Manchester United FC Official Thread

as i said a million times if you are happy with your squad when everyone is fit you dont buy a high priced player incase of injuries... unless you have unlimited money

Anderson has had a surgery and now is in 100% condition, if he gets any injuries it will be bad luck not reoccurring injury which he has had for the last 2 years. so the chances are higher then ever that he wont get injured

ViVaRooney wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

I think Ferguson should go anyway, but 5 seasons without Champions League success is too much for a club like Manchester United. This is only a question of whether people will realise it if the same flaws that have been exposed in 2009, 2010, 2011 (twice) and 2012 are exposed again, or whether they'll continue to bury their heads in the sand and pretend it's all part of a masterplan.

then madrid must be a shit club

you really dont understand the CL do you. judging managers/teams based on CL performance is ridiculous, its such a luck based tournament. the best team does not win it 80% of the time. your obsession with it is getting boring and pathetic now

They're not a shit club, because Real Madrid do not accept going 5 years in a row without winning the Champions League.

The best team in Europe has won it in at least 3 of the last 5 seasons. The other two have won it because they used sensible tactics against Barcelona instead of suicidal ones with strong, defensive midfields, and did the same to defeat Bayern in the Final.

Equally in 3 of the last 4 seasons we've used retarded tactics against Barcelona and been dicked on in midfield by both Bayern Munich and Barcelona. I accept that luck plays a role, but that's only if you give it a chance to do that.

Chelsea still gave LOADS of chances to barca, and messi missed a pen, pure luck they went through.

When inter beat them, barca had a perfectly good goal disallowed and a clear pen not given (when they needed 1 goal).

when we have played barca they scored amazing long range goals.. (in the wembley one), stats in those games i bet are same as the games against inter and chelsea. when you play barca you need barca to be off their game, i never seen messi miss as many chances as he did against chelsea (both legs).

and how has that worked out for madrid?? what is it now.. 10 years without a CL, wtf is your point again?

ViVaRooney wrote:as i said a million times if you are happy with your squad when everyone is fit you dont buy a high priced player incase of injuries... unless you have unlimited money

Anderson has had a surgery and now is in 100% condition, if he gets any injuries it will be bad luck not reoccurring injury which he has had for the last 2 years. so the chances are higher then ever that he wont get injured

If that's true, why did we buy Ashley Young? Why on earth are we in for van Persie and Lucas? Even if all our players were reliably fit we'd still need more midfielders, none of those guys are world class, the only one who is even close is Michael Carrick, and Scholes once or twice a month. None of them belong in a top midfield.

And you know full well that we're going to have an injury crisis during the season, it's sickeningly predictable.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:as i said a million times if you are happy with your squad when everyone is fit you dont buy a high priced player incase of injuries... unless you have unlimited money

Anderson has had a surgery and now is in 100% condition, if he gets any injuries it will be bad luck not reoccurring injury which he has had for the last 2 years. so the chances are higher then ever that he wont get injured

If that's true, why did we buy Ashley Young? Why on earth are we in for van Persie and Lucas? Even if all our players were reliably fit we'd still need more midfielders, none of those guys are world class, the only one who is even close is Michael Carrick, and Scholes once or twice a month. None of them belong in a top midfield.

look at the word SQUAD

cause we didnt have enough cover out wide. and if we sell berba we could do with another striker (experienced one especially). as you have said we have loads of midfielders atm and we arent looking to sell any (since 2 of them are legends and 2 of them are promising young players) so we wont buy any

ViVaRooney wrote:Chelsea still gave LOADS of chances to barca, and messi missed a pen, pure luck they went through.

When inter beat them, barca had a perfectly good goal disallowed and a clear pen not given (when they needed 1 goal).

when we have played barca they scored amazing long range goals.. (in the wembley one), stats in those games i bet are same as the games against inter and chelsea. when you play barca you need barca to be off their game, i never seen messi miss as many chances as he did against chelsea (both legs).

