with this aspect of Luffy's view. I don't like the idea of two midfielders who rarely break into the final third like Carrick and Hargreaves.

Players don't need to be replaced with replicas, but to me a Carrick-Hargreaves partnership lacks a creative threat. I've already been disappointed with Carrick's lack of ability to really influence a game, but that could improve. I just think you put Hargreaves next to him and we're going to find it difficult to break good teams down.

I also think the Hargreaves lovers should be prepared for the fact that he'll probably relegate Giggs to the bench and change our system.

Don't really agree with either point here S/Side, though I see what you're saying about 4-3-3 possibilities.

Carrick has spent most of the season being quietly effective in Scholes' shadow, which is exactly where we've needed him to be. He will become more positive with a decent player such as Hargreaves to sit for him. I also think Hargreaves' ability to burst forward is underestimated.

Certainly don't see Hargreaves playing too often at Giggs' expense, and equally, would imagine that were he to do so this would often be on the right anyway, with ronaldo on the left.

The main thing Hargreaves would bring, all must surely agree, is options.

And gbmufc - exactly, mate!

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Which would mean 4-3-3. I thought everyone on here hated that?

They do. What's wrong with making one of them fight for a place? It's OPTIONS.

Just because we might buy Hargreaves it doesn't mean we'll always start with him and Carrick. Even when Scholes hangs up his boots. Off the record Fergie has nothing but praise for Darron Gibson and it looks like he'll get his chance soon too. We need midfield options and whether we care to admit it or not there will be games when Carrick is on the bench, games when Hargreaves is. There'll also be games when Scholes takes a breather.

If we had midfield options of Carrick, Scholes, Hargreaves, Gibson and Fletcher I'd be pretty £#%&!ing pleased. Some folk on here and RI go giddy at the thought of Cahill or Nolan but I've yet to see either play effectively as one of a two man central midfield. Sneijder can fit into that argument too.

Oh, and please don't assume or say it's carved in stone that we'll revert to 4-3-3. 'We' the fans don't know that. It'll probably happen every now and then just like it does now but not signing Hargreaves won't stop him from doing that. Oh and if anyone's seen Giggs play this season I'd hardly say he's playing out wide either.

As pointed out elsewhere Hargreaves will probably be played at right back or on the wing to begin with. Just like he has been used at Munich in his early career so don't worry about it.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Which would mean 4-3-3. I thought everyone on here hated that?

Nope, I don't. The short addition of Larsson could ensure that is played effectively too in the second half of the season. Dynamic and with pace, backed up by a solid and creative midfield three.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

Don't really agree with either point here S/Side, though I see what you're saying about 4-3-3 possibilities.

Carrick has spent most of the season being quietly effective in Scholes' shadow, which is exactly where we've needed him to be. He will become more positive with a decent player such as Hargreaves to sit for him. I also think Hargreaves' ability to burst forward is underestimated.

Certainly don't see Hargreaves playing too often at Giggs' expense, and equally, would imagine that were he to do so this would often be on the right anyway, with ronaldo on the left.

The main thing Hargreaves would bring, all must surely agree, is options.

And gbmufc - exactly, mate!

Do you not think we could find someone for much less than 15-17m who could bring options? I think Hargreaves is coming as a first choice. I'm not sure he'd be kicking up so much of a fuss otherwise.

If he was being signed for 6/7m I'd be happy about it as it'd appear he's coming as a squad player, but I can't see the logic in spending that much money unless Fergie has a fixed idea of a long-term position in the side for him.

He can play on the right of midfield (I remember him doing a good man-marking job on Giggsy for Bayern in the 2000 game at Old Trafford) but I would think Fergie has him down as a first choice in midfield.

If it happens I hope the thing you say about Carrick developing after Scholes goes will be the case.

For me, at the moment, Hargreaves wouldn't get in my first choice eleven.

Originally Posted by MUFC One Love

They do. What's wrong with making one of them fight for a place? It's OPTIONS.

You don't spend 35m on two players to compete for the same place. Unless you're Chelsea.

He won't get anywhere near the first choice XI for another month or two because he won't be fit. Which is why I personally wouldn't buy him now and why I'd prefer Utd to sign Fernandes for 6.5million.

A £#%&!ing bargain. Although he's already made it crystal clear that he won;t be a bench warmer.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

You don't spend 35m on two players to compete for the same place. Unless you're Chelsea.

Well, it wouldn't be 35 million, really would it, maybe in 4-5 years if we win a lot, then, yes.

I'm just saying have a different out look, not necessarily fighting for 2 spots, but vary it depending on games, sometimes play both, things happen in a season and it's clear we need a Hargreaves style player, so get him.

Originally Posted by Whalefish

He won't get anywhere near the first choice XI for another month or two because he won't be fit. Which is why I personally wouldn't buy him now and why I'd prefer Utd to sign Fernandes for 6.5million.

A £#%&!ing bargain. Although he's already made it crystal clear that he won;t be a bench warmer.

He may not want to be a bench warmer for Pompey, but I think he'd kick up less of a fuss at United.

It's the kind of deal I'd prefer, given that I wouldn't change our starting lineup any time soon moment.

