As usual, Jazz comes up with the post that will probably be the post of the thread.Jazz 16 said:Keano was the best though in fairness.
Its hard for our present crop to compare because the ONLY Cm who
compares with Keano is Vieira and they both no longer play in the Prem.
We possibly have the best group of midfielders in European Football, along with
Barca and Chelsea possibly.
We cant complain too much to be fair. Scholes is a different player to Keane
but on his day equally as effective in other areas. There is time for Hargo and
Anderson as its their first season. Carrick as well is a different type of player.
You mention Essien who IS class and in the kind of Keane mould but to be
comparing our midfielders to Keane is a bit harsh imo.
As the saying goes 'There's only one Keano' and he will never be replicated or
matched for what he brought to the party.
Our midfield is fine imo. All 5 are different types of midfielders, so there is plenty of options. Okay, today we had a bad game, but thats just not the midfields fault and I don't think theres much wrong with our midfield.
Also, Hargreaves is a great CM and he should have been moved there today when O'Shea came on ( in all honesty, Anderson should have stayed on.) I also think Anderson has the ability to dominate the midfield (Arsenal away and FA Cup and Liverpool away) but it is extremely unfair to expect a 20 year old to dominate the midfield every game.
The problem today was the wastefulness in the final third (Nani particularly) and they way we set up.
The positional problem today was up front. Because of Saha's injury troubles, we only have 2 fit strikers who, being honest, were not made to play up front alone, and we could have really done with a Saha figure up top who we could play on his own (if REALLY needed) or with a deeper partner (Rooney or Tevez.)
Not only that but, like I said in the "Risk losing to Chelsea" thread, we SHOULD have started with the strongest team, whether that was a 4-4-2 or 4-3-3.