Absolutely agree. It's frustrating because RB has been an issue for us for a while. We persisted with Rafael (who I was a genuine fan of) but his injury problems were too much. We stuck Smalling there and he looked semi-comfortable, we stuck Jones there (when fit) and he wasn't up to it.

We finally sign a perfect fit for the position who is a consistent performer and was coveted by many clubs, and he has systematically destroyed the poor guy to the point that I would think he'd like to leave in the summer.

It is truly unbelievable to me, and like you say he is not the only one. Apart from Rooney and Smalling I see him having zero chemistry with the squad. He must have p***ed them all off.

He seems to still be playing well for Italy. I think I heard somewhere he was named in the team of the tournament for the Euro qualifiers, which would suggest he's a much better player than he has shown for us.

No wonder CBJ had a panic attack, I'm surprised there's not a queue forming considering some of the demands from Limp a long Louis.

It's like invasion of the body snatchers. He's sucking the life out of them.

I dont know why you quote and reply in that stupid manner with bold, it makes it confusing and impossible to reply properly.

I have not come round to your way of thinking because your way of thinking makes no sense.

Yes, last summer I would have replaced Falcao and Di Maria with players of similar standing and kicked on from what we did last season.

Our discussion about strikers took place round the last transfer window when you were insisting that another striker should be brought in to take the weight off Rooney.

That isn't the same argument because by January it had become clear that Rooney was playing every game regardless. In those circumstances there is no taking the weight off him because he always plays. Martial may well be playing out wide but he IS a striker and if Van Gaal was worried about Rooney he could easily have switched in Martial if he wanted to give Rooney a break. He didn't because Rooney always plays.

In the circumstances we were in at that point the was nothing to be gained by bringing in a striker to take the weight off a man who wouldn't be getting dropped anyway.

Thats very different what I would do if I was in charge and what I would have done in the summer.

You have to get it out of your head that another striker would have helped Rooney out when one thing we do know is that Rooney isn't being dropped, rested or left out for any reason.

Re the Darmian conversation - makes me wonder what kind of player Luke Shaw would have been had he not been fortunate enough to snap his leg in two. Van Gaal's management style is like bondage; incredibly restrictive. At first you think you're going to like it, then you get a bit apprehensive, then downright uncomfortable and in the end you just want to scream "no!" but can't as you've a giant ball-gag in your mouth and you've already agreed to the terms of not having a safe word.

Or something.

Louis Van Gaal and doctor muff present 50 shades of grey on and off the pitch

I've never read nor seen 50 Shades of Grey. I saw my mum read it though, which has by itself scarred me for life

As proven against Spurs, there was a chance to play Martial up front, but instead of playing him there, Martial was still stuck out wide, and Young was played up front instead of him, so it seems that under LvG Martial is not going to get many or any chances to play in his favoured position.

So with that being said, we did need another striker being brought in to replace the outgoing Falcao/RvP/Hernandez, as that is an awful lot of experience and goals to no longer have available international squad anymore.

Rooney as much as he is a favourite of LvG, was never going to be able to play in every single game (plus internationals) this season, that would have been what 70 plus games almost? Never going to happen, and it has shown with him getting the injury that he has, and the amount of time that he has missed so far.

We got incredibly lucky that our sixth and perhaps last choice of striker in Rashford has over performed to a very big degree, and has taken the weight to a degree off of Rooney whilst he has been absent.

That being said, he is still very raw and still learning at this level, and is no way near the finished article or product just yet, there is a lot of room for improvement with him.

If we were to bring in an extra striker (seeing as Martial will not seemingly be placed up front as long as LvG is here and in charge), then that would give us more options to select from, as Rooney cannot play in every match, his body just physically will not let him.

Having someone else here, will be beneficial for Rashford as well (as he has seemingly jumped in front of Wilson, and Fletcher now), as he could learn of that new person, and possibly add new things to his game, which would be beneficial for us in the long run.

You seem fixated on thinking that Rooney will play in every game, and if not we will play Martial there instead, when that is just not the case at all, neither is true (as much as I would personally love to see Martial through the middle) whilst LvG is the manager.

