The Manchester United thread 2006/2007 - featuring BBB leaving early

[Nick OGS20]

jings, just noticed in the 'british players abroad' thread someone talking about Kenny Cooper - seems he made his debut for the US (and scored) on Saturday

either the US are very short on strikers or he's improved immensely since he left us a year or so ago

[Hairy Coo]

ASTROTURF

[Nick OGS20]

put the bucky away dude

[Saha]

jings

[Taz & The Devil]

I saw the Del Piero news yesterday and thought back to what i said in the match thread on Sunday.

Fergie has a habit of going to players who are past it because he loved them in their prime. he either tried to sign them and got knocked back or they did well against us and the minute they are past it he goes in for them because its the only time they will join us.

He then plays said players everygame despite us having better options or what not. Blanc was just way too slow for the Prem and Larsson, who has done well so far, should not have started against Arsenal.

Yes Henke in a 4-4-2 but if you are playing the lone front man i think Saha so much better for the job.

[mark g]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Young Jimlad:

Looking at that again we look so completely lost at sea when the ball comes in.

The ball was damn-near perfect for Henry but if it had dropped a bit deeper for Baptista we'd have been just as screwed.

I understand why people are saying Vidic but he's got Adebayor to deal with, Gary is miles away from van Persie if it hits the back post, Rooney and Carrick (I think its him) have left Baptista on his own if it goes deep as I state above, and Henry is there, ghosting in behind Rio because he's positioned himself much too far away from him in anticipation of a near post cross that never came. Too much attention paid to whats in front of him and not enough behind. He's with him at the edge of the 18 yrd box but then he steps forward and leaves Vidic overloaded.

I'm not saying that the cross didn't make it, but the way it was delivered capitalised on the poor positioning of our team as it came in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's all very well, except i think i've seen where the argument has come on who's fault it is. You seem to have made the mistake that most people blaming Rio have made, which is getting the two players mixed up. Vidic misses the header, and Rio is left in the middle with both Adebayor and Henry.

[mark g]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nick OGS20:

it's Rio's fault primarily for me, but no-one covers themselves in glory. Henry is Rio's man, Rio's nowhere near him.

i didn't think our performance was that bad, certainly didn't think we deserved to lose. we had the better chances first half, and at times i thought we were very comfortable and completely in control. didn't deal with arsenal's substitutions, in addition to the other problems we have defending a lead. don't think there could have been too many complaints had we hung on to our lead frankly.

tactically, i'm not even that anti-451/433. i can see the logic for playing it, we're just going about it the wrong way - trying to cram out 442 players into a 451/433 and as such it doesn't work how it should for us and we negate our best players in an attacking sense.

when we play it yesterday, we basically play 4-4-1-1, ronaldo and rooney wide (the former pushed on more) and giggs in the hole. this basically compromises at least four of our players - rooney stuck out wide offers defensive diligence, hard work but we lose his creativity in the middle. giggs in the hole is not even half the player he is out wide. ronaldo hasn't got the freedom to go forward he ordinarily would have, and larsson (or whoever plays centre-forward) is left incredibly isolated (not least because giggs doesn't really know how to play off the striker).

if we really want to play that way (and again, i can see the logic in a game like yesterday, even if i don't necessarily agree with it), there are two much better approaches to take. #1 is to swap Ronaldo and Giggs - you get Giggs' superior defensive work on the wing and you give Ronaldo freedom to roam. Ronaldo's still not the ideal 'second striker' though and it doesn't solve the Rooney problem. my preferred approach is #2 - go to a very defined 433, drop Giggs, play Fletch (or Hargreaves if he signs, arf). Ronaldo and Rooney play as advanced wingers (as Ole and Giggs did when we actually got the 433 to work), and they can push on because we've got the extra defensive body (especially an energetic, close-everything-down midfielder like Fletch/OH) covering them and protecting the fullbacks.

or, erm, just play 442 ofc </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ffs nick, stop overanalysing it

A couple of points on that. The way we play normally week in week out and have done since Cantona arrived is nearer 4-4-1-1. When they swap Giggs in there it generally becomes a straight 4-5-1 because Giggs plays much further from the striker than Rooney does. When he does it it's more a midfielder with more licence to get forward, whereas with Rooney it's a forward who tracks back.

