Our 3 big signings this season

[LoughboroBlade]

I think that one post has coloured people's views of some of the other criticism. Take that one out, I didn't see much agreement with its content. Bert's waste of money post was not a "categorical" assessment, it was an assessment of their value "so far". But that's missed as the red mist decends. From the performance and contribution to that point, it was a reasonable comment - even if you disagree with it.
I argued the point on another thread that this settling in process can't be done with 90 minutes of a PL match - these games can't be used as an apprentice's training run-out. That's not writing him off or not wanting him to come good, it's an opinion on how the first team can't carry someone who isn't performing. Yet some people jump to the extreme and it's "writing off" and "embarrassing" and we get "Humble Pie" threads. It's all getting a but cultish and divisive.

No ‘red mist’ from me, that’s reserved for particularly egregious stuff – I’ve personally not really felt most of it has been worth engaging with, as the overreaction to the restart games seemed to override a lot of reason you might have otherwise seen. But fair enough. “So far they've looked a complete waste of money” basically means they at no stage in their United career to that point shown ability worth what we paid (hence use of “complete” rather than “slight” or “possible”). I think the only one of those you could apply that to is Berge, and it’s not worth me just repeating what I said before about why that felt like a but of an embarrassing statement to be making so early into his career. Applying that to the other two isn’t really worth replying on, as regardless of whether you think they’ve been worthwhile they certainly haven’t been “complete wastes of money so far”. It’s kind of crazy I even have to type that out.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

No ‘red mist’ from me, that’s reserved for particularly egregious stuff – I’ve personally not really felt most of it has been worth engaging with, as the overreaction to the restart games seemed to override a lot of reason you might have otherwise seen. But fair enough. “So far they've looked a complete waste of money” basically means they at no stage in their United career to that point shown ability worth what we paid (hence use of “complete” rather than “slight” or “possible”). I think the only one of those you could apply that to is Berge, and it’s not worth me just repeating what I said before about why that felt like a but of an embarrassing statement to be making so early into his career. Applying that to the other two isn’t really worth replying on, as regardless of whether you think they’ve been worthwhile they certainly haven’t been “complete wastes of money so far”. It’s kind of crazy I even have to type that out.

I'm not trying to go over the debate again. My point is the way the reaction has been, which is to slam people for having a different opinion. Argue the opinion, fine, simply say you don't agree, fine, even say "what a load of bollocks" and leave it at that if you want. But generic posts about how "embarrassing" it all is, attacking the posters themselves, starting "Humble Pie" threads, is not debating the issue at all. The like-for-like reaction is "the happy clappers are back". Where does that leave us?
It's possible to have two reasonable opinions that disagree with each other. And as I say, I've seen very little that is fundamentally unreasonable.

 

[CentralQuay]

Still the best finisher at the club.

That means nothing in a side not built to create chances.

You need more than just the ability to finish. You need to be able to carry the ball, threaten with pace, hold up the ball etc etc.

If it was purely down to finishing, McGoldrick wouldn't get a look in, but for me, he's far more well rounded than Sharp.
Likewise McBurnie has more to offer as the man ahead of McGoldrick than Sharp does too.

 

[CentralQuay]

So people who question a lack-lustre performance from a striker are only doing it because they can't accept that Sharp hasn't much left to offer? What a fucking stupid comment. Was your ridiculously condescending attitude why you got thrown off the Leicester City forums?

It's not condescending to suggest that McBurnie is questioned over his performances more than Sharp because Sharp has history at the club.

Basing both purely off their performances in this league, with knowledge of what they both offer, McBurnie would be in my side all day over Sharp.

 

[8lade]

You need more than just the ability to finish.

Well there is a whole lot more to Sharp's game as I'm sure you know, if you watch United but he's still the best finisher at the club.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

It's not condescending to suggest that McBurnie is questioned over his performances more than Sharp because Sharp has history at the club.

Basing both purely off their performances in this league, with knowledge of what they both offer, McBurnie would be in my side all day over Sharp.

