It was a pretty soft penalty, but above all it's Fred's fault, as you just can't do that in your penalty area. I've seen lots of those just waved on, but anyway you must be more careful. I think that Fred's hand was decisive, as he slightly pushed Lacazette.

John Moss is a ref that often loses control of the game and today he seemed on Arsenal's side when it comes to small decisions most of all. Every touch on their player was immediately a foul, while on the other hand he missed to call lots of fouls on our players.

However, it is completely our fault that we lost this match, as there were too many players which were poor today. First of all, I hope I'm wrong but it seems to me that Ole just doesn't have the courage to send Rashford to the bench. I don't know whether it is the pressure of English media or something else, but today was so obvious he was poor and he needed to be subbed. Instead, it seemed like Ole would sub off everyone else before him. Against PSG he was also weak, but he took all the glory because of one good long range shot and a well converted penalty.
Apart from Rashford, there were other 4-5 United players with a bad performance today. Lukaku, Lindelof, Young, Fred were under average imo.

Therefore, it is not possible to do much more when a team must "carry" 4-5 players. OK if it was one or two, but today there were too many of them out of the game.
A bit of luck in some crucial moments could change the game as well, but today it all went to Arsenal, so a defeat was inevitable in those circumstances.

Nah, today was a fine match and there was no penalty at all.

Fred played a good match and if you can't run alongside a player from the other team into the area, why even bother playing?

Stop your bullshit. This was unlucky and terrible reffereeing. United and Arsenal played equally well/bad.

Lamba написав:

Nah, today was a fine match and there was no penalty at all.

Fred played a good match and if you can't run alongside a player from the other team into the area, why even bother playing?

Stop your bullshit. This was unlucky and terrible reffereeing. United and Arsenal played equally well/bad.

Hey, watch your words there or just piss off!

I can insult people as well, but I try to keep the conversation on an educated level.

First of all, I hope I'm wrong but it seems to me that Ole just doesn't have the courage to send Rashford to the bench. I don't know whether it is the pressure of English media or something else, but today was so obvious he was poor and he needed to be subbed.

I don't know what exactly you have against him, but he had a fine game. He created a few great chances - one at the start of the second half, when he played in Lukaku in the centre of the box, also the one where Lukaku tried to go around the keeper. Those were perhaps the two best chances we had and he played the last pass. He didn't get a goal and perhaps should have done better when alone in the box and he missed the goal badly, but he was good. He also did his defensive duties very well(which is expected, but not everyone does that job with as much energy and manages to be as clever about it).

So I don't agree at all that he should've been subbed. How many such chances did our other attacking players create? Only Shaw and Young created some good chances with their crossing - Shaw for Lukaku when he hit the post and Young for Rashford late on, when he fluffed his header.

Apart from Rashford, there were other 4-5 United players with a bad performance today. Lukaku, Lindelof, Young, Fred were under average imo.

I think Lukaku did well in everything but scoring. His general hold up play was pretty good, he outmuscled opponents and got into great scoring positions like a top striker should(but not everyone can).
Lindelöf had a strange game, where I felt he didn't do well in some situations, but his general level has risen enough that I wouldn't say he had a poor game. Not great by high standards you'd set for a United starter, but not below par.
Fred was.. interesting as well. I liked some of the stuff he did, but he keeps on having some moments, where he seems to panic or run out of ideas. Those moments today happened much less often than a few weeks ago and I think his general performance was good - he worked really well defensively while giving away some balls. I feel like he needs a 'soft touch' and some confidence. Today was the second game after the PSG one, where I could see glimpses of a player that we bought and not the one we've seen so far. The penalty was a risk he took and hopefully he won't commit more of those. But as there wasn't much of an intent to bring him down then I feel for him a bit. I'm actually starting to like him - if he gets in his full flow, then he could be very useful.
I have no comment about Young - didn't see anything to make me feel like he did badly or great. He wasn't constantly dribbled past and he didn't do enough offensively to be worth a mention in my book.


In general I'm not fussed about this loss. It's not a good match to lose as it was a six-pointer for the CL spots, but as the race is so open, it's in our own hands. We also created the better chances today and only a strange mistake by De Gea(I didn't understand why he moved to his left at all) and a somewhat soft penalty combined with Lukaku missing a sitter in the first 10 minutes meant it was a loss.

