da realbet：
da pinup bet： The easiest thing to do on the back of a relatively meaningless friendly is to judge too harshly and scapegoat too willingly. England did not perform well against a decent Mexico outfit, stuttering to a disjointed and flattering 3-1 victory at Wembley. But the spotlight on Michael Carrick has seemingly intensified with a number of newspaper reports this morning castigating the United midfielder as a premier failure this year, for club and for country. I am forced to ask if this is merely a faltering campaign for the ex-Tottenham man or symptomatic of a permanent decline.
I’ll stop short of the meandering narrative argument for and against Carrick and simply say that circumstances have changed over the past year and a half and, despite an evident lack of confidence, he remains the same player. Two seasons ago I would ask United fans if they really thought Carrick was that good and I’d be met with the somewhat standard, and merited, arguments: he keeps it simple, he makes those around him play better, when he’s playing well the whole team plays well etc. Three back-to-back titles and Carrick playing regularly hardly refutes the claim. But it was a team that threatened on multiple fronts (Ronaldo had three stupid stat-defying seasons, Tevez and Rooney completed an interchanging forward line, Fletcher began receiving acclaim, Ferdinand and Vidic were insurmountable…in general it was a formidable setup) and with a variety of craft. Carrick played well in a team that played very well; he quietly complimented an array of talents. And perhaps that is his biggest asset.
Last season had seen notable departures from the team and a lack of fitness of many players. It had also seen the need for Carrick to become a more focal figure in the team and, the simple truth is, he did not deliver. Carrick has always been a technically proficient, composed passer of the ball. But he has never been the personality on the pitch who players look to in the hope of making something positive happen. United desperately needed that figure this season and Carrick is not the player to fulfil this criteria. He has not needed to be that person in the past and, at the age of 28, it’s not something he can learn to do now.
That his performance last night has garnered so much negative attention is indicative of the fickle and parochial tendencies of the press. Gareth Barry’s stock was said to have risen due to Carrick’s failings on the pitch yet the truth remains that Owen Hargreaves is the only true defensive midfielder England have to offer. Sure, Barry has been integral in qualification in that role but against Kazakhstan, Belarus, Andorra (and a surprisingly poor Croatia) his responsibility has been more distribution than defensive work. He has been allowed time and space in games England dominated anyway. Against the better quality, more disciplined teams at the World Cup the need for a genuine ball winning midfielder is paramount and has provided us with our last two stand-out performers (Nicky Butt in 2002 and, the previously berated, Owen Hargreaves in 2006).
Carrick remains a very easy target for England woes but the truth is that a dearth in holding midfielders and a generally passive team performance is more to blame than one player’s bad campaign. Furthermore I’d argue that his shortcomings this season are the same shortcomings he has had throughout his career, but it is only due to United’s disappointing season that the media have brought any attention to it.
If you enjoyed this, you can follow me on Twitter