You mean Sharp isn't questioned as much because he's already proven himself whereas McBurnie still has some proving to do? Yeah, how ridiculous to consider that.

Basing both purely off their performance in today's game, your judgement on this looks way off.

 

[CentralQuay]

You mean Sharp isn't questioned as much because he's already proven himself whereas McBurnie still has some proving to do? Yeah, how ridiculous to consider that.

Basing both purely off their performance in today's game, your judgement on this looks way off.

Was that during the 2 Premier League seasons he spent at Southampton where he was judged not good enough and loaned out?
Or are you again, talking about his goals in the Championship and League 1?

You're judging Sharp based off goals in the lower leagues.
But judging McBurnie on this season.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

Was that during the 2 Premier League seasons he spent at Southampton where he was judged not good enough and loaned out?
Or are you again, talking about his goals in the Championship and League 1?

You're judging Sharp based off goals in the lower leagues.
But judging McBurnie on this season.

I'm judging them both on what they've done for us under the current manager and in the current system. Using your method, you'd have dropped every one of our players who came up with us from the lower leagues the moment anyone with a moment of PL experience came along.

 

[CentralQuay]

I'm judging them both on what they've done for us under the current manager and in the current system. Using your method, you'd have dropped every one of our players who came up with us from the lower leagues the moment anyone with a moment of PL experience came along.

How do you work that out?
I'm judging them on performances in the current side in the Premier League.....Sharp in League 1 or the Championship is irrelevant, as are McBurnie's goals last season.

Why do you think Wilder is selecting McBurnie over Sharp?

 

[Cheesebored]

Why do you think Wilder is selecting McBurnie over Sharp?

Not that again. I furnished you with enough information in the other thread about why that's not the case. Horses for courses. Without going over old ground look at Wilder's team selection in the home fixtures before lockdown.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

How do you work that out?
I'm judging them on performances in the current side in the Premier League.....Sharp in League 1 or the Championship is irrelevant, as are McBurnie's goals last season.

I work that out from your own claim that any performance in lower leagues is irrelevant compared to performances in the PL. You've just repeated it. Do you even understand your own arguments?

Why do you think Wilder is selecting McBurnie over Sharp?

Why do you think he plays Sharp at all when he's got "not much left to offer on the pitch"?

 

[CentralQuay]

I work that out from your own claim that any performance in lower leagues is irrelevant compared to performances in the PL. You've just repeated it. Do you even understand your own arguments?


Why do you think he plays Sharp at all when he's got "not much left to offer on the pitch"?

I said that Sharp's performances in the lower leagues are not a fair comparison to McBurnie's in this league.
You claimed that Sharp had 'already proved himself'.......I'm asking when?

This season Sharp has been the least played of the 4 main strikers.
He also was loaned out to the lower leagues during the 2 seasons he was at a club in this division.
So where did he 'prove himself' at this level?

Three seasons at a Premier League club.
Two he was sent out on loan.
The other, he has scored 3 goals in 21 appearances.

At 34, he is not the future.
He plays because of a lack of depth up top.
Why did Wilder bring in 3 strikers this season?

 

[CentralQuay]

Not that again. I furnished you with enough information in the other thread about why that's not the case. Horses for courses. Without going over old ground look at Wilder's team selection in the home fixtures before lockdown.

McBurnie has featured in 31 of 33 games.
Sharp has featured in 21 of 33 games.

That is not a 5 or 10% swing, its a massive difference.
Wilder believes McBurnie has more to offer.

Wilder is a manager who likes to consistently pick a settled side and system.
Why is Sharp the exception?
He is the one who has been removed from the side as a regular since promotion unlike Fleck/Norwood/JOC/Basham etc

 

[Cheesebored]

McBurnie has featured in 31 of 33 games.
Sharp has featured in 21 of 33 games.

That is not a 5 or 10% swing, its a massive difference.
Wilder believes McBurnie has more to offer.

