The problem now with Man U and Moyes is the fans and Moyes himself.
Unlike Liverpool Man U do not have time to build under a new manager. Liverpool have been out of the top 4 for a few years now so could afford to allow Rodgers to build a team. Moyes does not have that luxury. If he gets top 4 he would have done well but bar a collapse by Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal and City and even Spurs thats not gonna happen.
Moyes is not the right manager NOW for United. Pep and Mourinho were available when SAF decided to leave and would have been a better manager to increase morale and get players in.
In the summer Moyes went for players he knew. Baines and Fellaini. The latter only coming.
He did get Mata but only because no one else bid.
Moyes is wrong. People moan at us regarding Wenger....but he has got us top 4 on a minimal budget.....Moyes can't keep Man U in the top 4 with a sizable budget...
I do not like managers being sacked. But to get back Man U will have to.
If they finish outside the topv4 or even Europe. The Man U name might still attract players but many want a manager they respect as well......
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Utd and Arsenal, (and the others) are now have not clubs.
--------------------------------------------------------
Utd have just spent nearly £40 million on Juan Mata and as current Champions of England I find it hard to see how they can be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he was essentially, like lukaku, moses and numerous other top players disposed of as scraps from the luxurious feast of Chelsea players. Ba was for example a star player at Newcastle and nearly all other EPL clubs would have him playing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mata wasn't disposed of as scrap. Jose has acknowledged many times that Mata is an outstanding player but he just didn't fit into how Jose wants the team to play.
That's just the reality of football just in the same way that Kagawa (another expensive Man Utd addition) hasn't been able to fit into the current system at Utd.
Either way Utd paid nearly £40 million for Mata just as Arsenal paid £40 million for Ozil and any teams flashing that kind of cash on any single player cannot be described as "have nots".
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by TheWhiteWall68 (U17633)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by TheWhiteWall68 (U17633)
posted 27 seconds ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 3 minutes ago
We don't need owners with deeper pockets we need management players and staff that can maintain the club culture!
----------------
That goes against those holding up the CFC managerial merrygoround as an acceptable strategy of success.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure Admin likes usGetting wummed
Can I filter you Admin?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not at all, nothing like that. But most other teams just can't come close to matching City and CFC and it appears many fans of other teams really struggle to accept the implications of that harsh reality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hasn't there always been the haves and have nots in world football? Powerful clubs signing the best talent and dominating their leagues has always been true with an economic advantage over the rest. Just look at the general last 8 of every CL over the last 15 years has generally been the usual suspects. Now the the status quo had been shaken, they don't like it, hence FFP, which only goes to protect those established clubs and doesn't help others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Utd and Arsenal, (and the others) are now have not clubs. Changing the manager will never fix that situation. The only glimmer is doing a LFC or Utd and nabbing a prospect who turns into a ronaldo or saurez and holding him for a season or two until you need to sell them to a Have club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can United and Arsenal be considered have not's, under FFP they are amongst the 4 highest earning clubs in the country and therefore cans spend more than any other club in the country, they may chose not to but they are definitely haves.
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Utd and Arsenal, (and the others) are now have not clubs.
--------------------------------------------------------
Utd have just spent nearly £40 million on Juan Mata and as current Champions of England I find it hard to see how they can be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he was essentially, like lukaku, moses and numerous other top players disposed of as scraps from the luxurious feast of Chelsea players. Ba was for example a star player at Newcastle and nearly all other EPL clubs would have him playing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mata wasn't disposed of as scrap. Jose has acknowledged many times that Mata is an outstanding player but he just didn't fit into how Jose wants the team to play.
That's just the reality of football just in the same way that Kagawa (another expensive Man Utd addition) hasn't been able to fit into the current system at Utd.
Either way Utd paid nearly £40 million for Mata just as Arsenal paid £40 million for Ozil and any teams flashing that kind of cash on any single player cannot be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is all relative. The fact CFC had Oscar keeping Mata out the side is testament to the fact that both Arsenal and Utd are "have nots" in comparison.
And Young was keeping out Kagawa
Chameleon, there are Chelsea fans I have debated with on this site, who think Chelsea should have won more based on the resources. I cannot see why it is unreasonable to think that. The fact Man Utd won more titles than Chelsea after Abramovich's arrival I don't think would have happened if Mourinho had remained.
JFDI if FFP was worth anything then i would wholeheartedly agree.
But it didn't matter to anyone last season cause Utd won the League
FFP was designed by the haves to keep the have nots out of their cartel.
comment by TheChameleonProject (U1847)
posted 10 seconds ago
But it didn't matter to anyone last season cause Utd won the League
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Utd were punching well above their weight and fortunate enough to have one of the greatest ever managers managing them. Even with that it was never gonna hold up indefinitely.
