The Copa America must have ranked high among Carlos Tevez's priorities last week. So, presumably, did completing his move to Manchester United.
The warrant issued for his agent Kia Joorabchian's arrest probably occupied his attention as well. But he could have another concern: getting a spot in the Old Trafford dressing room.
Forget competition for places, there will be competition for pegs at Old Trafford. Presuming Tevez joins Nani, Anderson and Owen Hargreaves among United's summer signings, there will be 45 footballers jostling for Sir Alex Ferguson's attention.
The size of the United squad suggests the Scot is intent on emulating his friend Barry Fry, who accumulated a half-century of players at Birmingham; that was a squad in a permanent state of rotation. United, with a high-calibre collective of automatic choices, is another matter.
Unlike Fry's scattergun selections, many of Ferguson's fringe players can barely glimpse the first team, let alone aspire to joining it. Yet they remain at Old Trafford. If the Glazer family and David Gill have surpassed most expectations in funding Ferguson's spending, heightened optimism is only one consequence. Another is an increase in the deadwood and the marginalised among the mediocrity at Old Trafford.
In part, it is a result of the youth policy Ferguson implemented two decades ago. It has often produced quality - and in Ryan Giggs, Paul Scholes and Gary Neville, there are three remnants of its greatest generation - but has always delivered quantity.
Graduates of the United youth policy are scattered across the lower leagues. Now David Gray, Darren Gibson, Ryan Shawcross, Craig Cathcart and Michael Barnes challenge the assumption that Manchester United players are instantly recognisable.
In addition, the ranks at Carrington are bolstered by returning loanees.
Ferguson's popularity among his fellow managers is probably not unrelated to his ability to lend them 18 players last season. Some, such as Danny Simpson, Phil Bardsley and Lee Martin, have displayed enough to suggest they have a future in the higher divisions, if not at Manchester United. Their role model, rather than Giggs or Scholes, could be David Jones who, recognising the improbability of establishing a regular place for himself in the United midfield, opted to join Derby and was promptly promoted to the Premier League.
Giuseppe Rossi, who has only featured occasionally in England but was prolific for Parma in Serie A, would be well-advised to encourage the attentions of his Italian suitors.
Others have been assured of a United future. But for injury, Ben Foster would have been expected to challenge Edwin van der Sar for the goalkeeping jersey. Jonny Evans and Gerard Pique, while at Sunderland and Real Zaragoza respectively, prospered to such an extent that they have been informed they are in contention for the first team this season.
The problem is that the defensive ranks are already overpopulated. The arrival of three midfielders means John O'Shea can be redefined from a utility player to merely a versatile defender.
But to accommodate Evans and Pique, departures are required and only Gabriel Heinze, attracting the attention of Liverpool, seems likely to leave. The aggressive Argentine would be mourned at Old Trafford after acquiring cult status; seeing him at Anfield would prove particularly painful for the Stretford End regulars.
Kieran Richardson
JohnWalton/Empics
Richardson celebrates his second at Molineux
But then there is Wes Brown, alternately impressive, inadequate or injured, who seemingly settled for the role of a stand-in long ago; he and O'Shea mean Bardsley and Simpson are respectively fourth- and fifth-choice right-backs. And below Brown in the hierarchy is Mikael Silvestre.
The Frenchman, bizarrely awarded a new contract 12 months ago, is entering his ninth year at Old Trafford, even if only a third of them, at most, were seasons to savour. He previously declined a move to Lyon that would have included a pay cut yet, especially if displaced by the younger generation of Evans and Pique, represents an unnecessary drain on the wage bill for one who does not rank among United's 22 best players.
The same applied to Kieran Richardson, whose posturing, coupled with his continued mediocrity, led to his unpopularity with the club's supporters.
The willingness of other Premier League managers to inquire about him is an indication of the rarity value of young, quick, left-footed England internationals, rather than the standard of his performance at United, and it was a surprise when he became the first meaningful departure this summer. Perhaps Roy Keane, previously assumed to be one of Richardson's critics, saw something in training to justify the excessive fee Sunderland paid.
Alan Smith is another to occupy the thoughts of Ferguson's counterparts elsewhere. United's reluctance to offer a new contract to a striker with a solitary goal since his recovery from long-term injury, along with the imminent arrival of Tevez, has highlighted his precarious position in the pecking order.
If admiration for his combative qualities abounds, a return of 12 goals in 93 games, albeit distorted by appearances in midfield and off the bench, indicate why he could be available. With Ole Gunnar Solskjaer invaluable as a substitute and Louis Saha's sporadic excellence, Smith appears the forward Ferguson can dispense with (assuming the sceptics' interpretation of Dong Fangzhou's presence at Old Trafford is correct).
GettyImages
Mikael Silvestre and Darren Fletcher have seen themselves fall further down the pecking order.
But leaving Old Trafford involves a drop in salary and status. It has long been suggested that few prosper after leaving United - though Ruud van Nistelrooy may have joined Paul McGrath on the list of notable exceptions - but who benefits from an extended spell in the second team?
If it is unlikely that Heinze and Smith would settle for the lucrative inactivity some squad players enjoy, plenty of others do. It is a reason why Manchester United have 45 players and, while Ferguson's lending policy will surely continue, why their squad has a bloated look.
Playing for Manchester United may amount to a dream realised but, some of their underused and unwanted players may reflect, does playing for their reserves?
