The defeat to Arsenal is disappointing but nothing more, unless United allow it to be. I expect United to react positively to only their third defeat of the season by firstly, beating Portsmouth in the FA Cup and then by taking the 3 points against Watford at Old Trafford. One concern that once again raised its head on Sunday was United’s willingness to replace big players in games if they are tiring.
The reason for this comment is partly a reaction to Wenger’s alleged instruction to his team that United tire during the course of a game. And to those fans wishing to dismiss this idea immediately as nonsense, I would ask you to ignore where the message came from and think about it for a moment. Perhaps look back to the United v Chelsea game this season, a game which saw United really attack Chelsea early on and then, in the last 20 minutes, saw key players begin to tire, as they did against Arsenal on Sunday.
Utilising substitutes is part of the game. On Sunday, I believe United should have replaced Giggs with Park. I also believe Fletcher should have replaced Scholes, with an instruction to get stuck into the best player on the pitch on Sunday, namely, Fabregas. Bringing on Heinze was not a bad decision as such, but to do so at the expense of Ronaldo - who was capable of hitting Arsenal on the break – was curious. It was perhaps too trusting for United to rely on those players they tend always to rely on. I say too trusting because you need energy as well as experience to ensure you impact on a game for 90 minutes, particularly when facing a team as young and as attack minded as Arsenal. When I saw United backing off, I began to get concerned. However, if it had not been for two good finishes, we would all be singing United’s praises, so I accept the line is a thin one. And the best time to judge is at the end of the season.
Therefore this article is certainly not a comment on Fergie – it never would be - but instead seeks to explore the question that surrounds the reasons for United not trusting in substitutes such as Park and Fletcher during these pressurised moments.
United are famous for making changes late on (think Solskjaer) when needing to get back into a game but we are less remembered for making the right changes to close a game out. It was right for Scholes and Giggs to start the game – of course it was - but was it sensible for them to play the whole 90 minutes when younger players could have been used to chase down the ball and opposition? We will of course never know, but changes to the midfield may have helped to take some pressure off the defence. I believe Fergie finds it too hard to not rely on the same players - a loyalty which has brought more success than problems but knows that come the summer his hand will be forced. United need to reinforce by bringing in players that are good enough to take some of the responsibility off Scholes, Giggs and Neville. That is the reason for United's dogged pursuit of Hargreaves. It may be the reason for United's previous interest in Franck Ribery and could be why Bardsley has been sent on loan to Aston Villa till the summer. Only Fergie knows. Till then we will continue to see Scholes, Giggs and Neville used in the same way, as Fletcher and Park - as good as they are - are not yet big game players.
The reason for this comment is partly a reaction to Wenger’s alleged instruction to his team that United tire during the course of a game. And to those fans wishing to dismiss this idea immediately as nonsense, I would ask you to ignore where the message came from and think about it for a moment. Perhaps look back to the United v Chelsea game this season, a game which saw United really attack Chelsea early on and then, in the last 20 minutes, saw key players begin to tire, as they did against Arsenal on Sunday.
Utilising substitutes is part of the game. On Sunday, I believe United should have replaced Giggs with Park. I also believe Fletcher should have replaced Scholes, with an instruction to get stuck into the best player on the pitch on Sunday, namely, Fabregas. Bringing on Heinze was not a bad decision as such, but to do so at the expense of Ronaldo - who was capable of hitting Arsenal on the break – was curious. It was perhaps too trusting for United to rely on those players they tend always to rely on. I say too trusting because you need energy as well as experience to ensure you impact on a game for 90 minutes, particularly when facing a team as young and as attack minded as Arsenal. When I saw United backing off, I began to get concerned. However, if it had not been for two good finishes, we would all be singing United’s praises, so I accept the line is a thin one. And the best time to judge is at the end of the season.
Therefore this article is certainly not a comment on Fergie – it never would be - but instead seeks to explore the question that surrounds the reasons for United not trusting in substitutes such as Park and Fletcher during these pressurised moments.
United are famous for making changes late on (think Solskjaer) when needing to get back into a game but we are less remembered for making the right changes to close a game out. It was right for Scholes and Giggs to start the game – of course it was - but was it sensible for them to play the whole 90 minutes when younger players could have been used to chase down the ball and opposition? We will of course never know, but changes to the midfield may have helped to take some pressure off the defence. I believe Fergie finds it too hard to not rely on the same players - a loyalty which has brought more success than problems but knows that come the summer his hand will be forced. United need to reinforce by bringing in players that are good enough to take some of the responsibility off Scholes, Giggs and Neville. That is the reason for United's dogged pursuit of Hargreaves. It may be the reason for United's previous interest in Franck Ribery and could be why Bardsley has been sent on loan to Aston Villa till the summer. Only Fergie knows. Till then we will continue to see Scholes, Giggs and Neville used in the same way, as Fletcher and Park - as good as they are - are not yet big game players.
Therefore, I think Fergie will settle for the odd result, as experienced on Sunday. I also think he knows United are capable of winning the title this season and accepts that the experience, craft and will to win that Scholes, Giggs, Neville etc bring to the team outweigh the downsides associated with these player’s ages. And right here, right now, he is right to. As United's best chance of winning the Premiership, since 2002/03, is now. And despite Sunday's defeat and despite what some people may think, United are still very well placed to win the Premiership this season.
So we can thank Liverpool for beating Chelsea and we must thank Fergie for ensuring that United remain six points clear. And we owe Arsenal and Wenger a response too, but lets do that in May.
No comments:
Post a Comment