|
Post by Chris on Nov 5, 2007 14:12:00 GMT
I look at this as positive. We got a 2-2 draw against the best team in the league so far this season without playing brilliant. Its a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by Red Yank on Nov 5, 2007 14:37:39 GMT
Hargreaves gives short shrift to Arsenal's beautiful gameArsenal had sprinted to the Premier League's summit this season propelled by a mesmerising brand of attacking football, but Manchester United departed London on Saturday encouraged that they had stamped their own authority on the title race. "I don't think they created a clearcut chance in the first half," said Owen Hargreaves. "So we did a good job controlling their so-called 'beautiful football'." The comment revealed the irritation in the United set-up at the plaudits lavished on Arsenal's free-flowing style. United have entranced as thrillingly this season, their attacking thrust more ruthless at times than that of Arsène Wenger's young charges. Indeed, the reigning champions' more streetwise approach, born of their greater experience than the current leaders can boast, could yet prove decisive in determining the destiny of the title. "Arsenal had a lot of possession today, but in the first half they never got into a position where they threatened the goal, besides the header from [William] Gallas which was a set piece," said Hargreaves. "They had plenty of possession, but were never threatening and football's about winning games and scoring goals. Both of our goals were beautiful pieces of play, while theirs were a bit scrappy and probably not typical of the way Arsenal play. "It's great to keep the ball, like they did, but when you've got a team that are as good defensively as us, you can keep them at bay. The most important thing is that when you win the ball back you attack. We hit the post and had players going forward to catch them out. With the players we've got up front we can score at any time." Wenger admitted his side had not played at their best, starting with "the handbrake on", though he gleaned other encouragement from the draw. "You never know what the consequences of a defeat might have been. Resilience isn't the first quality you imagine when you think about [Cesc] Fábregas, [Mathieu] Flamini, [Thomas] Rosicky or [Alexander] Hleb. They're more team players who you'd expect to be stronger on the technical side, but they have a lot of character. The technical ability and the stamina we have usually makes a difference in the last few minutes." ------------------------------------------------------- What was good to see is the fact that Arsenal don't look to be as intimidating as all the hype would lead you to believe, sure they haven't been beaten by the top sides they've faced thus far but they have beaten the top opposition either. I look forward to facing them again at OT and hopefully there we will beat them soundly.
|
|
Buliwyf
United Bench Warmer
fear has never helped a man
Posts: 513
|
Post by Buliwyf on Nov 5, 2007 15:43:16 GMT
Very intense game! Two good goals out of the game for us! Arsenal were very lucky with the first goal! As for Anderson: I don't like divers in our side either and him and Nani had their fair share of it! But that tackle from Fabregas was a clear nasty hit into the supporting leg and after the foul he was mouthing to the ref and to Anderson as though it was the worst dive ever! Fabregas is a fucking cunt! But a good footballer! dive? it wasnt a dive he overreacted thats for sure, but that isnt called diving. and i am not happy with him waving the imaginary card and overreacting. but i think we wont see that anymore, after all we have fergie as a manager. and everyone saying that arsenal are celebrating like they have won the league. for god sakes of course you gonna celebrate like a donkey when u draw a game in the last seconds against a team like united. Well son I know my English is not up there with the best but I think I've made the point that it was a nasty foul on Anderson and no dive!
|
|
Buliwyf
United Bench Warmer
fear has never helped a man
Posts: 513
|
Post by Buliwyf on Nov 5, 2007 15:47:38 GMT
Hargreaves gives short shrift to Arsenal's beautiful gameArsenal had sprinted to the Premier League's summit this season propelled by a mesmerising brand of attacking football, but Manchester United departed London on Saturday encouraged that they had stamped their own authority on the title race. "I don't think they created a clearcut chance in the first half," said Owen Hargreaves. "So we did a good job controlling their so-called 'beautiful football'." The comment revealed the irritation in the United set-up at the plaudits lavished on Arsenal's free-flowing style. United have entranced as thrillingly this season, their attacking thrust more ruthless at times than that of Arsène Wenger's young charges. Indeed, the reigning champions' more streetwise approach, born of their greater experience than the current leaders can boast, could yet prove decisive in determining the destiny of the title. "Arsenal had a lot of possession today, but in the first half they never got into a position where they threatened the goal, besides the header from [William] Gallas which was a set piece," said Hargreaves. "They had plenty of possession, but were never threatening and football's about winning games and scoring goals. Both of our goals were beautiful pieces of play, while theirs were a bit scrappy and probably not typical of the way Arsenal play. "It's great to keep the ball, like they did, but when you've got a team that are as good defensively as us, you can keep them at bay. The most important thing is that when you win the ball back you attack. We hit the post and had players going forward to catch them out. With the players we've got up front we can score at any time." Wenger admitted his side had not played at their best, starting with "the handbrake on", though he gleaned other encouragement from the draw. "You never know what the consequences of a defeat might have been. Resilience isn't the first quality you imagine when you think about [Cesc] Fábregas, [Mathieu] Flamini, [Thomas] Rosicky or [Alexander] Hleb. They're more team players who you'd expect to be stronger on the technical side, but they have a lot of character. The technical ability and the stamina we have usually makes a difference in the last few minutes." ------------------------------------------------------- What was good to see is the fact that Arsenal don't look to be as intimidating as all the hype would lead you to believe, sure they haven't been beaten by the top sides they've faced thus far but they have beaten the top opposition either. I look forward to facing them again at OT and hopefully there we will beat them soundly. I don't like to be a fuckin prig but at least all of their players could pass the ball around, not Hargo though!
