[paddymcp]

Would he be? Does the team he play for overcloud and exaggerate his actual ability? I think so.

He's a decent player and hard grafter but not nearly as good as most think.

[HEY_SIDNEY]

This is my thoughts aswell. i have said it before and i stick to my guns - Anyone who does the 'doggies' in a team gets a mention, but that alone surely cant be enough to merit the praise he gets off some quarters.

Each to their own tho when it comes to him, it seems to be split down the middle. We all know that SAF picks him for the big games - because hes a grafter, he will try win the ball back against teams who pass it better than those in the EPL.

Anyway my opinion is pretty clear, hes not as good as some people make out, but again each to their own.

[wunfellaff]

Agree 100%, dont think he would get a sniff of the Scotland squad if he played for anyone else, OF included.

[nessies long lost ghost]

He plays for Manchester United because he is good enough to.

If he was with a smaller team, he would still be one of the first names on the teamsheet in the Scotland fold.

Excellent player.

[Savage Henry]

nessies long lost ghost, on 29 November 2011 - 06:31, said:

He plays for Manchester United because he is good enough to.

If he was with a smaller team, he would still be one of the first names on the teamsheet in the Scotland fold.

Excellent player.

Indeed, it's ridiculous to argue otherwise. It's like people who say David Beckham isn't a good player. Look what he's achieved in the game. Bad players - or even mediocre ones - don't play 200 odd games for Manchester United. He's Scotland's best player by a country mile.

[H_B]

paddymcp, on 29 November 2011 - 04:47, said:

Would he be? Does the team he play for overcloud and exaggerate his actual ability? I think so.

He's a decent player and hard grafter but not nearly as good as most think.

Agreed. Good player, but aided massively by playing for Man U.

Look at Nicky Butt after he left Man U - looked really ordinary. Or even the likes of O'Shea and Wes Brown, who looked decent in that team, but have struggled afterwards.

I think he'd still play in the Premiership if he left Man U but it would be more at a Sunderland level than say a Spurs or Liverpool.

[TheScarf]

It musn't be forgotten how he ran the show in the CL QF against Roma in 06-07 when they demolished them 7-1. That's the game I always think of when I think of Fletcher. He was un-playable that night. He single-handidly fisted them (not literally obviously).

He's been MOTM for United more times that I care to remember. So yeah, I think he'd still be in the Scotland team if he platyed for a Sunderland or a Blackburn.

[Lex]

Typical Scottish negative mentality.

Darren Fletcher is the best player we've had for a generation yet people are queuing up to call him average or not good enough. Just look at his performance against the Czechs, while Charlie Adam was blowing out of his arse and getting away with fouls In the box Fletch was his usual commanding driving self, scoring one of our goals and setting up the other.


If he wasnt good enough for Man U Fergie would have got rid of him, he's not a manager known for his sentimentality. He may not be World Class but he is comfortably our best player and we are lucky to have him.

This post has been edited by Lex: 29 November 2011 - 09:23

[H_B]

Lex, on 29 November 2011 - 09:23, said:

Darren Fletcher is the best player we've had for a generation yet people are queuing up to call him average or not good enough.

Mmm.. how big a generation is this?

Quote

but he is comfortably our best player and we are lucky to have him.

Agreed. Says perhaps more about the current crop than it does Fletcher though.

[dave258]

paddymcp, on 29 November 2011 - 04:47, said:

Would he be? Does the team he play for overcloud and exaggerate his actual ability? I think so.

He's a decent player and hard grafter but not nearly as good as most think.

HEY_SIDNEY, on 29 November 2011 - 05:34, said:

This is my thoughts aswell. i have said it before and i stick to my guns - Anyone who does the 'doggies' in a team gets a mention, but that alone surely cant be enough to merit the praise he gets off some quarters.

Each to their own tho when it comes to him, it seems to be split down the middle. We all know that SAF picks him for the big games - because hes a grafter, he will try win the ball back against teams who pass it better than those in the EPL.

Anyway my opinion is pretty clear, hes not as good as some people make out, but again each to their own.

wunfellaff, on 29 November 2011 - 06:08, said:

Agree 100%, dont think he would get a sniff of the Scotland squad if he played for anyone else, OF included.

It's really quite bizarre how people can obviously follow football, but know sod all about it. Fletcher is becoming more and more important to the United team as the years go on. The argument that he looks good because he plays in a good team is nonsense - he gets picked on the merit of his performance in training compared with other players in his position. He's just a grafter who runs doggies, is he? Aye, he looked it when he curled the ball past Joe Hart from 25 yards last month, or when he was single handedly driving the team up the park when under pressure against Benfica last week.

[H_B]

dave258, on 29 November 2011 - 10:09, said:

. The argument that he looks good because he plays in a good team is nonsense -

He looks better because he plays in a good team.

If he started his career at Wolves rather than Man U, he'd still be playing at Wolves level.

