I agree. People on here are expecting him to take over games and control our midfield, but the problem is it's not gonna happen with Scholes in the same lineup. It's like asking Veron to take over a game when Keane was in the same midfield, it's just not happening. When Hargreaves comes back I'd try him and Carrick in midfield. I bet it'll work, and it'll work well.
I think the problem in comparing Carrick and Scholes, as DS alluded to, is that Carrick is supposed to be able to unlock defenses with the long pass. The defensive work he does is nice, but anyone can do it and many can do it better. If Carrick is not going to do the one thing we really need him to do, then what purpose does he serve? As everyone knows, I'm a big Carrick supporter, but he needs to take more control.
There was no sentiment in any statement I made. Just as clear there is no sentiment in stating another legend in Giggs was playing so poorly he should be dropped. And I've made clear time and again that neither players is playing well, I'm not singling out Carrick, but there is a number of obvious differences between the players and you seem to have unwittingly struck on a few of them. Carrick is a DLP, this much is a given, it is not by any coincidence whatsoever that his best game has come about in the match where he had no man to track vs. Chelsea and had all the play in front of him. Those are the perfect conditions for his game, Scholes is not getting out-passed by Carrick, in the slightest. Scholes' basic foundational play is constant and consistent ball retention and shor-passing chains between himself and whoever is around him - even this season no one at the club has come close to making or completing the number of short-passes Scholes makes, he has made some mistakes, they are noticeable by the practice being un-Scholes like, and that's what fans notice and extrapolate, but Scholes is easily out-passing every other CM in the side at this moment in time. Carrick has hit and completed more Hollywood balls, if that's what you're reffering to, but the difference between a kisfiring Scholes and a misfiring Carrick or Giggs is that Scholes knows exactly when his game is off and when to keep things so simple as to appear anonymous if you're not paying attention to the nuance in his game. It's not textbook Scholes, but it holds far more function than what Carrick has been doing for the majority of the matches he has played in. You say Scholes 'sleptwalked' through the Brum game, which only goes to prove the point you are comparing him to himself at his best. He was more than functional in that game and made a few key interceptions as well as positional saves. He hit no Hollywood ball that I can remember, but he kept the short passing game tiking over. And of course Carrick should be better in defence, that's part of his job description. Right now they are both playing poorly, but Scholes' job is far more important than Carrick's and you'd see that if he wasn't in the team at this moment in time given how Carrick is playing. Hehe, if you start splitting paragraphs into sentences, then we have a problem! Just covered this in response to Charley, Scholes is definitely not playing well at this moment in time, but what he is doing is giving us a semblance of continuity with his natural game and ability in the short-passing department. Carrick is not in Scholesy's class for this and never will be, in fact, no one else in the club is and we don't notice it because we are so used to it, but I am 100% positive Scholes makes and completes more passes per game than anyone else in the side. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if he completes double the amount of passes to his closest competitior in this department. We're not seeing any 'Scholes-like brilliance' at the moment, just a functional midfielder sticking to the basics and doing most of them well (enough) given the circumstances. Carrick's short-passing game is a lot more linear and predictable simply because he's not a true CM and is far more likely to get rid of the ball (for good) after a touch or two, he's shirking a lot of play with the ball right now and passing it off to the flanks where last season his fewer touches and passes were more decisive and penatrative as he'd ping the ball 30yards forward through the heart of a team without a second thought. What's missed here is that although Scholes can do that as well, primarily that's not his game. So when both of these players are spluttering and finding this area of the game a struggle we see a clear split in how they are as players, Scholes simply reverts back to the basics of retention and such, much like we saw from him when he played next to Keane, Carrick, however, starts to get rid of the ball out wide instead of to a player ahead of him. Basically, if Carrick isn't using his true DLP skills, he is easily replaced in a side because any CM can spray a ball wide without thinking, whilst offering superior energy levels, tenacity and aggression on the defensive end. Very few plaers in the entire league can offer what Carrick does when he's full of confidence and passing the