Utd won more Prems.
Same amount of CL's
Gunner, there are Chelsea fans that disagree as well, you can chose which side you want to place your money on but lets face it, the opinion will always be divided on most club related points amongst fans so those debates mean nothing.
comment by Damo69 _Here's to you Vincent Kompany city miss you more than you will know (U1004)
posted 30 seconds ago
FFP was designed by the haves to keep the have nots out of their cartel.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah ive always found it strange that. Essentially dictating that clubs owners cant speculate and invest to topple established dominance. As i say it can leads to have becoming have nots. Which it appears difficult to swallow for many fans.
comment by Lambsy (U2861)
posted 33 minutes ago
So your basically saying you need a new manager, new players and new backroom staff, all without a billionaire owner.
...............................................................................................
No, what I'm saying is we needed a new manager because Sir Alex was retiring, however the backroom staff and all behind the scenes should have remained the same! Continuity is what was needed!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lambsy
I'm starting to think fans and pundits are just using that argument as another cliched stick to beat Moyes with
What continuity would it keep? Moyes isn;t going to come in and ask them how to manage or coach is he? It would still have been Moyes' ways and the potential for conflict in the club would have been greater.
The second point I want to make on that is more simple.
we may have won last season, but let's not pretend it was anything like an entertaining brand of football. It was dull, pedestrian rubbish. We had debate after debate about how United crawled to wins playing utter dross. We bemoaned the fact we didn;t play well for 90 minutes in a single game all season.
I didn't particularly want continuity if it meant carrying on the dull football we were playing.
For me, people have short memories about last season on how we were playing
Rene, Mike, Eric. All Fergie's men.
Moyes was never gonna be felt in the same way by them, particularly if new philosophies were brought in that they didn't agree with
I've never gone on about changing the backroom staff because it's pretty par for the course when a new manager is appointed and if people think it's a bad idea to have Fergie in the background, then I don;t see how having his loyal coaches still there too can be a good idea either, particularly given the terrible football served up last season. 11 point win or no 11 point win.
Whether the previous coaches have been replaced by the right coaches is another matter though. Next season will hopefully start to answer that question
The Palace away game gave me some hope from a tactical point of view despite the opposition
Punching above their weight.
They are the biggest club in the world !
Not many clubs got a thing at Old Trafford. Home games were bankers
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 7 minutes ago
JFDI if FFP was worth anything then i would wholeheartedly agree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is worth little but the principles are there, it has not failed yet and until I does in no way can United or Arsenal be described as have nots, that is an insult to every club in the premiership that sit below them.
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Utd and Arsenal, (and the others) are now have not clubs.
--------------------------------------------------------
Utd have just spent nearly £40 million on Juan Mata and as current Champions of England I find it hard to see how they can be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he was essentially, like lukaku, moses and numerous other top players disposed of as scraps from the luxurious feast of Chelsea players. Ba was for example a star player at Newcastle and nearly all other EPL clubs would have him playing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mata wasn't disposed of as scrap. Jose has acknowledged many times that Mata is an outstanding player but he just didn't fit into how Jose wants the team to play.
That's just the reality of football just in the same way that Kagawa (another expensive Man Utd addition) hasn't been able to fit into the current system at Utd.
Either way Utd paid nearly £40 million for Mata just as Arsenal paid £40 million for Ozil and any teams flashing that kind of cash on any single player cannot be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is all relative. The fact CFC had Oscar keeping Mata out the side is testament to the fact that both Arsenal and Utd are "have nots" in comparison.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is that testament ? Jose simply decided that Oscar was better suited to playing the number 10 role than Mata. Last season Mata and Oscar were playing together.
I could make the same comparison with Kagawa, an expensive player who can't get into the Utd side because of other players like Rooney.
It proves nothing really.
I know that JFDI, but Chameleon seemed to be inferring ( apologies if wrong) no Chelsea fans would concede they had underachieved whereas I have debated with some, who think that.
We have fans on here who would still rather have AVB
FFP is awful
It's really only good for the clubs who currently have big sponsorship deals / revenue
everyone else is doomed to permanent 'not haves' status
comment by GUNNERBEGOOD (U10646)
posted 1 minute ago
I know that JFDI, but Chameleon seemed to be inferring ( apologies if wrong) no Chelsea fans would concede they had underachieved whereas I have debated with some, who think that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I understand, but I would tend to agree with TCP though I would caveat it by the fact that the sort of fan that seems to think we have underachieved is the opposite sort of fan from me, the kind that think we will win everything at the start of each season and jump on the back of any player they see fit because they aren't putting in fifa 14 PS4 type performances week after week.