Fred is crap. Not talking about the dive for a penalty, just generally. He always tries to take his man on outside the box, and inevitably coughs it up. I guess his moves worked in Ukraine, but not in the EPL. He's not even a squad player.

Lindelöf further proving his crapness in today's game as well.

I don't know what exactly you have against him, but he had a fine game. He created a few great chances - one at the start of the second half, when he played in Lukaku in the centre of the box, also the one where Lukaku tried to go around the keeper. Those were perhaps the two best chances we had and he played the last pass. He didn't get a goal and perhaps should have done better when alone in the box and he missed the goal badly, but he was good. He also did his defensive duties very well(which is expected, but not everyone does that job with as much energy and manages to be as clever about it).

I don't have anything at all against Rashford. I like the kid and think he is a huge talent, but I am against the hype which is dictated by the media and some of our ex players. In my opinion, all of this can harm a growth of a player that could be an asset for the club in the next 10 years or so.

I think Rashford should not be overplayed and should be kept with his both feet on the ground. It is easy for a kid to get carried away by all the hype and start thinking he's a superstar.

Talking about yesterday's game, he did have a couple of good passes to Lukaku, but that's about it. He made lots of mistakes and you could see there is fatigue and lack of concentration. In this case, it is for the best of the team and player himself to sub him off. Imo, nobody should be immune to substitution or starting a few games on the bench. It could even do good sometimes.

Hope that I made my views clearer.

Concerning Fred, I feel for him and I agree we should give him chances as he is starting to show some glimpses of a valid player, but he must quickly grasp a few things about Premier League. If he doesn't get used to the pace of the game in EPL and to the short time on the ball that midfielders have at their disposal, he won't have a bright future at United.
Things are not going so well for him atm, but I still have some faith, even though I would not bet on him becoming our firm starter anytime soon.

Lindelof - in this game he went back to the player we've seen under Mourinho. Seemed completely lost in several occasions. Must do better to keep his place.

Young - not his fault that he is always used out of position (he is a winger after all), but everyone have seen he's often a liability in defence, so any valid opponent will exploit our weakness on that side. It's not only about yesterday's game, but talking in general. It would be OK if he was just an urgent solution, but we've made him our standard starter and it's just wrong. It is like you have a bad tooth and you continue taking medicine against pain, instead of fixing it. Given the current situation, I think we should give some more trust to Dalot until the end of the season. This will show us whether he is good enough or it is necessary to dip into market for a right back. Continuing with Young as a firm starter won't get us anywhere.

Back to our loss against Arsenal, it was a bit unlucky, but it's up to us to use the occasions and to maintain concentration in defence. Anyway, we should not make a fuss about it, as we knew a defeat would come sooner or later. There will be a good fight ahead of us for the top 4, so the players should be further motivated by such challenge.

Nemanja77 написав:

I try to keep the conversation on an educated level.

Poor attempts then.

Unless United wins 5-0 and everyone plays well, it's the same load of crap coming from you.

- We need to spend €500m on new players, minimum.
- X, Y, Z, A, B, C players sucks, not worthy of the shirt.
- Q, W, E, R, T, Y would without a doubt be the best players.
- Manager O, who was a God last week, is now a messenger from hell. Begin the exorcism.


There's a good old saying, that if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. In my eyes, you're as much a part of the problem as Woodward is. Unlike Woodward, which is a problem that can very much be fixed by hiring a Director of Football - the problem with you is the same as with any FIFA-playing 15 year old; It's a mental thing, thinking you can just spend your way out of bad spells and less than stellar games.

At this point, it's just a matter of time before Lingard comes back, has two bad games and you'll go "I TOLD YOU HE SUCKED AND WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH FOR UNITED!!!", which frankly is extremely tiresome.


Don't get me wrong; we're all speculating. That's part of being a fan. I can't, however, think of anyone but Cato the Elder, who actually pulled off saying the same thing over and over and over and over, without it growing old.

I agree with Fred's play, however I think his talent is evident. He looks so comfortable on the ball, much more than any other player on the pitch in yesterday's match.

He seemed to have good vision and excellent ball skills, just made a lot of bad decisions. I'm not exactly rooting for him (as I had barely seen him play until yesterday), but if he can fit his play into how United want to play, I could see him be an excellent player in the PL.

I think Fred's comfort on the ball is out of line with his technical abilities on the ball.

I think Rashford should not be overplayed and should be kept with his both feet on the ground. It is easy for a kid to get carried away by all the hype and start thinking he's a superstar.

