must be in the room next to you then lol
The Manchester United Thread
- Thread starter MisterStubbs
- Start date
- Replies 106K
- Views 9M
steveorobbo
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1,453
- Reaction score
- 192
- Points
- 63
Thing is if we change to a 3 then that means leaving out Mata who has been one of our best players since Rooney was dropped. So the question is, are we going to get that much out of Pogba in a 3 that it makes up for not having Mata as the 10? Im not sure. Same as playing Pogba as the 10 with a free role and having Carrick/Schneiderlin and Herrera in the 2 behind. Then that gives you another headache with Mkhitaryan. Where does he fit? Especially now Martial has scored. He could well go on a run now and get that left spot back. Then do you put Rashford on the right or drop him for Mkhitaryan? Big arguments all over the pitch, and the players arent doing themselves any favours with the inconsistent performances.
Personally I would stick with the same side but change Rashford for Martial now he has his goal. Hopefully that goal is the kick up the **** he needed to get going. Rashford seems to have more of an impact off the bench. Need to reign Pogba in a bit defensively but in all honesty, if we was 3-0 up at half time like we should have been, we wouldnt even be talking about this now. With the set-up we have now with Herrera, Pogba, Mata and Zlatan, we are starting to play a lot more direct and are ripping teams apart. Today it was a combination of the keeper having a worldie and poor shot selection that cost us, and DDG making a howler. One of them days.
steveorobbo
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1,453
- Reaction score
- 192
- Points
- 63
Again its another misleading stat. Stoke had 3 shots on target in the first half I think that were all soft shots along the ground from outside the box. Where as our shots on target were more clear cut and only stopped by world class saves. Zlatan should have scored with that first chance. If he puts that far corner or through the keepers legs its a goal. World class save from Lingard at his near post. Pogba had a clear chance and missed the target and also hit the bar. While the shots on target stat might be close, they was nowhere near the same level of chances.
Meh I don't think they were that good at all mate, I have no problem saying Watford deserved their win against us, but I really don't think Stoke could argue at all if they came away with a bit of a spanking. Ok they saw the ball a decent bit for couple of spells here & there in the second half (particularly before the hour mark), had a few tame pops at De Gea, and Allen did have a really good chance prior to his rather fortunate goal, but if we're being realistic they could've been 5 or 6 down at that stage only for as you say, a lack of composure and some terrific saves from the man between the posts.
That's football, I'd rather drop points having a luckless day in front of goal than another dull performance in which we're accustomed to in recent years. Onwards on upwards, still curse this f*****g international break though.
Scouseinthehouse
Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2015
- Messages
- 22,504
- Reaction score
- 5,224
- Points
- 113
Not having that robbo. You were nowhere near second half what you were the first. Fair result.
You'd be disappointed if you were either manager to of lost that. Mourinho for Utd's first half profligacy. Hughes for the way they battled back.
Last edited:
But to go in front in the second half, when as you say we weren't as good as in the first, makes it all the more disappointing not to have took it with incredible respect and seen it out. For a 5-10 minute spell after we got the goal, they couldn't get out, wave after wave of attack & crosses, the second goal looked inevitable... but we didn't get it and one or two little individual errors/lapse of concentration in the same phase of play and bam you're punished - Football ladies & gents
steveorobbo
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1,453
- Reaction score
- 192
- Points
- 63
No not saying we was. But the shots on target stat being close isnt a true reflection of the game. We probably should have been 3-0 up at half time. And that was clear chances. Any other game one or maybe all three would have gone in. Thats without the second half chances. Pogba off the bar and more top saves from the keeper. Even the shots that was inches wide where the keeper would have had no chance. Stoke didnt really have any of that. Only chance I can think of where Stoke really should have scored was Allen in the second half when he done the hard work making space in the box then basically passed the ball to DDG. I might be missing a few obvious chances but I really cant remember any. Only Allens chance that he missed.
steveorobbo
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1,453
- Reaction score
- 192
- Points
- 63
Im really trying not to look at it with blinkers but I dont see Stoke having the better of the second half? We battered them first half. Thats without question and should have been 3-0 up at half time. Second half apart from the goal which was a **** up from DDG and poor defense, and the chance by Allen that he missed, I dont see it. We hit the bar. We had more shots saved by the keeper that on another day would fly in. Herrera had a good chance that just missed the post that the keeper was nowhere near. Barring Allens chance he missed, I never felt at any point that Stoke would score or under threat. And only scored from a **** up. Like I say, unless ive missed a lot that the blinkers are covering, I dont see how Stoke's second half performance was that much better than ours to see the game as a fair draw.
