The old Man Utd Thread

[FATEone]

That is exactly what I'm saying!

Then form an argument to show me I am, instead of saying nothing.

[oli]

I used to like you, until you ran off and tried to grass me up to the filth, so in your own words, stick it up your arse you cunt.

Is there a reason you're not banned yet?

[phresh]

You gonna say that shit again yeah. I don't dislike Man Utd, I dislike Man Utd fans like you who come across as arrogant, and don't say anything worthwhile. I wanted Liverpool to win the league this year because they deserved to, and it would have been good for English football. I'll be supporting Man Utd in the CL final as I always do when an English team plays in Europe.

I am fully aware that opinions differ. But to form an opinion you should be able to recognise facts, and also be willing to accept you may be wrong if someone can prove so, yet whenever someone does, you say 'oh leave it I don't wanna talk about it anymore.'

FATEONE = BENITEZ!!11!1one!!1

[phresh]

I can't see Scholes starting ahead of Giggs. Scholes did not look comfortable when Wigan were pressing against our midfield and as good as his passing is I would be more confident with Giggs in there, at least he still has some pace too.

[FATEone]

Is there a reason you're not banned yet?

How can I get banned for saying things that have been said to me in the past.

[FATEone]

I suppose, keeping the ball is his game. For me Scholes must start, maybe Giggs can come on for him later. Again, he's just great at keeping possession whilst still doing something positive with the ball. They could both start, with Anderson and Carrick either side of Scholes, and Rooney and Ronaldo either side of Berbatov. I love Tevez, but he will just run himself into the ground, perhaps he's an option for later in the game if it gets a bit too settled.

It's possible that Park could start instead of Berbatov, with Ronaldo playing through the middle instead. I'd probably prefer that, Park is less likely to shirk his defensive duties, plus our attack would have more pace overall. We've got so many great players, they can't all play a role I suppose. Would be odd if the likes of Giggs, Berbatov or Tevez didn't even get a sub's role though.

I'm not sure if he will, but I agree with you here. Scholes and Berbatov would offer the perfect outlets if you are to hit on the break, just for their ability to hold the ball so well.

[Trigg]

You gonna say that shit again yeah. I don't dislike Man Utd, I dislike Man Utd fans like you who come across as arrogant, and don't say anything worthwhile. I wanted Liverpool to win the league this year because they deserved to, and it would have been good for English football. I'll be supporting Man Utd in the CL final as I always do when an English team plays in Europe.

I am fully aware that opinions differ. But to form an opinion you should be able to recognise facts, and also be willing to accept you may be wrong if someone can prove so, yet whenever someone does, you say 'oh leave it I don't wanna talk about it anymore.'

In what way have I ever been arrogant?

The reason I generally don't want to carry on a discussion is if its going round in circles, once I said my piece thats it. I don't want to go in a big debate and provide evidence or stats or whatever you fucking want, as I to be honest I don't have the time to do so and even if I did have the time, couldn't be arsed, if I can be perfectly honest. Especially with some of the Liverpool fans and yourself, its like pulling teeth.

I will always recognise facts, but when it comes to football its generally not about facts is it? Its about views and opinions on what one sees or thinks. I'll gladly accept when I'm wrong, when I am wrong. I don't get massive kudos been right on some games forum ffs.

So if you can leave out the troll posts, and the sly digs at myself and get on with the discussions I'm sure it'll be fine.

[FATEone]

FATEONE = BENITEZ!!11!1one!!1

So why did they not deserve to, and why wouldn't it have been good for English football?

[Trigg]

I'm not sure if he will, but I agree with you here. Scholes and Berbatov would offer the perfect outlets if you are to hit on the break, just for their ability to hold the ball so well.

Thats true with Berbatov, but not Scholes I don't think. I think it'll be all a bit too quick in the midfield for Scholes, he struggled against Wigan recently like Phresh said.

[phresh]

So why did they not deserve to, and why wouldn't it have been good for English football?

Because they didn't get enough points and no team deserves anything that they were fully in control of and still failed to get.

Second point is a matter of opinion, partly as there are so few English players in the two teams (first 11 or so anyway) that it doesn't actually make any difference to English football. Non United fans will tell you it is good for someone else to win the league but there are no 'facts' as you so love to back up that it would actually be better for somebody else to win.

[FATEone]

Thats true with Berbatov, but not Scholes I don't think. I think it'll be all a bit too quick in the midfield for Scholes, he struggled against Wigan recently like Phresh said.

I didn't see the Wigan game, but Scholes is world class and has so much experience, as you know, and quality shines when it really matters. I'm not sure that he'll start, probably not, but he would be in my starting 11. He can create something from nothing and is excellent at holding onto the ball and bringing others into play.