So, we are a bit bare in this most important of areas, and our GD in the league shows this tone true, as we are well behind City and others in that department.

He was excellent before we bought him, a fantastic and exciting full back, capable of getting forward and back defending, just what we needed in that position at the time, yet sadly he has been a major victim of the philosophy, as he just doesn't look anywhere near the same player.

If he was let off of the lead, and could show his true potential, and his true abilities as a full back, we would see just how good he is, it is so frustrating.

I know. I watch our matches.

That doesn't mean Martial isn't a striker though. He could easily have been played up front had Van Gaal chosen to but he hasn't.



Again I know. I said so myself. I would have replaced both Di Maria and Falcao with players of similar standing in the summer, but we did not, for reason that became clear by Rooney playing in every game.



I know. However it was made clear that every game he is fit to play he starts in. You will never sign a top class forward to sit on the bench and only play when Rooney is unavailable. Were Martial not able to play out wide he would be a £30m player sitting on the bench as by your own admission he isn't going to play up front.



You cant take the weight of Rooney when Rooney isn't there. He is only playing because Rooney isn't there.


.

Who the hell has said otherwise? You are the one saying you wouldn't want a striker signed at the expense of his game time. Seriously there is no need to address me as if Ive never seen a game of football before.


As long as Rooney is guaranteed to be first choice we will not persuade a top class striker to sign just to sit on the bench, which is what would have happened in January, hence me saying there was no point.


Again , who has argued that point?


.

No. This is an example of your total failure to grasp a simple point. In not "fixated" im just repeating myself in the hope you will understand.

Just because Van Gaal chooses not to play Martial up front does not mean he cant. Im simply using it to illustrate that Rooney will play in every game if he is fit. Martial is a £30m striker and he hasn't even got a sniff of playing up front when Rooney was off form and no-one had heard of Rashford. It simply helps to illustrate the point that if Rooney is fit he plays. These are not my rules - these are what you can see by looking at what Van Gaal has done this season.


Again I am aware of this but having a striker who you don't play wont improve our goal difference, neither will having attackers completely stifled by a slow possession-based tactical set up.

The stories about dressing room unrest keep appearing in the press.

Ferguson chucking his sausage sandwich in disgust while at The Masters was a funny one. I bet he is slightly tempted to come out of retirement and sort it out. Must be painful for him to watch.

The tactical set up I can agree with you, but having someone more experienced in the team now whilst Rooney is out, would have given us a far better chance of improving our GD, and of being closer to City than we currently are.

Dressing room unrest is surely the beginning of the end for him, once that start seeping out to the press, then it is hard if not impossible to get them back on his side, and believing in him and his methods once again.

Typical Sure Alex not backing the Englisman though! He is a true Scot isn't he?!

Losing eight grand on a bet to boot probably didn't go down well either.

It's a pity you can't bottle some good old Fergie spirit. We're surely lacking some of it.

Yeah, that never say die, fight until the very end, sure would have come in handy for large parts of this season.

Van Gaal would have only shoved them out on the wing anyway, and played Young up front...much like he's doing with your 30 million pound striker currently..

I can't reply because you seem unable to post properly and insist on editing my post instead which is frankly bloody annoying.

What I will say is that all discussion is futile until you are able to make the distinction between "What I would do if I was manager" and "What we should do given our current real-world situation with the manger we have and the decisions he makes"

There is no need to be so pedantic about Rashford either you know fine well what I mean about him being unheard of. He was our sixth striker, TO ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES (feel free to borrow this instead of the shambles you are making of it) he was an unknown to the footballing world.

If a manager will only play one striker and he has decided who that striker is there is no point trying to buy another one of any quality because they will not come if the only way they will play is if there is an injury - its that simple. I also can't reconcile you saying it was a mistake not to buy a striker whilst at the same time lauding Rashford and being hell bent on having nothing impede his progress. If we had another striker who happened to be happy to sign to play second fiddle then Rashford would never have got his chance in the first place. The entire basis of the argument is that in the modern game you can't have it both ways.

