mbh, Oscars had a few good games so a new target must be found unfortunately.

Did not realise it was that time again, why it only seems like yesterday, when you all where lined up to have a crack at the latest whipping boy.

Nando's gone now, someone has to carry the burden of fan wrath.

Odd how a player who has an impressive history of winning major cup finals is now apparently not to be trusted with playing in the League Cup.

 

Top of the league, top of our Champions League group, still in the cups and undefeated in all competitions... I guess people need to create a problem when there isn't one.

Odd how a player who has an impressive history of winning major cup finals is now apparently not to be trusted with playing in the League Cup.

 

 

 

By the same token couldn't you say it's odd that this same player isn't trusted to start a league match?

 

I also don't buy this argument that the fans have to find someone to 'abuse' or dislike. Even if it's the case, why is it Mikel and not Fabregas or Matic? They're both midfielders, in fact Matic has taken his position in the team yet rather than attracting the same level of ire he's become a fan favourite (much like Makelele).

 

It's weird that isn't it. Makelele is lauded as one of our all-time greats, Matic is seen as one of the big players (and possibly a future captain) yet Mikel, a hero of Munich and with over 300 appearances simply isn't loved in the same way.

Edited October 2, 201411 yr by Blue Daze

Keep the strawmen coming.

 

He was a highly rated AM and we took him and forced him to play DM and then people all had the pre conceived idea of what he would be and because he didn't live up to that lofty expectation people are annoyed. 

 

He isn't even a DM but is always compared to one. He plays his original position for Nigeria which is where he shines and people go 'why doesn't he do that for us?' Because we tell him to shield the defence , hold the ball and pass it to the other attacking players.

 

As another poster said, he is probably the best backup DM you can get, doesn't have high wages at all (people talk like he is super highly paid.... not really) and despite copping constant abuse from fans he still keeps his head down and does the job for the club. IIRC he played for us whilst his father was kidnapped in Nigeria.

 

Guy hasn't really done much to cop so much flak bar not be perceived as good as people want him to be. But as I said, here we are with another 2 pages on this thread from a 20 minute cameo of a game we won. For that, I'll back him for as long as he is at the club. Long live Mikel.

Edited October 2, 201411 yr by Stim

Keep the strawmen coming.

 

He was a highly rated AM and we took him and forced him to play DM and then people all had the pre conceived idea of what he would be and because he didn't live up to that lofty expectation people are annoyed. 

 

He isn't even a DM but is always compared to one. He plays his original position for Nigeria which is where he shines and people go 'why doesn't he do that for us?' Because we tell him to shield the defence , hold the ball and pass it to the other attacking players.

 

 

That's actually a good point. We tried turning him into a Makelele clone but that position really doesn't exist nowadays. We've moved beyond it and Mikel doesn't have a place in the team.

 

I think you're overstating his form for Nigeria. He was sh*t in the world cup.

 

Long live Mikel.

 

A player you say isn't a DM, but follow it up with the comment that he's best backup DM you can get. How's that work then?

 

Wouldn't a better back-up DM be an actual DM?

Because despite not being a DM he still manages to do a good job of it.

 

He was alright in the world cup. But it is Nigeria. And one world cup is not a good indicator of international form.

 

He backheel nutmegged Pogba at the world cup, which is still pretty funny.

Edited October 2, 201411 yr by Stim

 He was sh*t in the world cup.

 

 

How did you go in the world cup?

Because despite not being a DM he still manages to do a good job of it.

He was alright in the world cup.

This is where opinions differ. Mikel is essentially right on the edge of being average or good. And it depends on whether you want someone like that as a backup for Matic.

I don't mind him personally but we're so strong now that his position/place becomes an area of focus for those who want to see improvement. There is a huge disparity between the talents of Mikel and Matic, with no upside because Mikel will never improve.

The standard of International football is so far below domestic football in the top 3 European leagues that international form barely deserves any consideration.

Edited October 2, 201411 yr by venom2011

How did you go in the world cup?

 

Me personally? I've actually retired from international football to concentrate on my home life.

It really intrigues me,the whole Mikel argument.I honestly don't think he adds anything positive in anyway shape or form - and has never,apart from the odd occasion.IMO bringing Mikel on to close up a game,is like putting up an umbrella made of tissue paper to keep out the rain.

I think he will go down in our hall of fame,that earned a fortune and delivered very little ..sorry.

^ Which I think is grossly unfair because he has contributed to league titles, cups and the effing CL trophy. He was part of the midfield that kept out Barcelona!

 

He's made something like 300 appearances, how is that contributing very little?

Edited October 3, 201411 yr by Stim

• Premier League (5): 2002–03, 2006–07, 2007–08, 2008–09, 2010–11
• FA Cup (1): 2003–04
• Football League Cup (3): 2005–06, 2008–09 2009–10
• FA Community Shield (4): 2003, 2007, 2008, 2010
• UEFA Champions League (1): 2007–08
• FIFA Club World Cup (1): 2008

 

A person's status within the club isn't based solely on their medal haul. It's about what the supporters think they put on the pitch.

 

There is nothing about Mikel as a person that means we shouldn't like him so it's got to be down to his football that he's such a 'divisive' player.

Who are you talking about ?

 

And who said it was purely on medal haul? I said contributed to, hence the inclusion of how many appearances. He wasn't a bench rider, he played and made meaningful contributions to most of the medals he has won in his time here.

Edited October 3, 201411 yr by Stim

Who are you talking about ?

 

And who said it was purely on medal haul? I said contributed to, hence the inclusion of how many appearances. He wasn't a bench rider, he played and made meaningful contributions to most of the medals he has won in his time here.

It amazes me how often people say he has contributed nothing, completely ignoring the superb displays during the CL run, including the one in the final. I understand when some fans don't like/rate him, that's fine, that's their opinion. But to then completely whitewash any good displays is just being spiteful.