Yeah, Inter also had a man unfairly sent off, and they smashed Barca at the San Siro. When you play Barcelona you need a bit of luck, you also need to play them with a midfield better than Carrick and Giggs, Ferguson has done this not once, but twice! It's truly staggering that you continue to defend this.

and how has that worked out for madrid?? what is it now.. 10 years without a CL, wtf is your point again?

My point is that they have high standards, they don't accept shit, neither should we.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:Chelsea still gave LOADS of chances to barca, and messi missed a pen, pure luck they went through.

When inter beat them, barca had a perfectly good goal disallowed and a clear pen not given (when they needed 1 goal).

when we have played barca they scored amazing long range goals.. (in the wembley one), stats in those games i bet are same as the games against inter and chelsea. when you play barca you need barca to be off their game, i never seen messi miss as many chances as he did against chelsea (both legs).

Yeah, Inter also had a man unfairly sent off, and they smashed Barca at the San Siro. When you play Barcelona you need a bit of luck, you also need to play them with a midfield better than Carrick and Giggs, Ferguson has done this not once, but twice! It's truly staggering that you continue to defend this.

and how has that worked out for madrid?? what is it now.. 10 years without a CL, wtf is your point again?

My point is that they have high standards, they don't accept shit, neither should we.

AND YET THEY STILL CANT WIN THE CL! lmao so clearly sacking managers is not working out for them

i havent defended the Giggs in midfield, but i understand it. him and carrick played superb against chelsea twice in that season, once in the league and once in the CL. you think he should be sacked cause of that? lol

ViVaRooney wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

If that's true, why did we buy Ashley Young? Why on earth are we in for van Persie and Lucas? Even if all our players were reliably fit we'd still need more midfielders, none of those guys are world class, the only one who is even close is Michael Carrick, and Scholes once or twice a month. None of them belong in a top midfield.

look at the word SQUAD

cause we didnt have enough cover out wide. and if we sell berba we could do with another striker (experienced one especially). as you have said we have loads of midfielders atm and we arent looking to sell any (since 2 of them are legends and 2 of them are promising young players) so we wont buy any

We had Park, Nani, Valencia and Giggs for the wings, there was no need to buy anyone for that position, certainly not a more pressing concern than the midfield was or is. By 2012 we should have got rid of all the dead wood in central midfield (which by the way, is all of them) and replaced them with genuinely top quality players. It is absolutely extraordinary that we are still having this conversation today, it speaks to a disgraceful neglect.

ViVaRooney wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Yeah, Inter also had a man unfairly sent off, and they smashed Barca at the San Siro. When you play Barcelona you need a bit of luck, you also need to play them with a midfield better than Carrick and Giggs, Ferguson has done this not once, but twice! It's truly staggering that you continue to defend this.


My point is that they have high standards, they don't accept shit, neither should we.

AND YET THEY STILL CANT WIN THE CL! lmao so clearly sacking managers is not working out for them

i havent defended the Giggs in midfield, but i understand it. him and carrick played superb against chelsea twice in that season, once in the league and once in the CL. you think he should be sacked cause of that? lol

On the other hand, Barcelona sacked Rijkaard (extremely successful manager) and won the Treble less than 12 months later. Inter Milan sacked Mancini (most successful manager since the 1960s) and won the Treble in 24 months.

I think he should be sacked because we still need to play Giggs in central midfield despite him spending hundreds of millions of pounds, and all of his erratic decision making in recent years.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:

look at the word SQUAD

cause we didnt have enough cover out wide. and if we sell berba we could do with another striker (experienced one especially). as you have said we have loads of midfielders atm and we arent looking to sell any (since 2 of them are legends and 2 of them are promising young players) so we wont buy any

We had Park, Nani, Valencia and Giggs for the wings, there was no need to buy anyone for that position, certainly not a more pressing concern than the midfield was or is. By 2012 we should have got rid of all the dead wood in central midfield (which by the way, is all of them) and replaced them with genuinely top quality players. It is absolutely extraordinary that we are still having this conversation today, it speaks to a disgraceful neglect.

and you thought that would have been good enough? Park was declining fast, and Giggs cant cut it out wide

the impact young had was clear and scored some great goals to help us win matches. in our 1st match he got the match winner

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:

AND YET THEY STILL CANT WIN THE CL! lmao so clearly sacking managers is not working out for them

i havent defended the Giggs in midfield, but i understand it. him and carrick played superb against chelsea twice in that season, once in the league and once in the CL. you think he should be sacked cause of that? lol

On the other hand, Barcelona sacked Rijkaard (extremely successful manager) and won the Treble less than 12 months later. Inter Milan sacked Mancini (most successful manager since the 1960s) and won the Treble in 24 months.