But then I would be being a little harsh.
I think there are an awful lot of people who simply don't understand FFP
Long term only 5 English clubs can benefit from it
City Utd Liverpool Chelsea and Arsenal
That's it,no one else
For any of the other clubs to even contemplate voting it in is simply mind boggling
Well I was quite happy with the football last season. To gain a seamless transition we needed to just change the manager, and the manager needed to fit in. If we wanted change then that's what we've got and we'll just have to put up with it!
I'd have gone for continuity myself.
comment by GUNNERBEGOOD (U10646)
posted 3 minutes ago
I know that JFDI, but Chameleon seemed to be inferring ( apologies if wrong) no Chelsea fans would concede they had underachieved whereas I have debated with some, who think that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gunner if Chelsea have underachieved in recent seasons having won 9 major trophies in 9 seasons then what does that imply for Arsenal ?
The less said the better I think.
Admitedly it could be argued that Chelsea should have won more PL titles in that time but constantly changing manager was a major handicap combined with the fact that Fergie had such a stranglehold over the Premiership. He knew all the tricks of the trade.
Not to mention City's emergence in recent years.
I could make the same comparison with Kagawa, an expensive player who can't get into the Utd side because of other players like Rooney.
--------------------------------
A lazy asumption
Kagawa wasn't expensive
Torres cost Chelsea nearly 4 times as much we paid for Kagawa. Andy Carrol cost Liverpool 3 times as much.
Fergie hardly utilised Kagawa correctly because Fergie played 4411 with tje number 10 expected to do a marathon to assist in an area of the pitch United were weak in. The central Midfield
Fergie hardly utilised Kagawa at 10, even when Rooney was missing.
Reports are saying the Kagawa issue is being addressed in training with Kagawa predominantly training in central midfield
Sign in if you want to comment
I laugh when i keep hearing.......
Page 4 of 8
6 | 7 | 8
posted on 4/3/14
The problem now with Man U and Moyes is the fans and Moyes himself.
Unlike Liverpool Man U do not have time to build under a new manager. Liverpool have been out of the top 4 for a few years now so could afford to allow Rodgers to build a team. Moyes does not have that luxury. If he gets top 4 he would have done well but bar a collapse by Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal and City and even Spurs thats not gonna happen.
Moyes is not the right manager NOW for United. Pep and Mourinho were available when SAF decided to leave and would have been a better manager to increase morale and get players in.
In the summer Moyes went for players he knew. Baines and Fellaini. The latter only coming.
He did get Mata but only because no one else bid.
Moyes is wrong. People moan at us regarding Wenger....but he has got us top 4 on a minimal budget.....Moyes can't keep Man U in the top 4 with a sizable budget...
I do not like managers being sacked. But to get back Man U will have to.
If they finish outside the topv4 or even Europe. The Man U name might still attract players but many want a manager they respect as well......
posted on 4/3/14
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Utd and Arsenal, (and the others) are now have not clubs.
--------------------------------------------------------
Utd have just spent nearly £40 million on Juan Mata and as current Champions of England I find it hard to see how they can be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he was essentially, like lukaku, moses and numerous other top players disposed of as scraps from the luxurious feast of Chelsea players. Ba was for example a star player at Newcastle and nearly all other EPL clubs would have him playing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mata wasn't disposed of as scrap. Jose has acknowledged many times that Mata is an outstanding player but he just didn't fit into how Jose wants the team to play.
That's just the reality of football just in the same way that Kagawa (another expensive Man Utd addition) hasn't been able to fit into the current system at Utd.
Either way Utd paid nearly £40 million for Mata just as Arsenal paid £40 million for Ozil and any teams flashing that kind of cash on any single player cannot be described as "have nots".
posted on 4/3/14
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by TheWhiteWall68 (U17633)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by TheWhiteWall68 (U17633)
posted 27 seconds ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 3 minutes ago
We don't need owners with deeper pockets we need management players and staff that can maintain the club culture!