Wilder is a manager who likes to consistently pick a settled side and system.
Why is Sharp the exception?
He is the one who has been removed from the side as a regular since promotion unlike Fleck/Norwood/JOC/Basham etc

Because we're talking about rotation of the forwards, which as I pointed out previously is something Wilder has done on a fairly regular basis. Again you're making assumptions about what Wilder believes. Unless Wilder's spoken to you directly I'd suggest you're pissing in the wind with your beliefs. Its absolutely fine to have discussion on other fans forums and I've no agenda against you, in fact I've liked several of your other posts but you've progressively come across as slightly arrogant and all knowing about the footballing side of our club and sooner or later you'll come a cropper and rightly be taken to task over your opinions which you state as fact.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

I said that Sharp's performances in the lower leagues are not a fair comparison to McBurnie's in this league.
You claimed that Sharp had 'already proved himself'.......I'm asking when?

I've told you already how I'm judging them, but you've ignored it because it doesn't fit your argument. You only want to consider PL performances, so once again, on that logic you'd have dropped the players that came up with us in favour of anyone with a bit of PL experience.

This season Sharp has been the least played of the 4 main strikers.
He also was loaned out to the lower leagues during the 2 seasons he was at a club in this division.
So where did he 'prove himself' at this level?

Three seasons at a Premier League club.
Two he was sent out on loan.
The other, he has scored 3 goals in 21 appearances.

You are prepared to judge Sharp based on a season at a different club, under a different manager, playing a different system, after he was only played in two games. Yet aren't judging McBurnie on his PL performances with Swansea where he failed to score.
If McBurnie's proved himself enough to you in this season then Sharp's proved himself at this level during this season. Unless you are about to make the ridiculous argument that 3 in 21 is dreadful and 5 in 31 is fantastic. Which I expect you're about to.

At 34, he is not the future.
He plays because of a lack of depth up top.
Why did Wilder bring in 3 strikers this season?

He doesn't play because there's a lack of depth up top. Today he could've left McBurnie on and could have brought Zivkovic on. He chose to bring Sharp on.
No one thinks he's the future, why are you arguing that? He is, however, perfectly capable of contributing this season, as he proved today.

 

[CentralQuay]

Because we're talking about rotation of the forwards, which as I pointed out previously is something Wilder has done on a fairly regular basis. Again you're making assumptions about what Wilder believes. Unless Wilder's spoken to you directly I'd suggest you're pissing in the wind with your beliefs. Its absolutely fine to have discussion on other fans forums and I've no agenda against you, in fact I've liked several of your other posts but you've progressively come across as slightly arrogant and all knowing about the footballing side of our club and sooner or later you'll come a cropper and rightly be taken to task over your opinions which you state as fact.

I only comment on what I have some knowledge of, hence you will not find me in any of the threads talking about ownership of the ground etc, because I haven't got a club who the owner of the club even is, or who the previous one was.....That meant nothing to me during every visit to the Lane as i've only been interested in the football side, whether in the home or away end.

What has become obvious to me though, is that Wilder prefers McBurnie to Sharp.

The policy of rotation is something which Wilder have done this season with strikers, you're correct.
But, there's also no doubt, looking at the appearances of all 4 of the main strikers (McBurnie, McGoldrick, Mousset and Sharp) that McBurnie is subject the least to the rotation policy.

Number of appearance this season.

McBurnie - 31 of 33
Mousset - 27 of 33
McGoldrick - 25 of 33
Sharp - 21 of 33

Clearly Wilder chooses to play McBurnie whenever available, but not Sharp.

 

[Cheesebored]

I only comment on what I have some knowledge of, hence you will not find me in any of the threads talking about ownership of the ground etc, because I haven't got a club who the owner of the club even is, or who the previous one was.....That meant nothing to me during every visit to the Lane as i've only been interested in the football side, whether in the home or away end.

What has become obvious to me though, is that Wilder prefers McBurnie to Sharp.

The policy of rotation is something which Wilder have done this season with strikers, you're correct.
But, there's also no doubt, looking at the appearances of all 4 of the main strikers (McBurnie, McGoldrick, Mousset and Sharp) that McBurnie is subject the least to the rotation policy.

