Michael Carrick v Fabregas

Discussion in 'Manchester United' started by Ruud v.Nistelrooy 10, Sep 9, 2007.

  1. Ruud v.Nistelrooy 10

    Staff Member

    Manchester United
    Jamaica
    Jun 4, 2006
    The Bridge to Iacon
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Jamaica
    ok me and this guy from work were comparing our teams and we agreed United have the better forward line and defense. the goalkeepers i insisted vdS was better but only just but we eventually agreed to call them equal

    then came Carrick v Cesc who do you think is better? i said Carrick will probably get more goals although he wanted to argue Cesc was a better passer and i said Carrick would handle a rough game better etc

    what do you think? overall and/or in separate categories
     
  2. prymetyme

    prymetyme Member

    Aug 20, 2005
    Vallendar
    Cesc is better. Not to mention he hasn't reached his full potential. Cesc will one day be the leader and captain of Arsenal. Carrick will never have the presence that Cesc carries, he won't ever have the responsibility or leadership either. Cesc is the Arsenal go to guy right now, Carrick doesn't have the pure ability to be like Cesc.
     
  3. Devil500

    Devil500 New Member

    Mar 7, 2006
    Section 101
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Cesc just looks like a great player but we'll have to see who wins more silver ware ;)
     
  4. JC7rox

    JC7rox Member+

    Manchester United FC, LAFC
    Jun 11, 2004
    West Coast, Cali!
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Cesc. Silverware is irrelevent. And Carrick is a specialty player.
     
  5. Highbury

    Highbury Member

    May 13, 2006
    Philadelphia
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't think anyone expects Carrick to be equal to Cesc. That's what Scholes, Hargreaves, Anderson, etc. are for.
     
  6. prymetyme

    prymetyme Member

    Aug 20, 2005
    Vallendar
    I think a good discussion in 10 years will be Scholes in his prime vs. Cesc in his prime.
     
  7. Invincible

    Invincible Member+

    Mar 28, 2004
    Sanctuary
    I'll take off my Red tinted shades and say Cesc.
     
  8. JC7rox

    JC7rox Member+

    Manchester United FC, LAFC
    Jun 11, 2004
    West Coast, Cali!
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    But Carrick still gets all the ladies.

    [​IMG]

    "Huh?"
     
  9. MtP07

    MtP07 BigSoccer Supporter

    Jan 3, 2005
    They play in different positions and both are very good at what they do.
     
  10. Teso Dos Bichos

    Teso Dos Bichos Red Card

    Sep 2, 2004
    Purged by RvN
    Completely different players but Carrick. He has more to his game, is the better passer and is not as limited as Fabregas. For Fabregas to operate effectively he needs a solid midfield behind him so that he can sit further forward and dictate the attacking play with his close passing. If he does not have that then he struggles. Put Scholes next to Fabregas and the latter would struggle to impose himself on games. Carrick has already proven that he can play well in that situation.
     
  11. barthez4

    barthez4 Member

    Apr 1, 2005
    Fabregas. Not by much though.
     
  12. Mighty_Mouse

    Mighty_Mouse New Member

    Jun 16, 2007
    I agree that they are completely different players. I also agree that Carrick may be a better passer because of his long range passing abilities. The only problem I have is that I think Fabregas' role (AM) is more important to the modern game and that he plays it better than Carrick. It would be very difficult to argue that Carrick is better at the short passing game in an advanced central position.

    Putting Scholes next to Fabregas is almost irrelevant to this discussion when talking about the (AM) Scholes. Putting two players that have similar playing styles next to each other in the central mid generally does not work out. ie. England

    However, Scholes seems to be adapting to Carrick's role this season, so having a Scholes, Hargreaves, Fabregas central midfield might work provided that Scholes were to play behind Fabregas as deep playmaker like he has been doing this season.

    To further this point, Scholes next to Carrick this season has not worked well at all and has led to Carrick taking a turn on the bench, since Scholes seems to be playing deeper and taking on a lot of Carrick's responsibilities.

    Were Fabregas to join Manchester (which will probably never happen), I think he would see more playing time than Carrick this season. The reverse would not apply if Carrick joined Arsenal.

    Lastly, Carrick plays best when given a lot of space to make decisions. Fabregas strives in tight spaces making quick, accurate passes and I think he would be more suited to the current Utd playing style. Carrick may be becoming obsolete in the current squad, especially if the 4-4-2 (that I think will be tried out) with Hargreaves and Scholes/Anderson works out well.