If you look at goals + assists per 90 minutes in PL this season for players who play regularly(500 min+), then he is 17th. Above players like Firmino, Lacazette, Mane, Martial, Sanchez, Alli and lots of others. If you consider only the period since Ole came in, then his expected goals+assists is lower than only Jesus, Aguero, Sterling, Salah and Aubameyang.

He is among the best players in the league already at the age of 21. He is a great player. He can obviously improve, but he is contributing a lot and you seem to be dismissing that somewhat.

I can see him doing some poor decisions at times as well, but that's part of the learning curve. Ronaldo in his youth also shot a lot from longer range, but eventually started to pick his positions much more. I think it's natural that younger players sometimes try things that don't come off. But as he is already contributing a LOT to the team even when he is making some bad decisions means that he should play as much as possible. I think playing is the thing that allows him to improve his game and learn what works and what doesn't.

Talking about yesterday's game, he did have a couple of good passes to Lukaku, but that's about it. He made lots of mistakes and you could see there is fatigue and lack of concentration. In this case, it is for the best of the team and player himself to sub him off. Imo, nobody should be immune to substitution or starting a few games on the bench. It could even do good sometimes.

You can't say that it was a few good things and a lot of bad ones. You've got to view those things together. He took risks, some of which came off and created our best chances, some didn't come off, which you say are 'mistakes'. They aren't mistakes, they're risks. Every choice a player makes can either come off or not. The fact that he had the vision and ability to play in Lukaku for those chances is something that others didn't have yesterday. Otherwise they would've created something for Lukaku as well - they didn't(well, Shaw did once, but none of our other attacking players did).

Of course he shouldn't be immune to being substituted, but yesterday he was one of our most productive players on the pitch and it would've been stupid to take him off. Not to mention his contribution defensively, where he worked a lot. It just confuses me why you criticize our most productive attacker every other week suggeting he shouldn't start when he continues to produce goals and assists and creates danger with his movement and dribbles.

While I am well aware of the fact that I can't always be right, I just can't accept being labeled as someone overly critical, because it is simply not true.

The truth is I just refuse to get carried away and try to see things realistically, to look at both sides of the story. Anyway, even if I criticize it is never just for the sake of criticism, but instead I am trying to see how things can be improved. In order to improve things, you must firstly identify where the improvement can/should be made. Simple as that. Just discussing things as I see them. You can either agree or not, but if you don't then you should have valid arguments and not just shoot randomly without any concrete example or argument.

If you see just the part of my posts where I criticize and somehow miss/forget the part where I underline the positives, then you either have some kind of selective memory, a short term memory problem, or you simply do it on purpose. Either way, I am sorry but I can't help you.

He is among the best players in the league already at the age of 21. He is a great player. He can obviously improve, but he is contributing a lot and you seem to be dismissing that somewhat.

If I have to repeat it again just to avoid being "the negative one", I will do it - I like the kid a lot and I think he's a huge talent and already a great player at 21. I've said it many times, but people tend to forget if I criticize some mistakes that the same player makes.
There are things he should improve and that's all I'm saying. I don't think it will happen over night, but I just hope that he will be managed correctly and that some mistakes will be pointed out to him, so he can correct them. A young player can easily oversee some of his errors, especially if every day everyone keep telling him he's so great etc. etc.

What I'm saying is the same philosophy that Fergie used with young players over the years - keep their head cool, their feet on the ground and be aware of not over-burning them too early.

Therefore, I'm just worried it might happen with Rashford and it would be a shame.

I can see him doing some poor decisions at times as well, but that's part of the learning curve. Ronaldo in his youth also shot a lot from longer range, but eventually started to pick his positions much more. I think it's natural that younger players sometimes try things that don't come off. But as he is already contributing a LOT to the team even when he is making some bad decisions means that he should play as much as possible. I think playing is the thing that allows him to improve his game and learn what works and what doesn't.