|
|
|
Post by Red Yank on Nov 5, 2007 15:52:17 GMT
I don't like to be a fuckin prig but at least all of their players could pass the ball around, not Hargo I though! The first half I thought we looked pretty nervous on the ball and couldn't get much going, but after Arsenal equalized in the second half we looked much better and the passing that lead up to Ronaldo's goal was great.
|
|
|
Post by Stew on Nov 5, 2007 16:16:39 GMT
I don't like to be a fuckin prig but at least all of their players could pass the ball around, not Hargo I though! The first half I thought we looked pretty nervous on the ball and couldn't get much going, but after Arsenal equalized in the second half we looked much better and the passing that lead up to Ronaldo's goal was great. Fabergas had a 78% succes rate with his passing, Flamini 84%. Hargreaves had 81%, so very little difference really. This belies the myth that Arsenal's midfielders passed the ball around with laser-like accuracy and we didn't. Anderson, on the other hand, had 93%, which is Scholes-like.
|
|
|
Post by Supatrice> on Nov 5, 2007 16:36:24 GMT
STATS mean fuck all. The amount of time Hargreaves ran out of space and had to knock th ball back to the keeper or generally had to go backards I lost count. Almost every time Arsenal had the ball they were pinging around and going forward. It wasn't good enough and I hate people who quote stats, they can be very missleading. Just watch the game, and make your mind up. We could hardly string a couple of passes together.
|
|
|
Post by Stew on Nov 5, 2007 16:44:09 GMT
STATS mean fuck all. The amount of time Hargreaves ran out of space and had to knock th ball back to the keeper or generally had to go backards I lost count. Almost every time Arsenal had the ball they were pinging around and going forward. It wasn't good enough and I hate people who quote stats, they can be very missleading. Just watch the game, and make your mind up. We could hardly string a couple of passes together. What absolute bollocks. You hate people who quote stats? The guy I was responding to said Hargreaves couldn't pass the ball, unlike the Arsenal players. I disagreed with him and the stats back me up. I didn't say Hargreaves played better than Fabergas but it's shite to say he didn't pass the ball as well as Arsenals midfield. THe only way to actually prove something like that is fact. Don't fucking use words like hate, pal.
|
|
|
Post by Supatrice> on Nov 5, 2007 17:30:24 GMT
Stats don't prove anything, and It irritates me when people use them to back up false claims. Hargreaves could knock th eball back to VDS 20 times and he would have a 100% pass rate. That would prove nothing, pal.
|
|
|
Post by Stew on Nov 5, 2007 17:38:17 GMT
Stats don't prove anything, and It irritates me when people use them to back up false claims. Hargreaves could knock th eball back to VDS 20 times and he would have a 100% pass rate. That would prove nothing, pal. What was my false claim? What irritates me, is people critising a player who had a good game, like Hargreaves, because they "watched the game and made up their own mind" despite the evidence completely dis-proving them and then dismissing this evidence because it dis-proves them. Pal.
|
|
|
Post by Manc Fever on Nov 5, 2007 17:43:02 GMT
Stats tell half the story. So you're both right, and both wrong
|
|
|
Post by Stew on Nov 5, 2007 17:45:58 GMT
Stats tell half the story. So you're both right, and both wrong Yeah, thats true. Stats don't take into account how difficult the pass was etc. I'm not a stats nerd, honest! I just don't think Hargreaves deserves the flak that seems to be coming his way after Saturday.
|
|
|
Post by Supatrice> on Nov 5, 2007 17:48:28 GMT
Your false claim is that there was little difference between the quality of Utd's passing and Arsenal because you look at the stats and it says Hargreaves had an 81% pass completion. That doesn't prove anything, alot of his passes were back to the keeper, or back to Rio because he couldn't pick out a good pass to get a move going. This happened far too often despite him having a good game deffensively. I watched the game and like everyne else watched us allow Arsenal to play the ball around us, and then when we got the ball back we gave it away or were resorted to long balls far too often.
|
|
|
Post by Stew on Nov 5, 2007 17:56:11 GMT
Your false claim is that there was little difference between the quality of Utd's passing and Arsenal because you look at the stats and it says Hargreaves had an 81% pass completion. That doesn't prove anything, alot of his passes were back to the keeper, or back to Rio because he couldn't pick out a good pass to get a move going. This happened far too often despite him having a good game deffensively. I watched the game and like everyne else watched us allow Arsenal to play the ball around us, and then when we got the ball back we gave it away or were resorted to long balls far too often. As I said above, stats, which I'm now sick of talking about, don't tell the full story, don't take into account the risk of pass etc and I concede that. You obviously won't concede anything so this is really pointless so lets move on. We did draw 2-2 didn't we? Just from your above account it sounds like we were slaughtered.
|
|
|
Post by Supatrice> on Nov 5, 2007 18:00:42 GMT
Your false claim is that there was little difference between the quality of Utd's passing and Arsenal because you look at the stats and it says Hargreaves had an 81% pass completion. That doesn't prove anything, alot of his passes were back to the keeper, or back to Rio because he couldn't pick out a good pass to get a move going. This happened far too often despite him having a good game deffensively. I watched the game and like everyne else watched us allow Arsenal to play the ball around us, and then when we got the ball back we gave it away or were resorted to long balls far too often. As I said above, stats, which I'm now sick of talking about, don't tell the full story, don't take into account the risk of pass etc and I concede that. You obviously won't concede anything so this is really pointless so lets move on. We did draw 2-2 didn't we? Just from your above account it sounds like we were slaughtered. I know, and it was a good result that I'd probably have taken before the game but, I want to see more from UTD. I believe we're the best team in the league, because of our attacking insticnts, pace down the wings and passing ability. But we showed little of that, and too many times now against the big teams we set up soley to stiffle them and then try and counter attack. It was dissapointing to watch.
|
|