ball forwards. Whoops, see above. My fault for not reading before scrolling down, eh? As to the point bolded, have a read of what machoward said about that play that led to the goal. I think it's dead-on accurate. Hehe, perhaps you dropped the bolded bit in as an intended pun. When the field is ahead of Carrick he is in his element, when you throw in proper defensive tracking and running, he rarely plays to the same standard, this is on him to improve and I think that was the case last night as well. As soon as you introdue players running in behind him, his game changes and he just doesn't look ultra calm and smooth. His game is more basic than Scholes' is and I think that's apparent when both of them are struggling for form. Scholes has a lot more to him to bail him out as he's not really a DLP, but because his ability is such can play the role without much effort. So I look at Scholes as still being of value to the team, to still have the ability to keep us ticking over to some degree, perhaps not his best degree, but to a degree at least. Carrick can't do that, and as I said above and VR said, at those times he can easily be replaced by a plain old DM who could do the basic things he's doing far better than he himself can. Carrick's true (and only for me) claim to a first team spot is that he can pass the ball superbly well through any range from mid to long with either foot effortlessly - when on form - can't put into words how invaluable and rare a skill that is, and when he is doing that, he should always start, for my money, without that ability showing himself he could easily be dropped for another player. It's not the same for Scholes, even when he's below par, he does a lot of things we would badly miss if he were absent. See above. Will just be repeating myself to answer in full. Carrick has played more Hollywood balls, he hasn't been the better passer. I would have to disagree. He looks to me, personally, to be feeling the strain this season, where last season there was no genuine threat to his starting position and he was hailed as a marvellous component in a title-winning side he had very few problems. But in this campaign he was met with being dropped for a new player, whose style the crowd will love even if it is a lot of bluster and not much substance, who could readily take his slot from him given the way he's playing at this moment in time. It's precisely at this time, whilst Hargreaves and Fletcher are out that Carrick has to make an impression on the manager with his overall contribution to our midfield. None of those players can do what Scholes does, so logically it's only Carrick whose spot is under threat. Nope. Carrick really isn;t expected to do the job of two-mids. He has his weaknesses, every player does, but it's his strengths that we're not seeing right now, and it's those strengths that got him into the team and would keep him there. You're talking about Carrick, rightfully, as a DLP, yet he is not very DLPish right now, and have inadvertantly highlighted what would or would not keep him in the team. he's got the time it takes for the two runners to return to make a claim for the position he has, I reckon. He needs to take the challenge on with confidence and asuredness. It could be the making or breaking of him as Utd starter. He's got to fight for his position if unlike: Rio, Scholes, Ronaldo and Rooney he doesn't offer something that's irreplaceable to us. For the record, I think when Carrick is at his best as a DLP, he should start at least 80% of our games and I'd readily see Hargreaves on the bench then outside of the Big Four and CL games.
Can we make sure that he does not attempt to rugby tackle or any other tackle an opposition player in the six yard area as he nearly gave away a pen...
In response to DS post above here is the link that will provide some stats http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11096_2705370,00.html
What one thing do we need him to do? If it doesnt relate to passing the ball, then only Fergie has himself to blame as he bought the player, and knew what he was capable of.
It makes sense, but as a footballer, especially an England international, I dont think the concept of competition for places is new to him. Not to the point where his play deteriorates. I think he was in the team by default last season. Who was going to take his place? Ryan Giggs, Darren Fletcher or Oshea? It was a bonus that he performed well without really having competition for his spot. Is Fergie trying to change another player? For one who doesnt get bit by the same dog twice, so to speak, he is sure making a huge mistake trying to change Carrick. When I said he deserves a pass, its because he's been asked to change himself as a player. He was already 25 when we got him. I dont think its going to be a make or break thing as well. He was never going to be the first name on the team sheet anyway. As long as Scholes is here.
The way Scholes was playing yesterday would make me less sure on that point as his usual ping-pong precision of passes went awry many times during the first half and were causing me great frustration.