I never said he is not contributing.
I just said that his decision making should be improved, especially as in several occasions he was too selfish and it got on my nerves, as I know he can do better than that.
I am a fan of players taking long shots when possible, especially if they have a good shooting ability, but there is a limit for everything and a difference between a long shot and a wild shot from impossible positions.
Then, let's be honest - Rashford is a very, very good player, but he is not Ronaldo and comparing those two is simply wrong. Ronaldo at 21 was a much better player. Maybe not contributing much in defensive duties, but attacking wise he was better in every sense. From the very first day I saw him, I was utterly convinced that he would become the best player in the world and I literally kept telling it to people who just laughed, as they could only see a selfish overconfident kid who was trying to do everything solo. He did make mistakes of course, especially in the beginning, but very quickly he acquired the ability to understand when to go solo and try to skip a player or two, when to shoot and when to pass the ball to a teammate. If Rashford can reach 70-80% of that, I would be overjoyed. So, let's not expect him to become Ronaldo, let's not even compare him with Ronaldo as it would only be a burden on the kids back. That's what I'm trying to say, but I'm afraid people are already making those comparisons too easily and it is difficult for a young player to stay above all of that and remain immune to all the stories.

You can't say that it was a few good things and a lot of bad ones. You've got to view those things together. He took risks, some of which came off and created our best chances, some didn't come off, which you say are 'mistakes'. They aren't mistakes, they're risks. Every choice a player makes can either come off or not. The fact that he had the vision and ability to play in Lukaku for those chances is something that others didn't have yesterday. Otherwise they would've created something for Lukaku as well - they didn't(well, Shaw did once, but none of our other attacking players did).

It is difficult to explain it like this, just writing posts. I'd have to sit down with you and watch the whole game(s) again, in order to show you each and every situation where I thought he made mistakes.

Of course he shouldn't be immune to being substituted, but yesterday he was one of our most productive players on the pitch and it would've been stupid to take him off. Not to mention his contribution defensively, where he worked a lot. It just confuses me why you criticize our most productive attacker every other week suggeting he shouldn't start when he continues to produce goals and assists and creates danger with his movement and dribbles.

Just for the sake of clarity, I think he should be a started in most of the games, but he should also be subbed sometimes or start from the bench in certain occasions.
If I criticize, it is constructive, in a way that I'm looking at what can be improved in a certain situation. For example, lately I concentrated on Rashford because I think he can and should be improved in some aspects. I have a feeling he is being slightly overplayed lately, while it would be more productive to sub him off sometimes or rest him in some games, if you look at things on a long term. I don't know about you, but yesterday I saw fatigue in his legs and I thought he was also mentally exhausted from the PSG game. Nothing wrong and nothing strange about that, it's perfectly normal for a young player and there were other players on the pitch with the same "syndrome", but I feel it influenced his game quite a lot, as he depends very much on the combination of speed of his legs and his thoughts. Anyone who has ever played football (especially 11 Vs 11) knows exactly what I am talking about.

I just said that his decision making should be improved, especially as in several occasions he was too selfish and it got on my nerves, as I know he can do better than that.

But that's the thing - you can't separate the good from the bad and look at every individual decision. It's not how it works. Just as an example Mahrez and Salah can dribble and go to their left foot and get past their man only because their opponents know they can do both and they have to choose to go on their right at times as well, even though they are a lot more dangerous when they go on their left. Because if they only went left, then it would be easy to defend against them. It's the same with all other aspects of the game. Sometimes you have to choose the suboptimal options to create that uncertainty for the opponent. As a result not all dribbles come off and not all choices look perfect. And there is luck involved. The opponents sometimes try to anticipate your moves(which is very risky for them in many situations) and you don't know which move they'll try to stop so there is some random whether things come off or not.

My point is that in general Rashford is making good decisions and his game is varied enough that he will never be easy to defend against. Of course there are some moments when he has chosen the wrong option and he'll improve on that, but it's not a good idea to focus on those. Maybe in training Ole will talk about a few of them and give him general guidelines of when to make different choices. But it's not like I could pinpoint something that he generally does wrong. You have to view the whole instead of single actions. His shot against PSG from 30 metres? Not the best choice ever as it rarely results in a goal, but it got us the second goal as the shot happened to dip and bounce before Buffon and Lukaku was alive. He will improve his awareness and tactical understanding, but it baffles me that you suggest he should be benched at times. Why? Especially considering our options on the bench in recent weeks. You've brought this up a few times recently and it's strange.

Then, let's be honest - Rashford is a very, very good player, but he is not Ronaldo and comparing those two is simply wrong. Ronaldo at 21 was a much better player.