[davejm]

I wanted Liverpool to win the league this year because they deserved to, and it would have been good for English football.

Haha, that old chestnut. What does that actually mean? They don't have a strong enough squad to win the league, so on that basis they don't deserve it at all. On their day they've shown that they can perform as well (if not better) than Utd, but over the course of a league season their squad has shown it's not of the same calibre.

Utd deserve it because the results have shown they've got the best squad. Liverpool have been good this season, but there have been too many games where they'd have picked up a better result if they had more quality in the squad.

[Trigg]

So why did they not deserve to, and why wouldn't it have been good for English football?

Fate, they didn't deserve too because they didn't finish with the most points, its as simple as that. The saying might be cliched, but the table doesn't lie springs to mind. I'm sure the majority of Liverpool fans will accept that they fell short this year.

Is it not good for English football that Utd have won the title?

[Trigg]

I didn't see the Wigan game, but Scholes is world class and has so much experience, as you know, and quality shines when it really matters. I'm not sure that he'll start, probably not, but he would be in my starting 11. He can create something from nothing and is excellent at holding onto the ball and bringing others into play.

He is brilliant, but his form as been patchy at best this year. I think with the way we're likely to play, I reckon Giggs might be better suited, thats all.

I obviously won't be disappointed if he starts, I just don't think he will.

[FATEone]

Because they didn't get enough points and no team deserves anything that they were fully in control of and still failed to get.

Second point is a matter of opinion, partly as there are so few English players in the two teams (first 11 or so anyway) that it doesn't actually make any difference to English football. Non United fans will tell you it sis good for someone else to win the league but there are no 'facts' as you so love to back up that it would actually be better for somebody else to win.

There doesn't need to be facts to know that someone else winning it means more competition, which means a better, more exciting league, that attracts even more viewers from all over the world and means more money for ALL teams in England.

Their performances on the pitch deserved to win it, they were unlucky this season, and you were lucky on a few occasions. Can you not admit that?

Of course Utd's experience carried them through in the end, but they weren't wowing anybody, well maybe those bandits on Sky Sports, but not anyone who can think for themselves.

[JLR]

GIVE ME FACTS FATE.

I see no facts. Come on boffins. FACTS!

[FATEone]

Haha, that old chestnut. What does that actually mean? They don't have a strong enough squad to win the league, so on that basis they don't deserve it at all. On their day they've shown that they can perform as well (if not better) than Utd, but over the course of a league season their squad has shown it's not of the same calibre.

Utd deserve it because the results have shown they've got the best squad. Liverpool have been good this season, but there have been too many games where they'd have picked up a better result if they had more quality in the squad.

You don't think Liverpool's squad is of the same calibre!?

Utd can put Bearbatov on the bench, that's where the difference lies regarding the Squads.

Gerrard and Torres started 12 games together this year. Do you not think if they had both stayed fit, things would have been different?

[Trigg]

There doesn't need to be facts to know that someone else winning it means more competition, which means a better, more exciting league, that attracts even more viewers from all over the world and means more money for ALL teams in England.

Their performances on the pitch deserved to win it, they were unlucky this season, and you were lucky on a few occasions. Can you not admit that?

Of course Utd's experience carried them through in the end, but they weren't wowing anybody, well maybe those bandits on Sky Sports, but not anyone who can think for themselves.

Both teams had both good and bad luck over the course of the season, be it penalties, late goals or even sendings off, Liverpool played 10 games this year in the league where the opposition went down to 10 men, now thats lucky!

They may well have had some good performances on the pitch, but its about being consistent and Liverpool weren't at various points through the season, drawing 11 games for instance just isn't good enough no matter which way you try and look at it.

They didn't deserve to win the league for the simple fact they didn't amass the most points over the course of the season. They took us close and credit where credit is due, but to think they actually deserved it and Man Utd didn't is bloody daft in my opinion.

[FATEone]

GIVE ME FACTS FATE.

I see no facts. Come on boffins. FACTS!

Tell me what you want the facts for. I'll go find 'em for ya.

[davejm]

Their performances on the pitch deserved to win it, they were unlucky this season, and you were lucky on a few occasions. Can you not admit that?

Of course Utd's experience carried them through in the end, but they weren't wowing anybody, well maybe those bandits on Sky Sports, but not anyone who can think for themselves.

Both teams had inconsistent spells during the reason. I personally think Utd have shown more quality in the tight games; games where a bit of extra quality has got them the points. As I said before, if Liverpool had a stronger squad I think they'd have scraped a few more points in games where they weren't on their game. Utd always seem to have another gear, which they sometimes click into at the end of games that are nip-and-tuck. On the otherhand, I think the Liverpool players have individually been more consistent and have played to their potential, but their squad overall isn't as strong and hasn't been able to grind out the results when not performing well.