As for seeing the logic, i think we're maybe seeing two seperate issues when in fact there's only one. I think it's more than likely that the late goals issue is one and the same as the issue with how we played, especially at the end on sunday.

I think it's a mentality one, which is that there seems to be this attitude with Fergie in recent years that there's more of an emphasis on hanging onto what you've got, which has never been his philosophy in the past. So the late goals costing us points are not a fitness or concentration issue at all, but a consequnce of trying to hold onto a draw or a one goal lead, and subsequently being pushed back and inviting pressure. I've always said that it's a dangerous tactic for teams who are used to playing that way, although for them it can be successful. But for teams who are generally attacking in mentality it's suicide, because they are not set up to kill games, and so end up conceding goals by going more defensive more often than not.

[JulesMUFC]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gonch19:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JulesMUFC:

just to let you guys know interview didnt go great, but picked up AFTER i got my **** out, who wouldnt thought! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

what company </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Goldman Sachs, didnt actually get my **** out btw.

Sun are running the 70+ conceeding times, rednews for more info.

[Terry Cheung]

Good point mark. Actually I immediately thought of England vs France at Euro 2004.

The similarities is that England and United don't have the players with the necessary mentality to hang on for the draw.

[mark g]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Terry Cheung:

Good point mark. Actually I immediately thought of England vs France at Euro 2004.

The similarities is that England and United don't have the players with the necessary mentality to hang on for the draw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Absolutely, and as well as mentality, it's skills as well. Again in both cases, it's teams trying to kill a game without even one destructive midfielder on the pitch. It's nonsense.

[James07?]

I'm not sure it was anything to do with tactics. It was simply being put under huge pressure by a very talented team who had to throw the lot at us. They pushed us back rather than us deciding to go on the defensive.

[mark g]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James07?:

I'm not sure it was anything to do with tactics. It was simply being put under huge pressure by a very talented team who had to throw the lot at us. They pushed us back rather than us deciding to go on the defensive. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There's certainly an element of that as well. But when you're set up with a midfielder supposedly as the second striker and he's already playing too deep, it's a natural progression that he starts playing level with the rest of your midfield, and from there that your one striker is isolated, which means that you have no outlet and invite more pressure as the ball just keeps coming back.

While you're correct that we've only looked at what we were doing and ignored arsenal in the discussion, which doesn't give the whole picture, you equally can't go the other way and pretend that what tactics we used didn't have any bearing on the outcome either.

[mark g]

One other thing i meant to say. If you want a game to compare it with, think of us ending Arsenals unbeaten run. Similar situation after we scored, and that we were under pressure from them trying to get back into the game. the difference was we were brave, kept an attacking enough mentality to always be a threat on the break, and while we conceded chances we created them as well, and got our reward with a second goal to kill the game.

I wonder how much the change in mentality is down to us not having a destructive midfielder. While he wasn't consistently good enough, Smith played that game, and i wonder how much having someone getting round breaking up attacks gave Fergie the reassurance to leave other players upfield. I wonder if as there's no-one to do that job in the squad, whether he feels he needs an extra body in there to compensate?

[James07?]

Did we make any tactical changes at all in the game of any substance? We started the match to contain and maybe grab something on the break. We did that and then naturally fell back as Arsenal upped the pressure. Individual players like Evra making their own decisions to curb runs etc rather than Ferguson changing things led to us dropping deeper and deeper.

If we'd started the game in a more attacking frame of mind with a 442/4411 and then changed things when we scored it'd be more of a tactics issue.

[mark g]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James07?:

Did we make any tactical changes at all in the game of any substance? We started the match to contain and maybe grab something on the break. We did that and then naturally fell back as Arsenal upped the pressure. Individual players like Evra making their own decisions to curb runs etc rather than Ferguson changing things led to us dropping deeper and deeper.

If we'd started the game in a more attacking frame of mind with a 442/4411 and then changed things when we scored it'd be more of a tactics issue. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not at all. I think the way the game went from the start suggested the tactics were wrong, and our goal was against the run of play. Even if you consider we started correctly, not changing the tactics to address a changing match situation is just as bad as making the wrong changes. Doing nothing is a decision in itself. And there was certainly a change that at once highlighted the problems i was talking about and made them worse, which was breaking up the back 4 to take Ronaldo off and stick Evra in midfield. If that wasn't a clear indication that Fergie was endorsing the "hang onto what you've got" policy i don't know what is.