I think he should be sacked because we still need to play Giggs in central midfield despite him spending hundreds of millions of pounds, and all of his erratic decision making in recent years.

Barca did those things thanks to the maturing of a little guy called messi

inter won the CL cause of luck as i mentioned. had mancini stayed they could still have won the CL at any time

i still dont get your point though, sacking managers = success??? i can give you million examples of the opposite, the problem is i cant say a team would have won the CL if they stuck with a manager cause it cant be proven.. once again you go towards an argument thats one sided. who is to say chelsea wouldnt have won the CL with AVB, or inter as i mentioned or Barca or Madrid

Come on RR, Park ended up crap, Giggs mostly in the midfield. Valencia spent time at full back, Nani had an injury. You thinking signing Young was a bad idea? Yeah he wasn't fantastic, but he played a key role at times, win at West Brom, Spurs, Norwich, Ajax... Draw at home to Basel after our defence had gone nuts..

ViVaRooney wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

We had Park, Nani, Valencia and Giggs for the wings, there was no need to buy anyone for that position, certainly not a more pressing concern than the midfield was or is. By 2012 we should have got rid of all the dead wood in central midfield (which by the way, is all of them) and replaced them with genuinely top quality players. It is absolutely extraordinary that we are still having this conversation today, it speaks to a disgraceful neglect.

and you thought that would have been good enough? Park was declining fast, and Giggs cant cut it out wide

the impact young had was clear and scored some great goals to help us win matches. in our 1st match he got the match winner

Both of those player were played out wide last season, even when Valencia and Nani sat on the bench.

Young didn't even score in that game, it was an own goal.

ViVaRooney wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

On the other hand, Barcelona sacked Rijkaard (extremely successful manager) and won the Treble less than 12 months later. Inter Milan sacked Mancini (most successful manager since the 1960s) and won the Treble in 24 months.

I think he should be sacked because we still need to play Giggs in central midfield despite him spending hundreds of millions of pounds, and all of his erratic decision making in recent years.

Barca did those things thanks to the maturing of a little guy called messi

inter won the CL cause of luck as i mentioned. had mancini stayed they could still have won the CL at any time

They had Messi before Guardiola came, it took Guardiola to do the ballsy thing and get rid of the dead wood regardless of any status they enjoy as club legends, and pick up world class defenders for less than £10m from Ferguson.

Mancini would never have won the Champions League, he would never have had the balls to sell his best player and use the money to fund the rebuilding of his squad and his record in Europe is utter garbage anyway. He makes Ferguson look like Mourinho or Guardiola in that department.

Young still set up the OG...

ViVaRooney wrote:
i still dont get your point though, sacking managers = success??? i can give you million examples of the opposite, the problem is i cant say a team would have won the CL if they stuck with a manager cause it cant be proven.. once again you go towards an argument thats one sided. who is to say chelsea wouldnt have won the CL with AVB, or inter as i mentioned or Barca or Madrid

No you can't. Name me a few managers who have been more successful in any two year period after their first two year period at the club, there aren't many.

Danny wrote:Come on RR, Park ended up crap, Giggs mostly in the midfield. Valencia spent time at full back, Nani had an injury. You thinking signing Young was a bad idea? Yeah he wasn't fantastic, but he played a key role at times, win at West Brom, Spurs, Norwich, Ajax... Draw at home to Basel after our defence had gone nuts..

O'Shea should never have been sold and then we wouldn't have had to play Valencia at full back. He was not worth £16-20m and £120k p/w, nowhere near. And if we'd have had a top class midfield we would never have needed to be rescued against Basel because we wouldn't have been cut to ribbons by them.