Anyway I'm done. I have no doubt you will find one word you disagree with and base your entire reply on it.

There might very well have been that problem, but we don't know that for sure.

He does seem to have something against playing Martial up front, what that is, I honestly don't know, as he should have been given more chances up there, in his best position.


In regards to the bit in bold, I have been talking about the real world situation throughout our exchanges on this topic, it is you that is fixated on not looking at what the real world situation actually is.

As for your point about Rashford, you only have to look at say the development of Ronaldo, which wasn't that long ago, he didn't start every game when we first bought him, he played some games, and then didn't play in others, we eased him into the team, and then once he proved that he was good enough, and earned a place in our starting line up on a regular basis, that is what happened.
That is the basis or the model that should be used in terms of Rashford, so another striker might be ahead of him, but he can be brought on, say as a sub, or start other games, but not as he is at the moment, being relied upon to be our main sole striker, and scorer of goals, as talented as he is proving to be.

In terms of him being our sixth choice striker, I was the one that brought that up, he was behind Rooney, Martial (if he was ever likely to be played up front, but lets put him here), Wilson, Fletcher, Powell, and Keane, so maybe even seventh choice, depending on your views on that particular order of things, so either way, he was pretty low down, he was even a sub for a large part of the under 21's, so he wasn't exactly the star of the show there before he got the call up the first team.
Injuries, and loans to the players mentioned, helped him to get that chance in the first team, and from there he has in a sense over performed, and we have been very lucky that he has done so, as if he had not, we would I think be in a much worse position then we currently are (and it is not exactly a good position that we find ourselves in).
So if anyone is making a shambles of talking about this, then it is you, as I have tried to explain my points in depth throughout our exchanges/discussions/talks (call them which terms you wish), yet you still have failed to grasp the central point, and are focused on repeating your point over and over, with the maxim being, the more you repeat yourself, the more real your point becomes, when that is just not the case.

If you now wish to move on then fine, as it might be best if you do, as we have seemingly exhausted the talking points here, as we both have our own points of view, neither of which seem likely to match up anytime soon unfortunately.

This is a joke surely? My irony meter just exploded.

You have not. You have been talking about what you would do, not the actual situation we are in with Van Gaal. We would all buy a striker and we would all play the team differently, but in the context of the real world with Van Gaal I repeat, there was not point trying to sign a striker of quality to sit on the bench when Rooney played and only be offered game time if Rooney ws injured. That is the real world reality.





Again thats lovely but as has been explained Van Gaal will play Rooney if Rooney is fit. That is demonstrated by the entire season up until Rooney's injury. That is the real world whether we like it or agree with it.


Yes I know. Whats your point? If we had bought the striker you crave he would have sat on the bench until Rooney's injury and then played instead of Rashford so where is your youth development there? He wouldn't have got a sniff.


LOL, yes Batdude that is whats happening, you have no idea what the central point is other than getting "I want a striker" mixed up with what Van Gaal is actually doing with the team.


Does it ever cross you mind even for one second why you are the only person on this forum who has to continually post this?

There is no irony there, just plain old honesty.


What that we disagree, and that it would be best to move on?
If others perhaps had as much disagreements with people, then I wouldn't be surprised to see such things, but as it is, then at the moment it is just the way things are, that we seem to have polar different ideas or views.

To be honest he's worth £34m. £8k is like us losing a fiver.

While I don't entirely subscribe to the thinking that it's all LVG's fault, he has ruined Darmain. Early on, played in his right position he was rock-solid. The only slight flaw I noticed was that he wasn't great on the overlap despite his reputation. Now the guy looks totally shot.

As for the "significant number" though, I have to be honest and say I don't think

Carrick
Fellani
Schwiny
Lingard
..... and Rooney

have much more to give.



In pure money terms, yes. But if I lost a fiver I wouldn't waste even more money by throwing my sasuage butty away Truth is SAF hates losing and loves winning more than anyone on this thread. Part of what makes him so missed now.

He didnt.

Rooney is in the squad for tomorrow