Number of appearance this season.

McBurnie - 31 of 33
Mousset - 27 of 33
McGoldrick - 25 of 33
Sharp - 21 of 33

Clearly Wilder chooses to play McBurnie whenever available, but not Sharp.

They're different types of player though wouldn't you agree? That's the reason Wilder has played them as a partnership on numerous occasions. Your argument might hold more water were you to compare Sharp against either Mousset or Mcgoldrick. Factor in the fact Sharp was missing through suspension and both Mousset and Mcgoldrick have been out with injuries and your appearance statistics can easily be argued away.

 

[CentralQuay]

They're different types of player though wouldn't you agree? That's the reason Wilder has played them as a partnership on numerous occasions. Your argument might hold more water were you to compare Sharp against either Mousset or Mcgoldrick. Factor in the fact Sharp was missing through suspension and both Mousset and Mcgoldrick have been out with injuries and your appearance statistics can easily be argued away.

Now you're just trying to change the point I made.

In fact i've continuously agreed that they are different types of played, hence I said McBurnie offers more. I said that Wilder prefers McBurnie over Sharp......The stats show that McBurnie is the first striker on the team sheet, ahead of Mousset, McGoldrick and Sharp.

Yes they do offer different threats as a 9.
But Wilder clearly prefers what McBurnie offers hence he's been played by Wilder in over 90% of games, whilst Sharp is trailing in the 60% range.

For me, McBurnie offers a lot more, but that is a slightly different debate.
He appears to be the only 1 of the 4 who really is not subject to rotation.

 

[Carlton Blade]

The issue with Berge was he offered almost zero positives in his first 400 minutes. It was a big stretch for those of us who hadn't watched loads of him in Belgium to understand where the improvement was going to come from. I never wrote him off but I certainly questioned the financial outlay for someone seemingly a million miles off the pace. His improvement from Arsenal onhasbeen pretty astounding. One big thing to consider - his first 400 league minutes were without McGoldrick, just having Didzy on the pitch is unlocking so much more roomfor the whole team.

The McBurnie stuff was harsh. He's never going to create a goal out of nothing and we had about 4 attacks in those first 3 games. But as a complimentary forward in an attacking unit he's been excellent the last 3

Moose is Moose

 

[JohnDenver]

The issue with Berge was he offered almost zero positives in his first 400 minutes. It was a big stretch for those of us who hadn't watched loads of him in Belgium to understand where the improvement was going to come from. I never wrote him off but I certainly questioned the financial outlay for someone seemingly a million miles off the pace. His improvement from Arsenal onhasbeen pretty astounding. One big thing to consider - his first 400 league minutes were without McGoldrick, just having Didzy on the pitch is unlocking so much more roomfor the whole team.

We all see things differently, but Berge showed me plenty in his early games to underline his potential. That’s not to say he stood out in those matches, or will definitely go on to great things. Rather that the fundamentals for an exceptional player were all there to see straight away.

Touch, passing, composure, power, height... What was missing was consistent involvement in the games, fitness and familiarity with his teammates.

So I objected to the waste of money claims. We bought huge and obvious potential.

As for McBurnie, I see enough to know he’s a useful performer at this level. The next step is for him to become a coveted asset who scores a few more goals. I’m not convinced the potential is there for that, but it’s a possibility.

 

[CentralQuay]

The issue with Berge was he offered almost zero positives in his first 400 minutes. It was a big stretch for those of us who hadn't watched loads of him in Belgium to understand where the improvement was going to come from. I never wrote him off but I certainly questioned the financial outlay for someone seemingly a million miles off the pace. His improvement from Arsenal onhasbeen pretty astounding. One big thing to consider - his first 400 league minutes were without McGoldrick, just having Didzy on the pitch is unlocking so much more roomfor the whole team.

The McBurnie stuff was harsh. He's never going to create a goal out of nothing and we had about 4 attacks in those first 3 games. But as a complimentary forward in an attacking unit he's been excellent the last 3

Moose is Moose

The Berge criticism seemed to intensify straight after the lockdown, given the poor results and pretty disappointing performances.