[HEY_SIDNEY]

Because we have an opinion on a player we know 'sod all about football'.......pull the other one.

Becomin more of a driving force in the Man Utd team in recent years??

Is this the team that in the years hes played the most games for Man Utd In recent years havent won the title. Coincidence??

Anyway its opinions, dont say that people dont know anything because the disagree with your view.

[redcard76]

HEY_SIDNEY, on 29 November 2011 - 10:39, said:

Is this the team that in the years hes played the most games for Man Utd In recent years havent won the title. Coincidence??

Yes.

England have won less games (percentage-wise) with Rooney than without him.

Don't have the stats to hand, but there's not much in it. So Rooney doesn't have any impact with England.

This post has been edited by redcard76: 29 November 2011 - 10:45

[atfccfc]

he plays for man utd because he is good enough to play for man utd. you could argue that players like nicky butt, john o'shea and wes brown who have left look average. but is that because they are now playing for teams who's standards are lower than man utd. at man utd players are expected to win games and titles, but at newcastle and sunderland there is much less pressure because they are happy to sit in mid table.
fletcher is part of a squad at man utd were he is not expected to play every game. if he was to go to anyother team he would be one of that teams key players

[H_B]

atfccfc, on 29 November 2011 - 10:44, said:

you could argue that players like nicky butt, john o'shea and wes brown who have left look average. but is that because they are now playing for teams who's standards are lower than man utd.

No, it's because they aren't top players.

Many very good teams have players below the level of others.

Liverpool won the Champions League with Djimi Traore at left back. Djimi Traore was never a very good player. Most teams, even at the top, carry a few solid citizen types.

[MWELL88]

Fletcher is a top class player, his movement, reading of the game, winning mentality that playing with man utd comes with and the never give up attitude. Maybe if he did played for another club at the beginning of his career he would not have developed as he has, but there is no doubts that whoever he may play for in the future he always will be first on the Scotland team sheet.

[Savage Henry]

redcard76, on 29 November 2011 - 10:43, said:

Yes.

England have won less games (percentage-wise) with Rooney than without him.

Don't have the stats to hand, but there's not much in it. So Rooney doesn't have any impact with England.

That's absolute nonsense. It's an utterly meaningless statistic, if true.

Quite what it has to do with Darren Fletcher is beyond me. I'm not sure anyone's questioning Fletcher's importance to Man Utd.

[Pink Freud]

Savage Henry, on 29 November 2011 - 11:04, said:

That's absolute nonsense. It's an utterly meaningless statistic, if true.

Quite what it has to do with Darren Fletcher is beyond me. I'm not sure anyone's questioning Fletcher's importance to Man Utd.

I think that's the point he was making - according to HEY SIDNEY, Man U have been poorer with Fletcher than without him. I think that's pish myself.

[Savage Henry]

Pink Freud, on 29 November 2011 - 11:27, said:

I think that's the point he was making - according to HEY SIDNEY, Man U have been poorer with Fletcher than without him. I think that's pish myself.

Ah right, that'll teach me. Apologies Mr Redcard, sir.

[HEY_SIDNEY]

Pink Freud, on 29 November 2011 - 11:27, said:

I think that's the point he was making - according to HEY SIDNEY, Man U have been poorer with Fletcher than without him. I think that's pish myself.

I was making that point thank you.

In the last 6 years in which the PL trophy has been split between Man Utd and Chelsea, the 2 years Darren fletcher has played the most games for his team in that season, chelsea have went ot to win the Title. I asked if its a coincidence.

Redcard thinks no. Ok. Just sayin

[greenockraver]

Man Utd always do better with fletcher in the team.

Scores a few as well

[DC92]

There's not really a comparison with players like Butt, O'Shea, Brown as they were no more than bit-part players. Fletcher is a first pick and a popular player.


Not that it's actually relevant. If he played for Sunderland, Everton or Aston Villa he would still be our best player.

[Gordon EF]

HEY_SIDNEY, on 29 November 2011 - 11:50, said:

In the last 6 years in which the PL trophy has been split between Man Utd and Chelsea, the 2 years Darren fletcher has played the most games for his team in that season, chelsea have went ot to win the Title. I asked if its a coincidence.

It's a fucking shite statistic anyway. For example, Man Utd's lowest points total in all those years was last season, when they won the league. Darren Fletcher can't affect how well Chelsea play against teams other than Man Utd.

[pub car king]

I don't think he gets the recognition he deserves for his reading of the game and his passing he can ping a ball 50 yards just as well as Adam or bannan but tends to choose the more straight forward option

For me I think he has to drasticly adapt his style when he plays for Scotland his team mates are miles behind the standard of his club team mates

[HEY_SIDNEY]

But Darren Fletcher can affect the teams Man Utd play against. Whoel point in my post. When hes in the team less they win league or more they dont. asked if it was a coincidence. obviously not according to everyone,