It's quite ironic that some of the posters defending him are the same who slaughtered Torres for the exact same thing.

Just saying...

Did I? Care to show where?

I've never slated Torres for it either...

There is a difference between players who are laughably substandard and players who are just a bit unspectacular. Mikel may well be the latter but he is definitely not the former, whereas Torres was the former and was a constant liability.

Who are you talking about ?

 

And who said it was purely on medal haul? I said contributed to, hence the inclusion of how many appearances. He wasn't a bench rider, he played and made meaningful contributions to most of the medals he has won in his time here.

 

That's John O'Shea's medal haul, a man who made 393 appearances for United winning pretty much everything along the way.

 

To me he's a passenger. He's never actually been a guy who has stepped up and led this team in the way Matic does now and Makelele did before him. 

 

It amazes me how often people say he has contributed nothing, completely ignoring the superb displays during the CL run, including the one in the final. I understand when some fans don't like/rate him, that's fine, that's their opinion. But to then completely whitewash any good displays is just being spiteful.

 

Do you actually want to discuss those performances where we played back to the wall football and relied massively on luck to win the Champions League?

 

If you don't want to whitewash those performances then let's discuss the role Mikel played in DM in the final where Bayern Munich created 34 chances, Gomez missing at least 3 clear chances and them also missing a penalty.

 

If you want to focus on those matches then what does it say about players like Bosingwa or Bertrand who featured in the final or JT who missed it and got sent off in the semi? I think those matches are an aberration to be quite honest - a massive achievement without doubt but a moment in time when everything went our way. Using that run to suggest Mikel is a anything more than a decent player is similar to using them to suggest Di Matteo is a good manager.

 

 

There is a difference between players who are laughably substandard and players who are just a bit unspectacular. Mikel may well be the latter but he is definitely not the former, whereas Torres was the former and was a constant liability.

 

Torres was broken. He went from being one of the best in the world to an empty shell of his former self which is why I find it hard to criticise him too much. The closest comparison is Tiger Woods drop-off after his 'scandal'.

 

Mikel isn't similar because he was never close to being the world's best. I can't think of a team in the top-12 in this country that he would get into because he's such a limited player now. Maybe I'm being harsh so I'll look at the table....Ok, Villa maybe and perhaps Palace although neither could afford his wages.

I'm not a Mikel fan, but as long as he's just back up to matic I'm happy. He does an ok job and can be relied on to slow play if we are ahead. We have enough depth now to use him appropriately.

What does any of that have to do with Mikels displays in the game? Wether we got lucky (come on) with our backs to the wall display or not it doesnt take away from the way Mikel handled 2 of the best attacking midfields in the game that season. Of those millions of chances created how many were just long shots from outside the box, how many were actual chances created by taking us apart, because they didnt exactly get in our penalty are that many times. Mikel was excellent in those games, and many others that have lead to trophies. Its as simple as that.

He can be such a frustrating player at times but is seen to be such a scapegoat by a majority of the fans which I think is unwarrented. As a backup he is solid if not spectacular he does his job well and gets on with it no moaning, great attitude to have in the squad.

What does any of that have to do with Mikels displays in the game? Wether we got lucky (come on) with our backs to the wall display or not it doesnt take away from the way Mikel handled 2 of the best attacking midfields in the game that season. Of those millions of chances created how many were just long shots from outside the box, how many were actual chances created by taking us apart, because they didnt exactly get in our penalty are that many times. Mikel was excellent in those games, and many others that have lead to trophies. Its as simple as that.

 

Well of the 34 chances they created, 21 were on target. I can't find the breakdown of where the shots were from but I remember Gomez missing a couple of absolute sitters.

 

Those games are where Mikel is at his best though - when 9 other players are defending alongside him. That to me is his upper limit, and we'll never actually dominate teams with him in the team.

 

He can be such a frustrating player at times but is seen to be such a scapegoat by a majority of the fans which I think is unwarrented. As a backup he is solid if not spectacular he does his job well and gets on with it no moaning, great attitude to have in the squad.

 

A scapegoat for what?

 

Even if that's true not a single person can give me a decent reason why HE is the one singled out. There's always allusions to scapegoating, being a whipping boy but no-one can say why.

 

Maybe it's just the case that he's an average player who shows a distinct lack of effort on occasion and most supporters recognise that. Although if that was the case then Jose would definitely go about replacing him in the starting XI. Oh wait....

 

 

Anyway this is far too much discussion for a man who hasn't started a league game all season and may well not do for a while. The book is closed, the judgment has been written and we've moved on from him. The same arguments from two years are still being used about a player who has been replaced.

Edited October 3, 201411 yr by Blue Daze

Well of the 34 chances they created, 21 were on target. I can't find the breakdown of where the shots were from but I remember Gomez missing a couple of absolute sitters.

Those games are where Mikel is at his best though - when 9 other players are defending alongside him. That to me is his upper limit, and we'll never actually dominate teams with him in the team.

A scapegoat for what?

Even if that's true not a single person can give me a decent reason why HE is the one singled out. There's always allusions to scapegoating, being a whipping boy but no-one can say why.

Maybe it's just the case that he's an average player who shows a distinct lack of effort on occasion and most supporters recognise that. Although if that was the case then Jose would definitely go about replacing him in the starting XI. Oh wait....

Anyway this is far too much discussion for a man who hasn't started a league game all season and may well not do for a while. The book is closed, the judgment has been written and we've moved on from him. The same arguments from two years are still being used about a player who has been replaced.

So can the same argument in reverse not count, the fact he was 1st choice for so long in so many trophy winning competitions shows how good he was?

As for book closed etc, it's good of you to tell us what we can and can't talk about, cheers.