[gonch19]

i think our tactics were pretty sound most of the game, even wenger said first half we had the tactics right and he had to address it. its all well and good saying we should come out and attack attack attack but you have to remember arsenal are the type of team that can explore space very well. if you notice for example, neville barely roamed down the right to get crosses in like he usually does which denied henry any space down the left keeping him largely anonymous.

i think the bottom line is we lost nerve/tired in the final 10-15 minutes and it cost us.

[Saha]

Excuse my stupidity, but Del Piero news?

[James07?]

Thing is Mark, I've no issue with the tactics at the start of the game. Considering the circumstances it was a sensible approach. I agree though, that doing nothing can be as much of a mistake as doing something wrong...and I'm not trying to absolve SAF from any blame.

Even so, what other options did he have available on the bench to make changes?

I'd also say that at the time the Heinze / Evra / Ronaldo change made sense. Ronnie wasn't really in the game at the time, Evra had been our best attacking option for much of the game (but had started to sit back more). I'm not sure putting Gabby on was such a risk (or mistake) as you seem to be suggesting...bit of hindsight at work?

Out of interest, at 1-0 up with 20 minutes to go and Arsenal dominating more and more, what would you have done?

[mark g]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gonch19:

i think our tactics were pretty sound most of the game, even wenger said first half we had the tactics right and he had to address it. its all well and good saying we should come out and attack attack attack but you have to remember arsenal are the type of team that can explore space very well. if you notice for example, neville barely roamed down the right to get crosses in like he usually does which denied henry any space down the left keeping him largely anonymous.

i think the bottom line is we lost nerve/tired in the final 10-15 minutes and it cost us. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's nothing to do with "attack attack attack", i'm not suggesting we get keegan as manager. What i'm saying is that there's a fundamental issue with whether we should be more worrying about the opposition, or letting them worry about us. Now within that basic mindset you can still tweak things like the Neville situation, but there comes a point where you have to decide if changing your tactics to negate the opposition is compromising your own game more. Apart from right at the start, and a couple of other 5 minute spells, we were barely an attacking threat. Yet all our success this season has come from our attacking play, and trusting that even if we concede one that way we'll outscore the opposition.

You also have to look at the makeup of the squad. While i don't like the tactic, if we had a more flexible squad, with a Makelele type player especially, and we could play equally well either way, we could consider switching tactics to counter other teams without comprimising our effectiveness. But we don't have that. We have a squad and a first XI that is set up to play a pacy, attacking game, and that certainly isn't set up to try and stifle teams into 1-0 wins or 0-0 draws. As i said before, if you haven't got a destructive midfielder you're immediately forced to get a 5th body into midfield, which is a) less effective anyway when it's basically 5 attacking players, and b) negates our own attacking strength, our main asset, more than it negates the oppositions.

[Taz & The Devil]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James07?:

Thing is Mark, I've no issue with the tactics at the start of the game. Considering the circumstances it was a sensible approach. I agree though, that doing nothing can be as much of a mistake as doing something wrong...and I'm not trying to absolve SAF from any blame.

Even so, what other options did he have available on the bench to make changes?

I'd also say that at the time the Heinze / Evra / Ronaldo change made sense. Ronnie wasn't really in the game at the time, Evra had been our best attacking option for much of the game (but had started to sit back more). I'm not sure putting Gabby on was such a risk (or mistake) as you seem to be suggesting...bit of hindsight at work?

Out of interest, at 1-0 up with 20 minutes to go and Arsenal dominating more and more, what would you have done? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ronaldo is one of those players who whether having a good game or bad game you know has the class to make something out of nothing and so you make sure you shackle him from the word go.

Ronaldo is not only a great outlet for us with runs like the one that took the ball straight from an Arsenal corner and won us one but Eboue was saying back because he didnt want to let Ronaldo in behind. The minute Ronnie went off it allowed Eboue to go forward.

Not to mention i think at 1-1 when you take off your biggest threat and throw on a defender that must have given Arsenal a big lift.