What I couldn't understand though was the criticism he was getting from those games individually, when it was clear that he was the best of the three in midfield in those games....Or I guess to put it more correctly, he was less worse than Norwood who couldn't pass 2 yards and Fleck who went missing, especially at Newcastle. Fleck and Norwood were very poor in their performances alongside Berge. They did not help the guy out at all.

What Berge hasn't done so far is shy away from the ball. He's always trying to get involved, but at times is not that effective which I put down to playing in a not only a completely different system, but different position.


I think there's still a reluctance for some to accept that for any longevity and progression at this level Norwood/Sharp have to be improved upon. Especially given their age. Wilder already knows this though, hence his signings. He wanted Berge back in the summer alongside McBurnie, so it's not difficult to infer that these are the areas he most wanted to develop. I wouldn't be surprised to see a CB in the summer to eventually overtake Basham and sit alongside Egan and JOC.

 

[Carlton Blade]

We all see things differently, but Berge showed me plenty in his early games to underline his potential. That’s not to say he stood out in those matches, or will definitely go on to great things. Rather that the fundamentals for an exceptional player were all there to see straight away.

Touch, passing, composure, power, height... What was missing was consistent involvement in the games, fitness and familiarity with his teammates.

So I objected to the waste of money claims. We bought huge and obvious potential.

As for McBurnie, I see enough to know he’s a useful performer at this level. The next step is for him to become a coveted asset who scores a few more goals. I’m not convinced the potential is there for that, but it’s a possibility.

We'll have to agree to disagree on what Berge showed pre-Arsenal. I saw was a young lad who looked lost, timid (especially in any physical encounters) and unable to exert any influence on the game. There was no question that his passing was crisp and his touch good. But everything was about passing on responsibility to others and avoiding making any difficult decisions with the ball. I didn't say it was a waste of money but his whole potential was (for me) based on his performances for his previous club. If the club had decided he'd picked up an 'injury' and told him to sit down till next season it would have been understandable. His willingness to takes risks on the ball now, and to use his physical attributes to his advantage make him a completely different prospect.

McBurnie looks a different prospect when we get men forward and play off him. He's not Drogba or any other one man forward line type player. He's shown enough for me this season to think he can regularly score 10-15 goals a season if we play like we have the last 3 games.

 

[Carlton Blade]

The Berge criticism seemed to intensify straight after the lockdown, given the poor results and pretty disappointing performances.

What I couldn't understand though was the criticism he was getting from those games individually, when it was clear that he was the best of the three in midfield in those games....Or I guess to put it more correctly, he was less worse than Norwood who couldn't pass 2 yards and Fleck who went missing, especially at Newcastle. Fleck and Norwood were very poor in their performances alongside Berge. They did not help the guy out at all.

What Berge hasn't done so far is shy away from the ball. He's always trying to get involved, but at times is not that effective which I put down to playing in a not only a completely different system, but different position.


I think there's still a reluctance for some to accept that for any longevity and progression at this level Norwood/Sharp have to be improved upon. Especially given their age. Wilder already knows this though, hence his signings. He wanted Berge back in the summer alongside McBurnie, so it's not difficult to infer that these are the areas he most wanted to develop. I wouldn't be surprised to see a CB in the summer to eventually overtake Basham and sit alongside Egan and JOC.

Showing for the ball and playing a 5 yard backwards pass was Berge's main contribution in those early games (including pre-lockdown). That is fine when you are having the majority of the ball and creating chances but when you aren't you need your better players to take risks with the ball. Berge has started doing that now and he looks a completely different player for it

 

[Rodley]

I'm not trying to go over the debate again. My point is the way the reaction has been, which is to slam people for having a different opinion. Argue the opinion, fine, simply say you don't agree, fine, even say "what a load of bollocks" and leave it at that if you want. But generic posts about how "embarrassing" it all is, attacking the posters themselves, starting "Humble Pie" threads, is not debating the issue at all. The like-for-like reaction is "the happy clappers are back". Where does that leave us?
It's possible to have two reasonable opinions that disagree with each other. And as I say, I've seen very little that is fundamentally unreasonable.