Scouseinthehouse
Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2015
- Messages
- 22,504
- Reaction score
- 5,224
- Points
- 113
Just thought for the overall play they done superbly to turn it around. Utd looked like they were gonna' run riot first half. In large part to how poor Stoke were. (Lost count of the amount of times simple moves broke down with careless control. Bonny a key culprit.). But second half thy came out with a different attitude, nullified the threat, and grew in confidence the longer it went. Yeah, you had the better chances but they had the better of the half to my view.
Depends how you view it. The better chances or the overall play. Seemed a fair result to my mind. I'd of been ****** off and frustrated with the profligacy of my players if I'd been a Utd fan. (Pogba in particular. Can't be missing such gilt edged chances. DEFINITELY can't when the club has just shelved out £89 million for you to change games.). And equally ****** off with my sides first half showing and feeling unlucky on the second half if I were a Stoke fan.
Depends how you view it. The better chances or the overall play. Seemed a fair result to my mind. I'd of been ****** off and frustrated with the profligacy of my players if I'd been a Utd fan. (Pogba in particular. Can't be missing such gilt edged chances. DEFINITELY can't when the club has just shelved out £89 million for you to change games.). And equally ****** off with my sides first half showing and feeling unlucky on the second half if I were a Stoke fan.
steveorobbo
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1,453
- Reaction score
- 192
- Points
- 63
I dont see how they had the better of the second half though. I can understand it probably looks better due to our first half performance, and their poor performance. But if that was the first half of a game and obviously had nothing to compare to, I dont see how anybody would say Stoke had the better of it. Considering the chances we missed and the quality of the chances compared to Stokes, possession of the ball and attacking threat in that second half, we still had the better of it in my opinion. But because their respective performance is compared to the first half, it appears Stoke was better when just looking at that half without comparison I think we was still better.
I think Scouse just means it looked as if it could've finished a cricket score based on the first half, so to come out in the second half and be much more competitive, warrants them a lot of credit, and having got out of that first half without somehow conceding, they could've felt somewhat unlucky to of not picked up a point. But I still think overall we fully deserved maximum points.
steveorobbo
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1,453
- Reaction score
- 192
- Points
- 63
Thats what I was saying. The only way you could even come close to having the argument that Stoke deserved something from the game, or that Stoke had the better of the second half is if you compare it to the first. Which clouds the judgement. If that was the first half of a game, with nothing to compare to then we won that half all day long. There isnt even a debate. But because your comparing both teams to their first half performance, it makes it look like Stoke performed better than they actually did, because they was slightly better second half and we was slightly worse (compared to our first half performances). But we was still better than Stoke in the second half despite them performing slightly better than the first half and us being slightly worse.
I don't think I've ever taken so many positives from such a depressing result before. If we're creating chances like this, then not every keeper is going to have a worldie and not every free header will rattle the crossbar or glance wide. Same team again against Liverpool, I fancy us to surprise them.
razielioux
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2015
- Messages
- 988
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Nope, mate. This year I've decided to play FIFA. Why? Don't tell me that's ******* awesome and I've wasted my money, life, job, etc.
razielioux
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2015
- Messages
- 988
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Mate, what Stoke has actually deserved was 4 conceded goals in the first half only, but we were simply impotent to score even one from like 4-5 clear cut chances.
Nope, mate. This year I've decided to play FIFA. Why? Don't tell me that's ******* awesome and I've wasted my money, life, job, etc.
I played Fifa 17 and quite liked it this year, but PES is meant to be very good. Problem is... even when PES is better gameplay (arugable) it still isn't as enjoyable an experience because of the overall package such as licenses, game modes, playing online etc. So long story short think I'm going to go with Fifa again this year.
If we go with the same line up it will be one **** of an open game and will suit Liverpool I think... just looking at how exposed our midfield is with Pogba and Herrera... I think we need a 3 man midfield against them. I'd be very surprised if Mourinho went with the same team.
Exactly. Stoke didnt deserve a draw, but we didnt take our chances. if they were poor chances fine, but they were excellent ones, and they shouldnt have been wasted.
I'd drop Lingard for Schneiderlin personally, or Carrick actually, with Pogba and Herrera bringing high energy to the midfield.