You've lost me. All carrick needs to do is deliver at the things he's supposed to be good at. I don't see how that means the manager is changing the player? Scholes and Carrick don't perform a similar role for us and Scholes should have no bearing on Carrick's future as a starter - if Carrick isn't careful he could easily be usurped by someone else once Scholes has gone, which would throw people's idea of Carrick-Hargreaves out the window. Carrick isn't a starter for his NT, there's the flaw in what you're saying. He's not under the pressure there because he doesn't have a starting position to lose.
The only thing stopping him yesterday was himself. Its not like he wasn't getting time on the ball and the chance to look up. Do you think he is filling another role that is preventing him from passing?
Scholes and Carrick not surprising at all. neither is Rio I knew he was playin hte ball out more but Vidic has been doing his thing quietly. It is almost not surprising to see this type of stat as we are not havingthe benefit of wide play from both sides from our full backs. Evra yes but Brown not quite. And with other folks still blending in we might be playing the passes around more to retain possession. Would be nice to see the stats from last year. It would be also nice to get more breakdown of these stats though such as who these passes are going to. Hopefully they are not back there passing the ball back and forth to inflate the stats just kidding
Carrick is just not playing well right now. I agree with VR, it's all on him. It has nothing to do with Scholes or formation/tactic, etc. Some of the ball he played vs. Brum and Roma are very un-Carrick like; it was no where near the intended target. I think Fergie subbing him out early and leaving Hargreaves in a few games earlier in the season hurt his confidence a little bit. But now with Hargreaves declared to be out for a period, he know he's going to start as long as he's healthy. Hopefully, he will regain his form soon.
I'm probably known as a hater of most stats because they can be bent and shifted to suit any argument, but sometimes, just sometimes they do tell the truth without need for further examination in that you can just watch 5 united games, any 5 at any point in the season and just watch Scholes rack up the passes. This is always backed up by stats and as he hits his groove he'll leave everyone else even further in his wake. What I like about Scholes in this sense is that I know, from watching him, that these aren't inflated numbers as he will literally interact with any red shirt who has the confidence to play with and off him no matter whether they are on the wing or in the middle of the pitch. I think Rio's stats would be quite honest as well. But I'd then begin to wonder how many others have had their stats boosted by lateral and backward passes.
Although you could flip the coin and say if the England injury jinx strikes again as it always does and crocks Barry/Lampard etc then Carrick is under pressure to prove to McClaren that he is worthy of a starting place and not because the injuries have let him in so he has to play for United in order to do so. This is all if's and but's but you never know!
No not suggesting Rio or Scholes or anyone for that matter is padding the stats. I am just surprised Vidic is there as the other three i can see easily. the 4 out of 5 stat which includes two centerhalves could be a function of other teams forcing them to play the ball more as part of strategy to defend against us. just a thought.........
Wasn't suggesting you were saying that the stats were padded more that with those two I'd think they would almost always be bonafide. I've always felt that passes in the opposing half should be categorizxed seperately from those in the side's own half. That would really throw up some interesting numbers.. I would wage Scholesy's stats wouldn't drop then either.
When Carrick is allowed to be a DLP, then he will deliver. Thats all Im saying. He cannot be a DLP when its Scholes that constantly taking up his space. Taking the ball off the back four, etc. Also, do you think all these forward runs are all Carrick just using his intuition? Playing as high up the pitch as he has been? These are things he's not usually good at,but has been doing to a decent standard since he joined us.
From the 60 minutes I watched, Carrick played well enough. I think he is being asked to do things that DLP do not do. Also, this could be a sophmore slump kind of thing.
I watched the match and I saw Carrick make a number of tackles (although he ended up on the ground more than usual) and he kept the ball moving along and didn't concede possession in dangerous areas. Nothing really impressive but nothing awful. The problem is that Carrick didn't attempt a long, defense-splitting pass. I can't remember one. I love Carrick but it disappoints me that he didn't try to make Roma pay for defending deep. Everything that Carrick did is what you expect from any CM, even a DLP. What he didn't do was do the one thing you expect from a DLP.