----------------
That goes against those holding up the CFC managerial merrygoround as an acceptable strategy of success.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure Admin likes usGetting wummed
Can I filter you Admin?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not at all, nothing like that. But most other teams just can't come close to matching City and CFC and it appears many fans of other teams really struggle to accept the implications of that harsh reality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hasn't there always been the haves and have nots in world football? Powerful clubs signing the best talent and dominating their leagues has always been true with an economic advantage over the rest. Just look at the general last 8 of every CL over the last 15 years has generally been the usual suspects. Now the the status quo had been shaken, they don't like it, hence FFP, which only goes to protect those established clubs and doesn't help others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Utd and Arsenal, (and the others) are now have not clubs. Changing the manager will never fix that situation. The only glimmer is doing a LFC or Utd and nabbing a prospect who turns into a ronaldo or saurez and holding him for a season or two until you need to sell them to a Have club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can United and Arsenal be considered have not's, under FFP they are amongst the 4 highest earning clubs in the country and therefore cans spend more than any other club in the country, they may chose not to but they are definitely haves.
posted on 4/3/14
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Utd and Arsenal, (and the others) are now have not clubs.
--------------------------------------------------------
Utd have just spent nearly £40 million on Juan Mata and as current Champions of England I find it hard to see how they can be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he was essentially, like lukaku, moses and numerous other top players disposed of as scraps from the luxurious feast of Chelsea players. Ba was for example a star player at Newcastle and nearly all other EPL clubs would have him playing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mata wasn't disposed of as scrap. Jose has acknowledged many times that Mata is an outstanding player but he just didn't fit into how Jose wants the team to play.
That's just the reality of football just in the same way that Kagawa (another expensive Man Utd addition) hasn't been able to fit into the current system at Utd.
Either way Utd paid nearly £40 million for Mata just as Arsenal paid £40 million for Ozil and any teams flashing that kind of cash on any single player cannot be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is all relative. The fact CFC had Oscar keeping Mata out the side is testament to the fact that both Arsenal and Utd are "have nots" in comparison.
posted on 4/3/14
And Young was keeping out Kagawa
posted on 4/3/14
Chameleon, there are Chelsea fans I have debated with on this site, who think Chelsea should have won more based on the resources. I cannot see why it is unreasonable to think that. The fact Man Utd won more titles than Chelsea after Abramovich's arrival I don't think would have happened if Mourinho had remained.
posted on 4/3/14
JFDI if FFP was worth anything then i would wholeheartedly agree.
posted on 4/3/14
But it didn't matter to anyone last season cause Utd won the League
posted on 4/3/14
FFP was designed by the haves to keep the have nots out of their cartel.
posted on 4/3/14
comment by TheChameleonProject (U1847)
posted 10 seconds ago
But it didn't matter to anyone last season cause Utd won the League
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Utd were punching well above their weight and fortunate enough to have one of the greatest ever managers managing them. Even with that it was never gonna hold up indefinitely.
posted on 4/3/14
Utd won more Prems.
Same amount of CL's
posted on 4/3/14
Gunner, there are Chelsea fans that disagree as well, you can chose which side you want to place your money on but lets face it, the opinion will always be divided on most club related points amongst fans so those debates mean nothing.
posted on 4/3/14
comment by Damo69 _Here's to you Vincent Kompany city miss you more than you will know (U1004)
posted 30 seconds ago
FFP was designed by the haves to keep the have nots out of their cartel.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah ive always found it strange that. Essentially dictating that clubs owners cant speculate and invest to topple established dominance. As i say it can leads to have becoming have nots. Which it appears difficult to swallow for many fans.
posted on 4/3/14
comment by Lambsy (U2861)
posted 33 minutes ago
So your basically saying you need a new manager, new players and new backroom staff, all without a billionaire owner.
...............................................................................................
No, what I'm saying is we needed a new manager because Sir Alex was retiring, however the backroom staff and all behind the scenes should have remained the same! Continuity is what was needed!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lambsy
I'm starting to think fans and pundits are just using that argument as another cliched stick to beat Moyes with
What continuity would it keep? Moyes isn;t going to come in and ask them how to manage or coach is he? It would still have been Moyes' ways and the potential for conflict in the club would have been greater.
The second point I want to make on that is more simple.
we may have won last season, but let's not pretend it was anything like an entertaining brand of football. It was dull, pedestrian rubbish. We had debate after debate about how United crawled to wins playing utter dross. We bemoaned the fact we didn;t play well for 90 minutes in a single game all season.
I didn't particularly want continuity if it meant carrying on the dull football we were playing.
For me, people have short memories about last season on how we were playing
Rene, Mike, Eric. All Fergie's men.
Moyes was never gonna be felt in the same way by them, particularly if new philosophies were brought in that they didn't agree with
I've never gone on about changing the backroom staff because it's pretty par for the course when a new manager is appointed and if people think it's a bad idea to have Fergie in the background, then I don;t see how having his loyal coaches still there too can be a good idea either, particularly given the terrible football served up last season. 11 point win or no 11 point win.