[vanester]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Saha:

Excuse my stupidity, but Del Piero news? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>We were after him in summer but he opted to stay in Juve

[mark g]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James07?:

Thing is Mark, I've no issue with the tactics at the start of the game. Considering the circumstances it was a sensible approach. I agree though, that doing nothing can be as much of a mistake as doing something wrong...and I'm not trying to absolve SAF from any blame. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the first bit i disagree with. Rooney wide and Giggs up the middle must have had Wenger rubbing his hands. We could have been set up with everyone in their correct position and stil reigned Gary Neville in a bit to counter Henry without comprimising ourselves half as much as we did. And as i've said before, there's also the physcholgical aspect to consider, both to our own team as well as Arsenal's. As soon as you make a significant tactical switch from your own normal and best line up, you say to the opposition that we fear you, and you put your own team on the back foot by saying we're more concerned about stopping the opposition scoring rather than scoring ourselves. If you do it every week it's normal, if you make a switch for a big game where players are already apprehensive you send out the wrong message imo.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Even so, what other options did he have available on the bench to make changes?

I'd also say that at the time the Heinze / Evra / Ronaldo change made sense. Ronnie wasn't really in the game at the time, Evra had been our best attacking option for much of the game (but had started to sit back more). I'm not sure putting Gabby on was such a risk (or mistake) as you seem to be suggesting...bit of hindsight at work? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You could certainly argue that i'm making it out to be more of a problem than it was, but it certainly wasn't hindsight. I complained as i saw the sub being made for two reasons. One was that it was instinctively negative, and took off one of the few players who could have held onto the ball for us and carried it upfield. I take your point that he hadn't been hugely effective in an attacking sense, but i still felt he could have been an outlet.

The second point was that i think it's a bad move to put a new defender on that late in the game when you're under the cosh unless it's absolutely neccessary. They come on cold, aren't used to the pace of the game, and are more likely to make mistakes. If he felt taking Ronaldo off was absolutely neccessary, which would have been more arguable because of the yellow card than anything, i'd have put Fletch on in the middle and pushed Giggs to the left.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">

Out of interest, at 1-0 up with 20 minutes to go and Arsenal dominating more and more, what would you have done? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's hard to argue from that position, because i'd have approached the game in a different way from the start. But at that point i'd have wanted us set up in the normal way, with Rooney central and Giggs wide. I'd have also gone braver and given Ronaldo more licence to stay upfield a little, with Giggs tucking in a little more, to give us more another outlet. The other change we were screaming out for was Saha on earlier. Larsson had worked hard but not really got into the game, and i thought Saha's pace would have given us more threat on the break again.

The key in that situation is to maintain an attacking threat. It makes defenders think twice about joining in as they know they have to cover. If they do join in, it leaves space to be exploited in an attempt to get a second goal to kil the game. And if nothing else, it allows you posession higher up the pitch to relieve the pressure and give your defence a break. i felt at the end of the game especially we failed to do all those things sufficiently often.

[Father Senegal]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nick OGS20:

blimey, senegal really is wise :*( </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great page topper, if a little confusing.

At 1-0 you should have attacked us, you pretty much stopped playing at that point and handed the initiative to us.

[gonch19]

i think we could really have done with hargreaves on sunday fwiw

[player_65]

*sigh* just doesn't quite cover it

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Kieran Richardson has vowed to fight for his future at Manchester United after revealing he has the backing manager Sir Alex Ferguson.

The versatile midfielder has made just five starts this term, which can be attributed to the form of the evergreen Ryan Giggs, the resurgence of Paul Scholes and star quality of Cristiano Ronaldo.

England international Richardson admits he has found it tough watching on from the sidelines this term, but is determined to forge a successful career at Old Trafford.

“I will be staying at Manchester United and fighting for my position,†he exclusively told skysports.com from a photoshoot for Adidas' F50+ clothing and footwear range.

“The gaffer does not want me to go and if the gaffer does not want me to go then I want to stay.

“The gaffer always tells those who are not playing that it is hard because the team is playing so well and it is hard to bring you in.

“We have a 23-man squad and we are all internationals so you are going to get people who are not playing and at the moment I am one of those people.

“But hopefully I can get through it and earn my place.