Danny wrote:Young still set up the OG...

Sorry, well done Ashley, well done for mishitting a shot which happened to fly in. £20m worth of talent there.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Danny wrote:Young still set up the OG...

Sorry, well done Ashley, well done for mishitting a shot which happened to fly in. £20m worth of talent there.

Well done for playing a part in both goals in an opening day win you mean.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Danny wrote:Young still set up the OG...

Sorry, well done Ashley, well done for mishitting a shot which happened to fly in. £20m worth of talent there.

i guess you missed the build up to that..

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:
i still dont get your point though, sacking managers = success??? i can give you million examples of the opposite, the problem is i cant say a team would have won the CL if they stuck with a manager cause it cant be proven.. once again you go towards an argument thats one sided. who is to say chelsea wouldnt have won the CL with AVB, or inter as i mentioned or Barca or Madrid

No you can't. Name me a few managers who have been more successful in any two year period after their first two year period at the club, there aren't many.

thats true, because managers dont usually last that long in big clubs and thats why non of those clubs have had as much consistent success as man utd. but here is the list anyway, off the top of my head

Guardiola
Rijkaard
many madrid managers that should have been kept (and madrid would have won a CL for sure in the last 10 years and more league titles too)
Mancini
Jose (chelsea), someone who would have eventually won the CL with chelsea if given time
i am sure there are more, hard without research and cant be bothered to go into it now

as i said managers get sacked without being given enough time and this results in an unsuccessful stint. its all great going to a club and getting success but keeping it is the hardest thing, and many fail that where fergie hasnt and thats why he is still going strong

ViVaRooney wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

No you can't. Name me a few managers who have been more successful in any two year period after their first two year period at the club, there aren't many.

thats true, because managers dont usually last that long in big clubs and thats why non of those clubs have had as much consistent success as man utd. but here is the list anyway, off the top of my head

Guardiola
Rijkaard
many madrid managers that should have been kept (and madrid would have won a CL for sure in the last 10 years)
Mancini
Jose (chelsea), someone who would have eventually won the CL with chelsea if given time
i am sure there are more, hard without research and cant be bothered to go into it now

as i said managers get sacked without being given enough time and this results in an unsuccessful stint. its all great going to a club and getting success but keeping it is the hardest thing, and many fail that where fergie hasnt and thats why he is still going strong

Guardiola won 7 trophies in his first two seasons. I don't know what you are talking about there.
Rijkaard, fair enough
No Madrid managers are applicable, you can't use what you think would have happened to support your argument.
Mancini has only been in charge at City for two full seasons, and every League season he was at Inter post2006 were a crapshoot
Jose won two Premierships in his first two years. Again, you can't use predictions as part of your argument.

The point I'm making is that new managers can often be very successful. Mourinho was at Chelsea and Inter, Guardiola was at Barca, van Gaal was at Bayern in 2009-10, Wenger was at Arsenal in his first full season, and despite his extremely long stint he's not matched anything there in the last 8 years or so despite staying there longer and longer.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:

thats true, because managers dont usually last that long in big clubs and thats why non of those clubs have had as much consistent success as man utd. but here is the list anyway, off the top of my head

Guardiola
Rijkaard
many madrid managers that should have been kept (and madrid would have won a CL for sure in the last 10 years)
Mancini
Jose (chelsea), someone who would have eventually won the CL with chelsea if given time
i am sure there are more, hard without research and cant be bothered to go into it now

as i said managers get sacked without being given enough time and this results in an unsuccessful stint. its all great going to a club and getting success but keeping it is the hardest thing, and many fail that where fergie hasnt and thats why he is still going strong

Guardiola won 7 trophies in his first two seasons. I don't know what you are talking about there.
Rijkaard, fair enough
No Madrid managers are applicable, you can't use what you think would have happened to support your argument.
Mancini has only been in charge at City for two full seasons, and every League season he was at Inter post2006 were a crapshoot
Jose won two Premierships in his first two years. Again, you can't use predictions as part of your argument.