Was he?
At age 21 he had scored 29 and assisted 17 in 146 games for United and Portugal.
Rashford is 21 now, has 52 goals, 24 assists in 201 games for United and England.
(I'm too lazy to filter out the NT goals and games, but it probably doesn't make a big difference). Here it looks like Rashford is contributing more than Ronaldo at the same age. It's no guarantee that Rashford will progress to the next level and it's not a guarantee that he will stay injury free for the bulk of his prime(I mean - look at Bale, he was the closest to Ronaldo in recent times at his best, but doesn't stay fit and that has hindered him a lot), but Rashford certainly has a chance of being mentioned in the same breath as Ronaldo. It's unlikely that he will, because there are more than a few players who have had that ability and not all succeed. Even Rooney is in that category - could've been one of the all time greats, but was merely a modern great.

While I agree that Ronaldo was already great, I think Rashford is also great. If you remember the first few years, then Ronaldo was also doing some poor decisions on the ball and wasn't the type of player we saw in the last two seasons. He blossomed when he turned 22 - scoring 26 and assisting 20 for club and country. I don't see a good reason why Rashford wouldn't continue to progress. He seems like someone who works hard(his physique has changed a lot since he first burst on the scene and it doesn't look like he is happy with what he has and wants to improve).

I agree that some of the players seemed mentally fatigued from the PSG game, but when the bench consists of an injury-risk who hasn't played for a while(Martial), an unproven 17-year old(Greenwood) and.. well, players who would play out of position if they were put in as a striker, then it feels like you're having a go at Rashford. It's hard to read something else out of such a post in this context.

It's obvious that he could've done better in some situations(read: he didn't play perfectly) and that he is probably somewhat tired, having played 6 full games and a sub appearance in the last month while getting a minor injury as well, but it's not like we had a full bench there.

And as for the substituting him against Arsenal - it was one of the most important games in the race for the top four and not a place to give up by taking out your best striker. We know how top strikers can have a bad match and still contribute with important goals. While I don't agree that he had a particularly bad match, I think that even if I were to agree with that I probably wouldn't have subbed him.

I think the mental fatigue from the PSG game influenced us against Arsenal somewhat, but at the same time I think it was just a somewhat unlucky match. After all we created the best chances and were on top in general.

I was somewhat surprised that Ole put Matic back in as I felt that McTominay could've been a better choice there. I felt Matic, even though he didn't play in Paris, felt like he didn't have enough energy and was a bit off form while McTominay was top class against PSG. I felt that maybe it would've been good to have McTominay start the game and battle it out for an hour and then introduce Matic in his place to provide better passing and more ability on the ball. I think a young player like him could've started the game with more energy and showed our intent better. Combined with Fred they might have outfought Arsenal in midfield in the first half as well. But then again maybe this is hindsight. And I don't think Matic was particularly bad, just that the whole team had to drop deep and turn into a 5-3-2 in the second half of the first half to make sure we weren't overrun. I felt that our midfield didn't press well enough and that forced us back. But maybe it wouldn't have helped, who knows.

So all in all I think our options were limited and the only possible alteration for me would've been McTominay for Matic at the start, but that's hindsight as I feel I saw Matic still slightly recovering from his injury. I don't think it would've been a good idea to rest or even sub Rashford as he contributed a lot.

I am talking about one thing and you reply about something completely different, suggesting that I thought or said something else. It is impossible to have a conversation in these circumstances, as it seems we are having two parallel conversations.

I could agree with most of what you wrote in your long post, but as I said that is something else and doesn't really touch the part that I meant initially. Never mind.

At age 21 he had scored 29 and assisted 17 in 146 games for United and Portugal.
Rashford is 21 now, has 52 goals, 24 assists in 201 games for United and England.

It is wrong to make comparison looking simply at the number of goals and assists, as those number can show something but don't prove anything.
There are so many details that don't go into the statistics, but are very important.
While I'd love us to have a new Ronaldo, I think we must stay realistic here.
Rashford is a great talent, one of the best of his generation, but he is not on Mbappe level, not on Neymar level and surely not the level of Ronaldo, neither the Brazilian one nor the Portuguese one.
The media must write something and especially in England they need to create a new idol, so they are forcing such comparisons and making up stories about Barcelona or Real Madrid preparing bids of 100 or 200 mil euros and such crap.
My point is that such hype can only do harm to a young and super talented player, it can easily make him fly too high, put too much pressure on him and it can also do harm to his club and coach.
I just hope Rashford, Solskjaer and our coaching staff will avoid being pulled into this kind of game, because the player must stay on the ground, follow his learning curve and follow the process gradually.