The First XI: Van der Sar; Neville, Ferdinand, Vidic, Evra; Ronaldo, Scholes, Hargreaves, Giggs; Tevez, Rooney.
The Second XI: Foster; O'Shea, Brown, Pique, Heinze; Anderson, Fletcher, Carrick, Nani; Solskjaer, Saha.
The Third XI: Kuszczak; Bardsley, Evans, Silvestre, Eckersley; Park, Eagles, Lee, Martin; Smith, Rossi.
Well i agree with you in moving Smith/Rossi up to the second team, problem is who comes out in addition to Ole? Same thing happens when I think of Park in the third team.....he should definitely be in the 2nd XI, but there's no one there i can willingly say doesn't deserve to be there.
Well i agree with you in moving Smith/Rossi up to the second team, problem is who comes out in addition to Ole? Same thing happens when I think of Park in the third team.....he should definitely be in the 2nd XI, but there's no one there i can willingly say doesn't deserve to be there.
Richardson is missing
looking at the teams they are using a 4 4 2 system
They have Anderson , Nani , Carrick and Fletcher in that list so clearly they are using Fletcher as an RM . Park would be my preferred choice at RM due to his abilities so he would get the slot in the second team above Fletcher for me.
I think he meant either Smith or Rossi would get that slot in the second team instead of Ole , Saha clearly would be one of the 2 strikers there .
personally I think its a load of shit that Prem teams can only list 5 subs on the bench . Why the great limitation ?? Its part of the reason the reserves and youth players don't get any chance to play for the first team. The small number of bench players allowed means that in addition to the reserve GK there can only be 4 outfield players and coaches don't want to take that risk of naming the fringe players on the bench incase they get an unexpected challenge in a game .
personally I think its a load of shit that Prem teams can only list 5 subs on the bench . Why the great limitation ?? Its part of the reason the reserves and youth players don't get any chance to play for the first team. The small number of bench players allowed means that in addition to the reserve GK there can only be 4 outfield players and coaches don't want to take that risk of naming the fringe players on the bench incase they get an unexpected challenge in a game .
Couldn't agree with you more. I hadn't thought about the sub situation in that way before, but now that you say it it makes perfect sense to argue its case like that. England complain about not having a good enough youth system anymore (one wonders if they ever did, lol) yet something like this would create some more opportunity for the youngsters to be on the bench. You never know how a game is going to pan out and if you're up 4-0 you can afford to blood a few youngsters.
that's a problem that only the best teams have. you think blackburn has a bench worthy of a 6th or 7th player? pffft. I weep for the teams that have 40+ players in their squads. As a fan I'd rather give the manager more problems, after all, if Rafa had 7 players he might actually start looking like he's not tactically inept, I personally don't believe the hype.
managers like ferguson, wenger, jol and mourinho all have big squads, but they also have the in game ability to judge what is needed and when. restricting the bench is a restriction on the best of teams, since the top teams are the ones that truly benefit from the expansion of the bench. Is it not more interesting to give the managers a further challenge? I'd say yes
Quality of Posts > Quantity of Posts
There is a reason I bleed red. United until I die.
Last edited by GocartMozart : 07-18-2007 at 11:30 AM.
How can you say the top teams are the only ones that would benefit from an expanded bench? Do other teams not get injured players? Do all the top English talented youngsters come from teh books of United, Chelsea, Liverpool or Arsenal? Have you forgotten about Middlesbrough?
It is nice to give the managers a challenge, but i feel it's better to blood some youngsters, not at the team's expense but when the team is doign well like in overwhelming victories. Nowadays a loss is huge in the league, so throwing some youngsters in just to see if they make the grade is too risky. Teams are winning the league with as few as 2-3 losses in a season. And those are requirements, i'm not saying they do that cuz they are leagues better than the rest.
that's a problem that only the best teams have. you think blackburn has a bench worthy of a 6th or 7th player? pffft. I weep for the teams that have 40+ players in their squads. As a fan I'd rather give the manager more problems, after all, if Rafa had 7 players he might actually start looking like he's not tactically inept, I personally don't believe the hype.
managers like ferguson, wenger, jol and mourinho all have big squads, but they also have the in game ability to judge what is needed and when. restricting the bench is a restriction on the best of teams, since the top teams are the ones that truly benefit from the expansion of the bench. Is it not more interesting to give the managers a further challenge? I'd say yes
nicely phrased but I honestly believe you are terribly wrong in your assessment. All the other leagues have more players on their benches and the same is thing applies to the Champions League and International teams. Are you trying to say that Spain and Italy are less competitive than England ???
nicely phrased but I honestly believe you are terribly wrong in your assessment. All the other leagues have more players on their benches and the same is thing applies to the Champions League and International teams. Are you trying to say that Spain and Italy are less competitive than England ???
how and at which point did I make statements about the competitiveness of other leagues and their managers? In fact I didn't. My reasoning is purely from the vantage point of competitiveness of the league. Whether other leagues have made the choice to go to 7 rather than 5, I'm sure is in spite of my logic.
Now if you're trying to further extrapolate my opinion on this, you could assume that I think other leagues have actively choosen in this case to favor the better teams over the lower teams, but I never made a comparison between leagues.
Quality of Posts > Quantity of Posts
There is a reason I bleed red. United until I die.
Playing for the Reserves vs. First Team Football
Playing for the Reserves vs. First Team Football -
07-16-2007, 02:25 PM
)
Linear Mode