The point I'm making is that new managers can often be very successful. Mourinho was at Chelsea and Inter, Guardiola was at Barca, van Gaal was at Bayern in 2009-10, Wenger was at Arsenal in his first full season, and despite his extremely long stint he's not matched anything there in the last 8 years or so despite staying there longer and longer.

but as i said thats the point... you have brought up an arguments thats too one sided, how can i prove my point if managers are getting sacked for the smallest things. no manager gets given the chance/time anymore

ferguson is a successful long term manager and nothing suggests sacking him means better times, we have never gone more then 1 season without a trophy. only twice had we had a trophyless season since 93. thats incredible and nothing these clubs who keep changing managers can compete with. sure they get short bursts of success but not consistent success. dont know about you but i would take 4 leagues titles, 1 CL title in 6 years over what madrid, chelsea or city have managed

Barca is an exception cause they have the greatest player in the history of football and without him they would be same level as every other club.

http://espn.go.com/sports/conversations/_/id/8191164/manchester-united-glazers-saddled-club-massive-debt-yet-alex-ferguson-continues-support-gabriele-marcotti

this is probably the first article I've ever read regarding United's debt.

Danny wrote:

Viva Ronaldo 7 wrote:So, what does everyone know about Lucas other than youtube videos and the fact hes rated 82 on FIFA?

Sao Paolo drive a really hard bargain in career mode.

On Career Mode I always have to pay like 40 - 50 Mil for him.

i bought him for £48m when i was managing AC Milan, he is so skinny in the game though.. doesnt look like that from the vids i saw

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:

thats true, because managers dont usually last that long in big clubs and thats why non of those clubs have had as much consistent success as man utd. but here is the list anyway, off the top of my head

Guardiola
Rijkaard
many madrid managers that should have been kept (and madrid would have won a CL for sure in the last 10 years)
Mancini
Jose (chelsea), someone who would have eventually won the CL with chelsea if given time
i am sure there are more, hard without research and cant be bothered to go into it now

as i said managers get sacked without being given enough time and this results in an unsuccessful stint. its all great going to a club and getting success but keeping it is the hardest thing, and many fail that where fergie hasnt and thats why he is still going strong

Guardiola won 7 trophies in his first two seasons. I don't know what you are talking about there.
Rijkaard, fair enough
No Madrid managers are applicable, you can't use what you think would have happened to support your argument.
Mancini has only been in charge at City for two full seasons, and every League season he was at Inter post2006 were a crapshoot
Jose won two Premierships in his first two years. Again, you can't use predictions as part of your argument.

The point I'm making is that new managers can often be very successful. Mourinho was at Chelsea and Inter, Guardiola was at Barca, van Gaal was at Bayern in 2009-10, Wenger was at Arsenal in his first full season, and despite his extremely long stint he's not matched anything there in the last 8 years or so despite staying there longer and longer.

Sir Alex Ferguson himself was mostly uconvincing until 3-4 years into his managerial career with Manchester United. Nils Arne Eggen, my local team's "legendary" manager, began with a side capable of playing well enough in Norway, took up a more dominant position in his first 3 years, and within 10 years he had defeated AC Milan, Real Madrid and Bourissa Dortmund, achieving a quarter final in the champions league with a team made up entirely of local talent.

Dario Gradi finished near bottom and relegation with Crewed Alexandra in his first few years, and achieved promotion to Division one in 1997, 8 years after he took charge.Matt Busby didn't win the league until his 7th season. Bill Shankly used 3-4 years to build Liverpool into a dominant force. Clough's Forest took the European Cup in 1979, 4 years after he joined them. Giovanni Trappatoni had his best season with Juventus in 1985, Almost a decade afer he first joined them.

Lucas Moura's agent Wagner Ribeiro says any move to Manchester United is off as they will not up their bid for the Brazilian ace.

Andy wrote:Lucas Moura's agent Wagner Ribeiro says any move to Manchester United is off as they will not up their bid for the Brazilian ace.

How much are they asking?

£30 million.

"Manchester United made an offer, which was rejected and they won't make another one as they have reached their limit."

We offered around £26m

£30M for a 19 year old is ridiculous.

£30M for a 19 year old who still has a lot to learn sounds absurd.