“You sometimes ask the gaffer ‘why am I not playing?’ But he tells you he wants to keep you involved and to keep going.

“And that is what you do, you need a good 23-man squad to win the Premiership and hopefully we have got that and hopefully we can win it.â€

Richardson burst onto the international scene in 2005, but he is aware that he needs to be playing regularly in order to catch the eye of England manager Steve McClaren.

“Always playing for your country is a main aim," he added. "But obviously you want to get your club sorted out first.

â€If you get your club sorted, playing for Manchester United, then the international thing will take care of itself.

“There is no better honour than playing for your country.â€

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fergie senility making another appearance

[alilaw]

Die Richardson.

[mark g]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The versatile midfielder has made just five starts this term, which can be attributed to the form of the evergreen Ryan Giggs, the resurgence of Paul Scholes and star quality of Cristiano Ronaldo. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmm. I don't know about anyone else, but i get the feeling that list is missing the main reason hes not been playing.

[JulesMUFC]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">

The versatile midfielder has made just five starts this term, which can be attributed to the form of the evergreen Ryan Giggs, the resurgence of Paul Scholes, star quality of Cristiano Ronaldo and that he is ****ing dire \o/

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

fixed

[gonch19]

richardson putting country over club. tut tut

[Young Jimlad]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mark g:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Young Jimlad:

Looking at that again we look so completely lost at sea when the ball comes in.

The ball was damn-near perfect for Henry but if it had dropped a bit deeper for Baptista we'd have been just as screwed.

I understand why people are saying Vidic but he's got Adebayor to deal with, Gary is miles away from van Persie if it hits the back post, Rooney and Carrick (I think its him) have left Baptista on his own if it goes deep as I state above, and Henry is there, ghosting in behind Rio because he's positioned himself much too far away from him in anticipation of a near post cross that never came. Too much attention paid to whats in front of him and not enough behind. He's with him at the edge of the 18 yrd box but then he steps forward and leaves Vidic overloaded.

I'm not saying that the cross didn't make it, but the way it was delivered capitalised on the poor positioning of our team as it came in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's all very well, except i think i've seen where the argument has come on who's fault it is. You seem to have made the mistake that most people blaming Rio have made, which is getting the two players mixed up. Vidic misses the header, and Rio is left in the middle with both Adebayor and Henry. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Really? You're sure? Off to watch it again...

[Young Jimlad]

Yep sorry, my bad. Wasn't paying close enough attention. Just swap Vidic and Rio around in my analysis of where we went wrong.

GNev & Vidic AFFGs on Sunday then.

[Young Jimlad]

Lads, I couldn't apply for any of the CL group games so I didn't notice then, but are prices a bit higher for CL games than league games?

The areas I apply for are £30/£31 tickets for league games but I'm just about to process an application for the Lille home game and its £35 for the E/W Tier 2 and £36 for the NE/NW Quads. thats not including the admin fee ofc.

Quick reply would be cool to this one cheers

[James07?]

yes, and they go up again for QF / SF too.

[Saha]

i used the quick reply box when writing this just for you jimlad

[Young Jimlad]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Saha:

i used the quick reply box when writing this just for you jimlad </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cheers James, just wanted to make sure I knew what was going on.

[SLO_Fila]

I kept saying that against Arsenal, Chelsea, Arsenal again and Newcastle the team looked like **** in the last 20-30min. I attributed this to the players not acting interested anymore and just strolling around the pitch waiting for the game to end with a win but it does make sense if they are tired.

Rooney has been looking tired 3/4 of the season so far.

[SLO_Fila]

I still think that for the first goal it was Evra, Scholes, Neville and even VDS at fault for the goal

VDS - i thought he should have tried going with his upper torse first than with his legs first.

And for the 2nd goal it's obviously that's Vidic at fault.

[gonch19]

very interesting point by wenger i must say (if he said it at all ofc)

[BlacKouT]

Nick:

Ole Gunnar Solskjær:

Made his debut i 1990 - only played a few minutes. (Didn't say whether it was a few minutes in only one match or more matches)

First team from 1991. Haven't found any info from this season, but I think he mostly played for the 2. team this season too.