I was somewhat surprised that Ole put Matic back in as I felt that McTominay could've been a better choice there. I felt Matic, even though he didn't play in Paris, felt like he didn't have enough energy and was a bit off form while McTominay was top class against PSG. I felt that maybe it would've been good to have McTominay start the game and battle it out for an hour and then introduce Matic in his place to provide better passing and more ability on the ball. I think a young player like him could've started the game with more energy and showed our intent better. Combined with Fred they might have outfought Arsenal in midfield in the first half as well.

I think it's unfair that you criticize Ole like that. The first match we lost in the league and people already think they know better than a coach who has made us play so well lately.

Just kidding, relax. I just wanted to show you how words can be taken out of context and turned to seem quite different than they were intended to. I know well, because it happened to me several times.

I had the same thought about McTominay and I thought Matic is being rushed back. However, we don't know why Ole and the staff made the decision to start Matic ahead of McTominay and what were the exact physical and mental conditions of those players. Most of all, I had a feeling Herrera was missing against Arsenal, as we didn't seem to impose ourselves enough in the middle. Fred had some good moments and if he can only improve his decision making in some crucial situations, he could really be useful.

I thought that Ole should have put Martial on for Rashford after 50-55mins, as the latter was fatigued and the former could have brought some freshness in our attack. I would not change the shape of the team overall as the plan seemed to work generally. Instead, Martial was introduced a bit too late, when we were already two goals behind. We needed to chase two goals at the time we also lost some balance by then.

This is all a new experience for Ole as well and I think/hope he is learning quickly from each game. Even if we don't finish in top 4, I think it should be fair to give the job to him and let him continue what he started so well, with full backing from the board.

I am talking about one thing and you reply about something completely different, suggesting that I thought or said something else. It is impossible to have a conversation in these circumstances, as it seems we are having two parallel conversations.

I could agree with most of what you wrote in your long post, but as I said that is something else and doesn't really touch the part that I meant initially. Never mind.

Well, I'm responding to what I read :). I don't know what to say. In a sense I understand the frustration of Lamba when he went on his rant, because it's easy to see how your points can be read in a different way than you intend them to be.

It's just that when you're regularly saying that you prefer Martial to Rashford and saying that Rashford is not playing that well it feels like you have something against him.

I don't really agree that we shouldn't read the hype. He is a young striker who is doing the right things and who might go on to be one of the United greats. We should enjoy this and support him. He is a top centre forward and when finally free from Mourinho pushing him out wide, he's shown his capability of scoring regularly. It seems clear that he will be our main striker for the next 10 years and unless he is unlucky with injuries, he might become Uniteds top scorer at some point. While Martial is great as well, I think he probably isn't as good as Rashford. I'm really hoping Ole can find ways to make our attack tick with both of them as I like them both and I like them a lot.

It is wrong to make comparison looking simply at the number of goals and assists, as those number can show something but don't prove anything.
There are so many details that don't go into the statistics, but are very important.

I brought out the statistics to illustrate a point - namely that Ronaldo in his first three seasons was an inconsistent performer who was brilliant at times, but still often failed to deliver the goods. Rashford has been ahead of Ronaldo in his learning curve a bit - he has delivered more than Ronaldo at the same age. And he is better defensively as well.

I don't think the comparison is too bad actually. Of course we shouldn't expect him to start scoring one goal per game like Ronaldo did at Real, but that kind of a strike rate is not beyond him. I don't think there are too many abilities in which Ronaldo is better that Rashford couldn't learn in the next few years. Given that he gets the right guidance of course.

While I'd love us to have a new Ronaldo, I think we must stay realistic here.
Rashford is a great talent, one of the best of his generation, but he is not on Mbappe level, not on Neymar level and surely not the level of Ronaldo, neither the Brazilian one nor the Portuguese one.

He is still 21. At 21 Neymar for example scored just 9 league goals and gave 8 assists for Barcelona(his first season there) while playing with much greater teammates than who Rashford is playing with. Right now with a quarter of the season to go Rashford at the same age has 9 goals and 6 assists already. Ronaldo at that age - 9 goals and 9 assists in the league. Messi - 10 goals, 12 assists. Old Ronaldo was outrageous of course - 34 goals and no idea about the assists(too bad about his injuries, otherwise he would've broken every record).

I just hope Rashford, Solskjaer and our coaching staff will avoid being pulled into this kind of game, because the player must stay on the ground, follow his learning curve and follow the process gradually.

