• Manchester United Message Board

  • Neil Neil Jan 9, 2012 13:23 Flag

    I'm confused (don't tell the wife) - serious thread.

    We're all hearing official and unofficial quotes out of OT that united will not buy in January because you can't get the players you want and the cost is inflated. Plus United are rebuilding and don't want to add short-term fixes, despite long-term injuries.

    We are told Cahill wont be a good buy to help us out of an injury crisis in defence. And no point going for a CM as they are cup-tied or not good enough.

    So how come Fergie goes and gets Scholes back and rushes him into a major game? Someone who is past his best and wont be able to figure in every game. Surely that's a sign Fergie knows we need someone NOW and it doesn't have to be a long-term fix?!

    It can't just be availability. It has to be about money, hasn't it?!

    Also, Scholes couldn't have been match-fit? I know he's got a coaching role but it can't be as strenuous as training with the first team day in day out? Fergie was quoted as saying he left Rooney out of the B'burn game as he missed a training session (plus breaking going out rules). So the message is it's ok for one but not for someone else.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I would take everything Fergie says with a pinch of salt, like Keane said, he does whats right for him, or to be more precise, what Fergie thinks is right for the club. Unless you think he's going senile in his old age, then you're a fool for questioning his track record really.

      What annoyed me is when asked about a possible return for Beckham earlier this season, he laughed it off saying 'I dont think we've ever brought back someone as old as that!'....forgetting the fact he brougght in OAP's Laurent Blanc (well past it) and Henkrik Larsson (did OK)...and now he brings back Scholes!

      Then again, Becks is in Manchester at the moment.....

    • Booked in Rosso's this evening.

    • Sneijder and his entourage in a Midland hotel suite right now.

    • I don`t agree with Scholes return but I can see why utd have done it. Fletcher is out probably for the rest of the season, Cleverley is about a month away from a return and Anderson has just returned from a lengthy layoff which leaves utd with just Carrick and Gibson in centre midfield plus untried youngsters. So yes utd need some help at the moment but what they don`t need is to spend money - and given how much January transfers can cost a lot of money - on a player who once Cleverley is back is hardly likely to feature for the 1st team. Personally I would have preferred to see the likes of Pogba given a chance but I guess given how results have gone recently SAF thinks it would be too much of a risk not only in terms of results but also in terms of the potential damage it could do to the confidence of the young players. And yes in a way it is about money. SAF doesn`t have an unlimited budget and the bottom line is the more he spends in January the less he is likely to have in the summer. That`s fine if the player is one that utd have always been interested in, but short term fixes only risk leaving SAF with a reduced budget in the summer and no guarantee that the new player would settle in in time to be of use during the current injury crisis.

      • 1 Reply to A Yahoo! User
      • Devon, there are a number of players who are available, inexpensive (relatively), and long-term, are more than good enough to significantly improve the 1st team, let alone the squad! Italy, Belgium, France and Holland are the places to look.

        Fergie is crowing on about how there is no value in the January market. Then why an earth did he not buy a central midfielder in the summer?! It wreaks of poor management, having known of Fletcher's condition, and the risks associated with it, not to have gone out and spent on at least one central midfielder in the summer. Relying on Cleverley, talented though he is, was foolhardy in the extreme, given the lack of depth and quality in midfield. If it isn't poor management, then the only thing that it can be explained through is a lack of funds.

    • I think you've summed it up as well as anyone could have done. All excellent points.