So you’re annoyed about an overreaction to an overreaction then?

 

[DronnieBlade]

It is difficult to argue that the OP, at the time of writing, has a point.

You could if you wish (as some have) but it is mostly futile.

Now.

If you could foresee (and for certain) that a significant up tick in individual performance levels was coming from the players in question, then goody gum drops. Jolly good show !! Certainly one up on moi .

If you would like to conveniently ignore the significant prior evidence of sub standard performance levels, then. IMHO, you would be guilty of entirely missing the point.

Last 2 or 3 games encouraging. Let’s see if the individuals in question can build on that !

UTB.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

So you’re annoyed about an overreaction to an overreaction then?

No, I'm hoping reasonable discussion doesn't get replaced by childish spats between "followers" and "heretics".


Yes, I did see your winky (Sid James laugh) but thought I'd reply anyway.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

Now you're just trying to change the point I made.

In fact i've continuously agreed that they are different types of played, hence I said McBurnie offers more. I said that Wilder prefers McBurnie over Sharp......The stats show that McBurnie is the first striker on the team sheet, ahead of Mousset, McGoldrick and Sharp.

Yes they do offer different threats as a 9.

Actually, you're trying to change your own point, which was:

Sharp doesn't have much left to offer on the pitch at the club

 

[corner_flag]

Showing for the ball and playing a 5 yard backwards pass was Berge's main contribution in those early games (including pre-lockdown). That is fine when you are having the majority of the ball and creating chances but when you aren't you need your better players to take risks with the ball. Berge has started doing that now and he looks a completely different player for it

Agree, that is what was frustrating about him, and at times it felt like we really needed a forceful attack and this cautiousness, seeming to hold back, had me screaming at the TV
But he seems intelligent and capable so I wonder whether that was what he'd been told to do? And now he's been let off the leash? And he's been a joy to watch because of it

 

[8lade]

I think there's still a reluctance for some to accept that for any longevity and progression at this level Norwood/Sharp have to be improved upon. Especially given their age. Wilder already knows this though, hence his signings. He wanted Berge back in the summer alongside McBurnie, so it's not difficult to infer that these are the areas he most wanted to develop. I wouldn't be surprised to see a CB in the summer to eventually overtake Basham and sit alongside Egan and JOC.

We all know Wilder is 'loyal but not sentimental' (although I personally would question his loyalty to Sharp over the last 2 seasons) and Wilder's man (Mitchell) is constantly on the move looking for improvements, we've bolstered the squad amazingly for very little money but realistically how much to replace either Sharp or Norwood with a known improvement? For £20m you might get a player as good as Sharp but younger (I'm thinking of Watkins, it might take £25m) so we are on what I suspect is the limit of what we can afford.
Why do I think Sharp gets left out?
He's not as good as McG or McB defensively McB in particular is a huge asset.
He can't hold the ball up as well as those 2.
He's not a fast outlet like Mousset or Zivkovic.
But he is our most intelligent striker, the best attacking header of the ball and the best finisher (although when Mousset played v Man Utd he looked exceptional), so given that level of play he still has plenty to offer. However at his age this may be his last season at this level he may go on for another 3 but United have to make contingency for worst case scenario.

 

[CentralQuay]

Actually, you're trying to change your own point, which was:

I stick by that 100%.
Where have I argued against or tried to change that?

Yes they do offer different threats as a 9.

Interesting that you misinterpret this.
You're clearly assuming i'm claiming that offering different threats means they both offer a similar amount.....I'm not.

Sharp is probably the better finisher.
But besides that, McBurnie offers everything else that Sharp cannot.
Ability in the air, leading the line, pressuring the opposition, fitness to last 90 minutes at a high intensity etc.


To sum it up, for the sake of the debate, lets say there are 10 key attributes required from a striker, i'm arguing that McBurnie has 8/9 of them whilst Sharp has 1/2.