I think that's a given and shouldn't be stressed too much. I think it would be strange for Rashford or Ole to be happy with what Rashford is doing now. The amount of goals and assists is not great. It's good, but I'm sure they'll be expecting 20+ goals and 10+ assists in a few years from him and working towards that.

I think it's unfair that you criticize Ole like that. The first match we lost in the league and people already think they know better than a coach who has made us play so well lately.

Just kidding, relax. I just wanted to show you how words can be taken out of context and turned to seem quite different than they were intended to. I know well, because it happened to me several times.

Well, it's a different thing when you're doing it because you really feel it or when you're doing it just to make a point :).

I'm trying to be sincere if I tell something like that and the quotes I use are generally shorter than the full point because of the post length limits :).

I hope you understand that I'm not trying to deliberately try to argue for the sake of argument but telling you when I don't agree. I find our arguments fun and it's good to have someone to discuss things with that doesn't have the same views as me and is willing to explain his arguments.

I had the same thought about McTominay and I thought Matic is being rushed back. However, we don't know why Ole and the staff made the decision to start Matic ahead of McTominay and what were the exact physical and mental conditions of those players. Most of all, I had a feeling Herrera was missing against Arsenal, as we didn't seem to impose ourselves enough in the middle. Fred had some good moments and if he can only improve his decision making in some crucial situations, he could really be useful.

Yeah, Herrera is a big loss. Although I felt that Fred played this role reasonably well. At times he did make poor decisions on the ball and lacked a bit of 'Carrickness' - the ability to remain calm, see the whole pitch, think tactically and make the simple, effective choice. But his energy was good and he managed to be effective defensively, except for the penalty incident when I'm undecided wherther I think he should've avoided the risk of a foul or whether he was just unlucky, because he has to try to make it hard for his opponent there and such a small push often disrupts the opponent while the refs see it as legal.

I think that it was reasonable to start Matic as McTominay had just played a tough match some days before and Matic was able to play 90 minutes and was hopefully fresher, more experienced and better on the ball. But in hindsight we can say that he wasn't great. So I can't really complain. I just feel that McTominay had a really good game against PSG and.. just based on that game could've started.

I thought that Ole should have put Martial on for Rashford after 50-55mins, as the latter was fatigued and the former could have brought some freshness in our attack. I would not change the shape of the team overall as the plan seemed to work generally. Instead, Martial was introduced a bit too late, when we were already two goals behind. We needed to chase two goals at the time we also lost some balance by then.

I felt that as Martial hadn't played for a month, he might not be able to bring much extra and I though that even though Rashford maybe wasn't playing at his best, he has the ability to create and score goals from nothing.

This is all a new experience for Ole as well and I think/hope he is learning quickly from each game. Even if we don't finish in top 4, I think it should be fair to give the job to him and let him continue what he started so well, with full backing from the board.

I agree that it's probably the best way forward. I'm not totally convinced yet, but given how much the general gameplay has improved, I think the results don't matter in terms of whether he gets the job or not. I just hope he manages to make the board help him succeed. We still need to improve the squad to compete with City and Liverpool and without doing well on the market it's unlikely to happen.

It's just that when you're regularly saying that you prefer Martial to Rashford and saying that Rashford is not playing that well it feels like you have something against him.

Ideally, I would play them both, one on the left and the other as a striker. They can both play on either position very well.

I rate Martial a bit higher, which doesn't mean I have something against Rashford.

You rate Rashford higher than Martial and that's OK for me, as I respect a different opinion and it would be stupid from my side to suggest that because of your preference you have something against Martial. You are entitled to have your own opinion and rate one player over another.

He is still 21. At 21 Neymar for example scored just 9 league goals and gave 8 assists for Barcelona(his first season there) while playing with much greater teammates than who Rashford is playing with. Right now with a quarter of the season to go Rashford at the same age has 9 goals and 6 assists already. Ronaldo at that age - 9 goals and 9 assists in the league. Messi - 10 goals, 12 assists. Old Ronaldo was outrageous of course - 34 goals and no idea about the assists(too bad about his injuries, otherwise he would've broken every record).

Stop it. You are stats dependent :)

So what if Neymar at 21 scored only 9 goals....who gives a damn?
Football is not all about stats. Better look at his movement, his overall quality.

Said that, I must underline that I would never want us to have Neymar at United, despite all his qualities. Great player, but simply repulsive.