[FATEone]

Both teams had both good and bad luck over the course of the season, be it penalties, late goals or even sendings off, Liverpool played 10 games this year in the league where the opposition went down to 10 men, now thats lucky!

They may well have had some good performances on the pitch, but its about being consistent and Liverpool weren't at various points through the season, drawing 11 games for instance just isn't good enough no matter which way you try and look at it.

They didn't deserve to win the league for the simple fact they didn't amass the most points over the course of the season. They took us close and credit where credit is due, but to think they actually deserved it and Man Utd didn't is bloody daft in my opinion.

I never said ManUtd didn't.

The fact is if you have 27 shots in a game, hitting the woodwork several times, and the other team has 2 and you draw that's unlucky.

Scoring in the last couple of minutes from some scrappy shit is lucky.

If the players sent off were sent off wrongly, yeah that's lucky, but if they weren't how can that be lucky?

[phresh]

There doesn't need to be facts to know that someone else winning it means more competition, which means a better, more exciting league, that attracts even more viewers from all over the world and means more money for ALL teams in England.

Their performances on the pitch deserved to win it, they were unlucky this season, and you were lucky on a few occasions. Can you not admit that?

Of course Utd's experience carried them through in the end, but they weren't wowing anybody, well maybe those bandits on Sky Sports, but not anyone who can think for themselves.

But why does it mean more competition and more viewers? United are the most supported team in the World so by default them winning probably means more viewers than if they don't. The league was competitive, same as last year (in fact less so in that it ended a weekend earlier). Who wins a league has absolutely nothing to do with the level of competition, if Liverpool won the league by 15 points that would have been less competitive but i'm sure you wouldn't have posted the above were that the situation.

So Liverpools performance agasint Middlesborough was deserving of a league title? 7 or so home draws deserve a league title? Performances don't win you anything, ask Arsenal fans. Both clubs were lucky at times but unless you were to somehow re calculate every single game, correcting every single wrong decision it means nothing.

[FATEone]

Both teams had inconsistent spells during the reason. I personally think Utd have shown more quality in the tight games; games where a bit of extra quality has got them the points. As I said before, if Liverpool had a stronger squad I think they'd have scraped a few more points in games where they weren't on their game. Utd always seem to have another gear, which they sometimes click into at the end of games that are nip-and-tuck. On the otherhand, I think the Liverpool players have individually been more consistent and have played to their potential, but their squad overall isn't as strong and hasn't been able to grind out the results when not performing well.

They were grinding 'em out at the beginning of the season in quite a few games, so that doesn't hold true.

I agree though that Utd have the ability to switch it on for 10/15 minutes and grab two goals, definately. It's to be applauded in one way I suppose, but I know what I'd rather spend money on watching.

[Trigg]

Gerrard and Torres started 12 games together this year. Do you not think if they had both stayed fit, things would have been different?

What if...

What if it's actually down to you, Rafa?

What if Ole Gunnar Solskjaer had flicked out a right boot only to lift the ball high over the bar against Bayern Munich in injury time?

What if Leeds United had refused to sell Eric Cantona on that fateful day in November 1992?

What if Mark Robins had failed to save his manager's job by scoring in a third-round FA Cup tie at Nottingham Forest 19 years ago?

Rafa Benitez

Liverpool boss Rafa Benitez: he's wrong to shift the blame

The answer in each case is that Sir Alex Ferguson would not be where he is today, preparing to collect his third successive title before heading to Rome, while he looks proudly down from his managerial throne on Rafa Benitez and the rest.

Life is full of 'what ifs?' Everyone can write an alternative history of how things could have been very different, if only.

Never more so than in sport, where fractions can be the difference between everlasting glory and enduring ignominy.

But Benitez, perhaps feeling a sudden twinge from his stigmata again, decided to play the martyr as he declared a malign fate had somehow conspired against his club this season.

Anfield's boss claimed he could have won the Premier League ahead of Manchester United if only Steven Gerrard and Fernando Torres had been fit on a few more occasions this season.

He argued that this was the real reason Liverpool now find themselves heading towards their 20th year without the title they so desperately crave.

It's a seductive thought and one that will even seem valid to many of the Kop faithful. Gerrard is a powerhouse and a true matchwinner. Torres is a sublime striker.

There is no doubting their worth and the absence of the duo has clearly had some effect on the season.

But so what? By that logic, my aunt would have been my uncle had she been born with a different set of genitalia.

Like many managers, Benitez often comes out with these pet theories to distract from his own shortcomings, dressing up excuses and peddling them as the 'facts' he professes to live by.

Every season is a maze of twists and turns, of good and bad luck, of wise decisions and errors. Every manager is beset by injury problems.