    Fabregas>Carrick
     
  13. GranCanMan

    GranCanMan Member

    Jan 12, 2007
    Manchester
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Even as a Man Utd fan I'd say Fabreagass was the better player. He has a better technique and has a neater close game. His touch is better than Carricks also.

    Carrick has come on leaps and bounds since he signed for Man Utd but Fabreagas is still only 19 I think and has the world at his feet......
     
  14. impalemeplz

    impalemeplz Member

    Jul 7, 2004
    Sydney
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    i dont buy this solid midfield arguement. ie, he needs gilberto next to him to be better then carrick. i think either way he is better then carrick. as a deep playmaker or in the attacking third as a touch player.
     
  15. Vermont Red

    Vermont Red Member

    Jun 10, 2003
    Brooklyn
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Carrick plays for United. Fabregas plays for Arsenal. Therefore, Carrick is better than Fabregas.
     
  16. Stud83

    Stud83 Member+

    Jun 1, 2005
    If half of you can't even spell his name, is he really that good?
    Exactly.
     
  17. Numquam Moribimur

    May 30, 2005
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Thats what my red tinted specs tell me !
     
  18. Val1

    Val1 Member+

    Arsenal
    Mar 12, 2004
    MD's Eastern Shore
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    I dunno, I've seen a lot of misspellings of OGS here on this forum, including one guy who spelled it "Gunner". Is that really your criteria?;)
     
  19. Vermont Red

    Vermont Red Member

    Jun 10, 2003
    Brooklyn
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If you can't change your font, should what you say even matter?
     
  20. johno

    johno Member+

    Jul 15, 2003
    in the wind
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    --other--
    Comparing them isn't fair as they are different players. Fabregas has a better game closer to the goal, that shows of smooth 1 touch skill but he's not a goal scorer. Carrick plays much further from goal and is as much of a goal threat as Fabregas. Carrick is not the player Fab is when played higher up the pitch, however, he can nominally be played with either the Gilbertos or Scholes of the premiership and he's played a critical role in a Premier League winning team. That's more than Fab has. I think Fab is a wonderful player who will only get better, I think Carrick is more versatile and a better overall player.

    Remember with Carrick's addition United goal possesion, goal scoring and defensive record all improved. As for those saying Carrick has looked bad next to Scholes this year,you're not looking at the entire picture. With the addition of Hargreaves, there's a DM, which means if Scholes sits in and around the centre circle Carrick has very little room left to play in. He's a DLP by nature, but he's been gradually moved towards the all-rounder CM. Hargreaves' inclusion means Carrick's role is made redundant because Scholes has chosen or been asked to, sit deep. Being worse at something (other than tackling) at Paul Scholes is highly forgiveable.

    IMO, Scholes would walk into the best teams in the world, with the exception of Milan who have 3 ideal players in Gattuso, Kaka and Pirlo.
     
  21. benni...

    benni... BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 23, 2004
    Chocolate City
    When your midfield partner is Flamini, then you have to get more credit than this...

    He's had a good number of great games with Flamini as his partner, uncluding a number of games against Chelsea.
     
  22. SirManchester

    SirManchester Member+

    Apr 14, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    I didn't respond to this because I thought it was anawkward comparison. I still think it is and I'm not quite sure why it was made. They are two very different players.

    Carrick is very much a specialty player. We can assess him by calling him a deep-lying playmaker whereas Fabregas isn't that easy to assess. He can play in a deeper role but also seems to look quite comfortable in a more attacking role. He's a much better rounded footballer but still requires molding whereas Carrick is clearly a sharper and more experienced player who knows exactly what he has to do. Since Cesc has such a variety of responsibilities at Arsenal, it will take more time for him to come into his own. I still think he's been doing a fantastic job and at the end of their careers, there's no doubt in my mind that he will be a higher praised footballer.
     
  23. Vermont Red

    Vermont Red Member

    Jun 10, 2003
    Brooklyn
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I, too, have no doubt that Fabregas will finish his career as a higher-praised player than Carrick. Carrick's game is much more subtle, plus he is one star of many in the United lineup. Fabregas plays closer to goal and plays on a team that features few stars.
     
  24. benni...

    benni... BigSoccer Supporter

    Nov 23, 2004
    Chocolate City
    Good post on the subject.
     
  25. billyireland

    billyireland Member+

    May 4, 2003
    Sydney, Australia
    Oi! Careful now.
     

Share This Page