Whether the previous coaches have been replaced by the right coaches is another matter though. Next season will hopefully start to answer that question
The Palace away game gave me some hope from a tactical point of view despite the opposition
posted on 4/3/14
Punching above their weight.
They are the biggest club in the world !
Not many clubs got a thing at Old Trafford. Home games were bankers
posted on 4/3/14
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 7 minutes ago
JFDI if FFP was worth anything then i would wholeheartedly agree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is worth little but the principles are there, it has not failed yet and until I does in no way can United or Arsenal be described as have nots, that is an insult to every club in the premiership that sit below them.
posted on 4/3/14
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Utd and Arsenal, (and the others) are now have not clubs.
--------------------------------------------------------
Utd have just spent nearly £40 million on Juan Mata and as current Champions of England I find it hard to see how they can be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he was essentially, like lukaku, moses and numerous other top players disposed of as scraps from the luxurious feast of Chelsea players. Ba was for example a star player at Newcastle and nearly all other EPL clubs would have him playing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mata wasn't disposed of as scrap. Jose has acknowledged many times that Mata is an outstanding player but he just didn't fit into how Jose wants the team to play.
That's just the reality of football just in the same way that Kagawa (another expensive Man Utd addition) hasn't been able to fit into the current system at Utd.
Either way Utd paid nearly £40 million for Mata just as Arsenal paid £40 million for Ozil and any teams flashing that kind of cash on any single player cannot be described as "have nots".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is all relative. The fact CFC had Oscar keeping Mata out the side is testament to the fact that both Arsenal and Utd are "have nots" in comparison.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is that testament ? Jose simply decided that Oscar was better suited to playing the number 10 role than Mata. Last season Mata and Oscar were playing together.
I could make the same comparison with Kagawa, an expensive player who can't get into the Utd side because of other players like Rooney.
It proves nothing really.
posted on 4/3/14
I know that JFDI, but Chameleon seemed to be inferring ( apologies if wrong) no Chelsea fans would concede they had underachieved whereas I have debated with some, who think that.
posted on 4/3/14
We have fans on here who would still rather have AVB
posted on 4/3/14
FFP is awful
It's really only good for the clubs who currently have big sponsorship deals / revenue
everyone else is doomed to permanent 'not haves' status
posted on 4/3/14
comment by GUNNERBEGOOD (U10646)
posted 1 minute ago
I know that JFDI, but Chameleon seemed to be inferring ( apologies if wrong) no Chelsea fans would concede they had underachieved whereas I have debated with some, who think that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I understand, but I would tend to agree with TCP though I would caveat it by the fact that the sort of fan that seems to think we have underachieved is the opposite sort of fan from me, the kind that think we will win everything at the start of each season and jump on the back of any player they see fit because they aren't putting in fifa 14 PS4 type performances week after week.
But then I would be being a little harsh.
posted on 4/3/14
I think there are an awful lot of people who simply don't understand FFP
Long term only 5 English clubs can benefit from it
City Utd Liverpool Chelsea and Arsenal
That's it,no one else
For any of the other clubs to even contemplate voting it in is simply mind boggling
posted on 4/3/14
Well I was quite happy with the football last season. To gain a seamless transition we needed to just change the manager, and the manager needed to fit in. If we wanted change then that's what we've got and we'll just have to put up with it!
I'd have gone for continuity myself.
posted on 4/3/14
comment by GUNNERBEGOOD (U10646)
posted 3 minutes ago
I know that JFDI, but Chameleon seemed to be inferring ( apologies if wrong) no Chelsea fans would concede they had underachieved whereas I have debated with some, who think that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gunner if Chelsea have underachieved in recent seasons having won 9 major trophies in 9 seasons then what does that imply for Arsenal ?
The less said the better I think.
Admitedly it could be argued that Chelsea should have won more PL titles in that time but constantly changing manager was a major handicap combined with the fact that Fergie had such a stranglehold over the Premiership. He knew all the tricks of the trade.
Not to mention City's emergence in recent years.
posted on 4/3/14
I could make the same comparison with Kagawa, an expensive player who can't get into the Utd side because of other players like Rooney.
--------------------------------
A lazy asumption
Kagawa wasn't expensive
Torres cost Chelsea nearly 4 times as much we paid for Kagawa. Andy Carrol cost Liverpool 3 times as much.
Fergie hardly utilised Kagawa correctly because Fergie played 4411 with tje number 10 expected to do a marathon to assist in an area of the pitch United were weak in. The central Midfield
Fergie hardly utilised Kagawa at 10, even when Rooney was missing.
Reports are saying the Kagawa issue is being addressed in training with Kagawa predominantly training in central midfield
Page 4 of 8
6 | 7 | 8