Rather than ask what might have happened if Gerrard and Torres were fit, Benitez would have been better served addressing other questions, although I suspect he might not like the answers.

Questions like: What if he'd been braver and played more positive football when Liverpool had a lead at the top of the table and United were away in Japan?

What if he hadn't drawn 11 games and allowed United to seize back control?

What if he'd actually used Robbie Keane properly during Torres's absence, instead of shunting him out the door?

What if he'd kept his counsel instead of launching that distracting attack on Ferguson?

What if he had played key players more often instead of leaving them on the bench?

What if he had bought more wisely and gathered together a squad better equipped for the challenges of a long season

I'd imagine his rivals could easily ask pertinent questions of their own.

What if United had started the season with a completely fit Cristiano Ronaldo and Wayne Rooney? Would the title race have been over long ago?

[phresh]

Tell me what you want the facts for. I'll go find 'em for ya.

How someone else winning will bring in extra viewers? How it will make it more competitive? I don't expect you to get them of course, like I don''t expect to find references for everything I post.

I never said ManUtd didn't.

The fact is if you have 27 shots in a game, hitting the woodwork several times, and the other team has 2 and you draw that's unlucky.

Scoring in the last couple of minutes from some scrappy shit is lucky.

If the players sent off were sent off wrongly, yeah that's lucky, but if they weren't how can that be lucky?

That is completely contradictory. Hitting the woodwork or missing loads of shots isn't unlucky at all, it's bad finishing. I've mentioned it before but football fans use of the term 'luck' is like a goddamn plague.

[FATEone]

But why does it mean more competition and more viewers? United are the most supported team in the World so by default them winning probably means more viewers than if they don't. The league was competitive, same as last year (in fact less so in that it ended a weekend earlier). Who wins a league has absolutely nothing to do with the level of competition, if Liverpool won the league by 15 points that would have been less competitive but i'm sure you wouldn't have posted the above were that the situation.

So Liverpools performance agasint Middlesborough was deserving of a league title? 7 or so home draws deserve a league title? Performances don't win you anything, ask Arsenal fans. Both clubs were lucky at times but unless you were to somehow re calculate every single game, correcting every single wrong decision it means nothing.

Well it's easy to say that shit when you've won the league.

When Utd won the league for the first time again after Chelsea were winning it they did it with exciting, devestating performances. They were smashing teams up. Last year was the Ronaldo show, and this year you've ground out the results. I prefered it when you were smashing teams up.

[JLR]

There doesn't need to be facts to know that someone else winning it means more competition, which means a better, more exciting league, that attracts even more viewers from all over the world and means more money for ALL teams in England.

Their performances on the pitch deserved to win it, they were unlucky this season, and you were lucky on a few occasions. Can you not admit that?

Of course Utd's experience carried them through in the end, but they weren't wowing anybody, well maybe those bandits on Sky Sports, but not anyone who can think for themselves.

I would like full analysis of where United were lucky, and where Liverpool were unlucky. I then want you to show me where United were unlucky, and where Liverpool were lucky.

We'll then formulate some kind of luck table to show who should have really won.

[FATEone]

How someone else winning will bring in extra viewers? How it will make it more competitive? I don't expect you to get them of course, like I don''t expect to find references for everything I post.

That is completely contradictory. Hitting the woodwork or missing loads of shots isn't unlucky at all, it's bad finishing. I've mentiond it before but football fans use of the term 'luck' is like a goddamn plague.

How many times were keepers having 'one of those days when your saving everything' against them this year. Quite a few. When Utd hit the woodwork, I'm guessing you go something like 'OOOOOOH! Unlucky Dimi you sexy bastard' or do you go 'Berbatov you streak of piss that's poor finishing!'

[phresh]

WTF. Firstly your first point has nothing to do with luck as that is just 'having a good game' and for your second point yes, I would say how the fuck did you miss that. Surely if you are unlucky to just miss then you are lucky if it just goes in? Oh no, the latter is a good finish, which surely makes the former a bad finish.

To clear up my opinion, I would only consider lucky, things that are completely out of the players control i.e multiple rebounds, bad decisions, shitty pitch etc. Hitting the woodwork does not classify as unlucky whichever way you look at it.

[Majora]

And while we were smashing teams up we were getting outclassed in Europe year after year. I don't think any United fan is going to say this was a vintage season in terms of performances but the stats don't lie. We were an FA Cup match away from making the final in all three major cups and winning the league.

To be honest saying Liverpool deserved to win it because they played more exciting stuff sounds like something you'd hear coming from Arsene Wenger and it strikes me as pretty rich that Liverpool fans are suddenly using it as a reason that they deserve to win the league when they've happily ground out some absolute turgid shite under Benitez, and the moment they get a few months good form it's suddenly all about the performances.