Originally Posted by MUFC One Love

Well, it wouldn't be 35 million, really would it, maybe in 4-5 years if we win a lot, then, yes.

I'm just saying have a different out look, not necessarily fighting for 2 spots, but vary it depending on games, sometimes play both, things happen in a season and it's clear we need a Hargreaves style player, so get him.

If we pay 17m for Hargreaves and we win the league this season it'll be near enough 35m.

My outlook is very simple, but it's based purely on my own opinion. If I was the United manager and I had Hargreaves available to me - he wouldn't be in my first choice lineup.

With that in mind - I wouldn't spend 17m on him. If I thought I needed different options, I'd look for a similar player for half the price.

We are going to need all the money we have in the next couple of years, as some pretty big players are going to need replacing.

If money is no object then fine. But I don't think any of us believe that.

These arguments will all be fine by me - after he's signed!

Especially if it's this month and Neville Scholes Giggs and Carrick have all had a rest and look fresh on the run in.

On the other hand, good luck Danny Simpson

Hargreaves will obviously strengthen our squad, and I'd have him in my team as a defensive mid sure, but in my eyes Carrick is a very good defensive player who has good passing.

Its the fact Fergie was/is chasing these two with gusto - which points to the idea that these two will be our backbone for years to come, which I find puzzling.

I don't know why people are suddenly saying Hargreaves will be great either, he's not especially impressed me with anything, decent tackler and engine, but does he score goals, win headers, intimidate opponents, storm through midfields etc? Is he a particularly tidy passer?

He seems like the Alan Smith of midfielders, pretty good at everything, but nothing outstanding. Screams squad player.

Judging from this thread, the answer to the original question seems unanimous, he's coming to add an extra man to the squad as opposed to drive our first team forward. Our Geremi.

Originally Posted by Luffy

Judging from this thread, the answer to the original question seems unanimous, he's coming to add an extra man to the squad as opposed to drive our first team forward. Our Geremi.

eh? you're kidding? he will walk straight into the first team when fit. and the team will be better because of it. our essien.

He won't be walking straight into the first team for at least a year regardless of if he signs this month or in the summer, depending on his performances, obviously.

Don't really get any comparison with Alan Smith (in fact it's %@#$&!s!). Smith has a long (very very long) way to go to be near the best in his position. Hargreaves is nearly there right now.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

He won't be walking straight into the first team for at least a year regardless of if he signs this month or in the summer, depending on his performances, obviously.

Don't really get any comparison with Alan Smith (in fact it's %@#$&!s!). Smith has a long (very very long) way to go to be near the best in his position. [SIZE="5"]Hargreaves is nearly there right now.

WUM SURELY???

Smith is very good at football, good on the ball, good in the air, can finish, can do spectaculars, he's just not world class at anything other than energy and effort.

Hargreaves is nowhere near Essien who can outpace and outmuscle midfields, score goals, create goals and get around the pitch like a pitbull.

Good players, but not extraordinary players. Hargreaves may be a tidy player for us, but he won't be winning too many man of the match awards or wowing fans with wonderful displays. Solid, reliable, dependable, functional. Best in world? Yeah right, he'd be lucky to make top ten.

Originally Posted by Luffy

WUM SURELY???

Smith is very good at football, good on the ball, good in the air, can finish, can do spectaculars, he's just not world class at anything other than energy and effort.

Hargreaves is nowhere near Essien who can outpace and outmuscle midfields, score goals, create goals and get around the pitch like a pitbull.

Good players, but not extraordinary players. Hargreaves may be a tidy player for us, but he won't be winning too many man of the match awards or wowing fans with wonderful displays. Solid, reliable, dependable, functional. Best in world? Yeah right, he'd be lucky to make top ten.

1 What do you £#%&!in know

2 What do you £#%&!in know

3 He might well, as you say, be lucky to make the top ten based on overall ability as a midfielder. But, and without wishing to slate him, in terms of the world's best forwards, Smith would be lucky to make the top 500.

Give it up Luffy. You talk £#%&!in %@#$&!s. Red issue is just a click away, pal. Why not just make that click?

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

1 What do you £#%&!in know

2 What do you £#%&!in know

3 He might well, as you say, be lucky to make the top ten based on overall ability as a midfielder. But, and without wishing to slate him, in terms of the world's best forwards, Smith would be lucky to make the top 500.

Give it up Luffy. You talk £#%&!in %@#$&!s. Red issue is just a click away, pal. Why not just make that click?

my track record is pretty much spot on. Its a Red Issue tradition for Luffy to make inflammatory posts, which kick off huge arguments with a bunch of people - but a few months down the line I'm usually proved right.

Here I am questioning Hargreaves ability to improve our first 11 and there you are claiming he is world class and defending him to the hilt - by resorting to personal insults towards a fellow red who started a simple debate. what a top man you are.

Smith is a good footballer, Hargreaves is a good footballer, both belong in the category solid but not spectacular. the thread seems to agree that he will strengthen the squad first and foremost, but guaranteed starter? No.

if you're gonna randomly pick fights with someone, choose someone with less intellect and football know-how than yourself. I'm afraid if we keep this up you will have to start paying me a fee cos I keep taking you to school.

In your head somewhere I have no doubt you agree with every word you have posted. Not to worry, eh!