In 1992 he scored 30 goals

In 1993 he scored 20 goals

In 1994 he scored 31 goals

From 1991 to 1994 he played 71 matches, scoring 81 goals.

Clausenengen from 1990 to 1994:

Clausenengen - 1990:

Clausenengen 22 - 3 4 15 - 26-61 - 13 - Relegated

Clausenengen - 1991:

Clausenengen 22 - 10 5 7 - 67-41 - 35

Clausenengen - 1992:

Clausenengen 22 - 14 3 5 - 61-38 - 45

Clausenengen - 1993:

Clausenengen 22 - 19 1 2 - 54-10 - 58 Promoted

Clausenengen - 1994:

Clausenengen 22 - 9 4 9 - 48-43 - 31

Unfortunately, I don't think it's possible to find any seasonal stats for individual players from early 90's LL football in Norway, so I think you just have to make a qualified guess.

Those 109 apps/115 gls I read about everywhere must include every match Ole played for Clausenengen's senior team (including friendlies and cups).

[JulesMUFC]

just to let you guys know i got through my interview without showing my **** \o/

[Nick OGS20]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Taz & The Devil:

The minute Ronnie went off it allowed Eboue to go forward. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This point has kinda got overlooked, think it's utterly crucial personally.

[Nick OGS20]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlacKouT:

Nick:

Ole Gunnar Solskjær:

Made his debut i 1990 - only played a few minutes. (Didn't say whether it was a few minutes in only one match or more matches)

First team from 1991. Haven't found any info from this season, but I think he mostly played for the 2. team this season too.

In 1992 he scored 30 goals

In 1993 he scored 20 goals

In 1994 he scored 31 goals

From 1991 to 1994 he played 71 matches, scoring 81 goals.

Clausenengen from 1990 to 1994:

Clausenengen - 1990:

Clausenengen 22 - 3 4 15 - 26-61 - 13 - Relegated

Clausenengen - 1991:

Clausenengen 22 - 10 5 7 - 67-41 - 35

Clausenengen - 1992:

Clausenengen 22 - 14 3 5 - 61-38 - 45

Clausenengen - 1993:

Clausenengen 22 - 19 1 2 - 54-10 - 58 Promoted

Clausenengen - 1994:

Clausenengen 22 - 9 4 9 - 48-43 - 31

Unfortunately, I don't think it's possible to find any seasonal stats for individual players from early 90's LL football in Norway, so I think you just have to make a qualified guess.

Those 109 apps/115 gls I read about everywhere must include every match Ole played for Clausenengen's senior team (including friendlies and cups). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great stuff, that's a massive help, cheers

[ACou2000]

It's not so much the defeat itself (though I'm annoyed by that too) ... it's the sense that Fergie really doesnt have any idea why it happened and perhaps hasnt even noticed the problem that we've been conceding quite a few late goals recently. That's what worries me.

[Weststandred]

Can anyone remember the score it was last time we played Pompey in the FA Cup at home? iirc it was the year they got promoted, I remember they brought loads of fans and that we won, can't think of the score though. I think they might have played in some dodgy gold kit too.

[Nick OGS20]

yeah, his 'we won't make that mistake again' claim, no matter how sternly put, doesn't really ring true when you see how often we've made things awkward for ourselves in that way and just refused to learn from it.

Hargreaves would make a huge difference in that regard. if we can't get him, i still say Fletch should be utilised more in those kind of games.

anyway, this is all irrelevant. i've realised today that i didn't follow my usual pre-match ritual of listening to i am the resurrection on sunday - every time i've forgotten to this season we've lost/drawn

so blame me, but i won't make that mistake again, no question about that

[Weststandred]

The score of that fa cup game has been bugging me all day.

[Blaine]

just browsing ebay and came across this interesting item...

link here

[Blaine]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Weststandred:

The score of that fa cup game has been bugging me all day. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

4-1

http://red11.org/mufc/ShowAllResultsAgainstOpponent.do

[ACou2000]

like I said before. North Stand curse is going to be in full effect Saturday

forget your 4-1s... it's got 0-1 written all over it

[Taz & The Devil]

The last goal in that 4-1 F.A cup win over Pompey was great. Scholes just so brilliant.

Was 02/03, the year we won the Prem and they won the championship iirc.