🇪🇸 Juan Mata

[mufilika 101]

In general, I agree.

Compare and contrast to a player like Willian who never does anything of value inside the box and spends most of the game outside it contributing fuck all.

Willan + Oscar = 4 assists in the PL all season.

Juan Mata = 4 assists since he joined Man Utd.

Need I say anymore?

The team is more stable and balanced without Mata.

As Willian and Oscar grow into their roles, there will be more creativity.

You can cry for Mata all you want, but he doesn't fit very well into a high pressing approach. He is not that kind of player, he is very limited as an athlete.

And don't expect to ever win the league with an unbalnced teaam. It's one of the main reasons why were out of the race by Christmass last season.

[Tomo 21,751]

Clearly I'm experiencing early onset Alzheimer's.....

When did any of those teams beat us with Mata playing?

West Brom in both AVB and Di Matteo's last league game.

West Ham in that 3-1 in Benny's 3rd game incharge.

Villa in new years eve 2011.

[Tomo 21,751]

Also assist stats are meaningless until they define it a bit more, one off Juan's assists for United was a 2 yard sideway pass to Young vs Cardiff who beat McNaughton and hammered home, a true assist was Mata's one to Van Persie vs Stoke.

Rooney's goal vs WHU from the half way line, Young offically got an assist for that ffs.

[Reddish-Blue 2,666]

The team is more stable and balanced without Mata.

As Willian and Oscar grow into their roles, there will be more creativity.

You can cry for Mata all you want, but he doesn't fit very well into a high pressing approach. He is not that kind of player, he is very limited as an athlete.

And don't expect to ever win the league with an unbalnced teaam. It's one of the main reasons why were out of the race by Christmass last season.

Oscar isn't creative. He's effectively a lightweight central midfielder, playing as a #10

[BlueSunshine 672]

The team is more stable and balanced without Mata.

As Willian and Oscar grow into their roles, there will be more creativity.

You can cry for Mata all you want, but he doesn't fit very well into a high pressing approach. He is not that kind of player, he is very limited as an athlete.

And don't expect to ever win the league with an unbalnced teaam. It's one of the main reasons why were out of the race by Christmass last season.

And you can dream all you want, but Willian and Oscar will never be as creative as Mata, they just don't have his vision among other things.

People were saying the same things when we sold Sturridge, that he was too selfish and didn't fit in our team, that we made a nice profit from his transfer and the scousers were fools etc. etc. and now look at him.

I know it is not the same case but in both occasions people have been too hasty to defend the decision of the club to let them go and say anything to prove that this was the right thing to do. Time has shown that it was a wrong move in the case of Sturridge and it will show the same thing for Mata. It is true that Mata doesn't fit very well into a high pressing approach but it is also true that if he was used right he could have helped us unlock all those games that the opposing teams were parking the bus, and those games are the reason that we won't win the league.

I agree that there is no point crying about Mata but there is also no point trying to make up stories like that we wouldn't have been able to win the league if we had Mata in our team.

[dee25 1,044]

West Brom in both AVB and Di Matteo's last league game.

West Ham in that 3-1 in Benny's 3rd game incharge.

Villa in new years eve 2011.

He didn't even start against West Brom away last season. I'm pretty sure he was rested for the Juventus game and came on probably around the 70th min mark.

Honestly I'm not getting this logic at all. You're basically saying that because Mata played in the games where we lost to teams like West Ham so therefore he wouldn't then have made much of a difference this season - I just think that's really flawed thinking. You're reducing a player's importance based on loses, which are dependent on many factors. Hazard doesn't become useless to us because he was on the pitch when we lost against Crystal Palace. Matic's influence in the team doesn't become irrelevant because he played when we lost to Villa. That's just like arguing that since Messi played when Barcelona lost to Real Valladolid and Granada, so therefore the team isn't any better with Messi.

Not buying this argument.

[mufilika 101]

And you can dream all you want, but Willian and Oscar will never be as creative as Mata, they just don't have his vision among other things.

People were saying the same things when we sold Sturridge, that he was too selfish and didn't fit in our team, that we made a nice profit from his transfer and the scousers were fools etc. etc. and now look at him.

I know it is not the same case but in both occasions people have been too hasty to defend the decision of the club to let them go and say anything to prove that this was the right thing to do. Time has shown that it was a wrong move in the case of Sturridge and it will show the same thing for Mata. It is true that Mata doesn't fit very well into a high pressing approach but it is also true that if he was used right he could have helped us unlock all those games that the opposing teams were parking the bus, and those games are the reason that we won't win the league.

I agree that there is no point crying about Mata but there is also no point trying to make up stories like that we wouldn't have been able to win the league if we had Mata in our team.

Oscar is miles better than Mata when Mata was 22. I can also bet he will also be a much better player than Mata at 26.

Mata is more mature in his play than Oscar, and that is expected as he is 3.5 yrs older than Oscar.

Mata has likely already peaked because he is not a naturally gifted athlete. He will never be very robust, he will never be fast, he will never have big acceleration, he will never have a big engine. He doesn't have all that in his arsenal to work upon and improve. Not to mention, he can't get down and dirty. You won't ever see crunching tackles and bravely from him. And also he is not physically gifted. He is a very limited footballer.

His bread and butter is in being a technical passer of the ball and he has likely peaked in that ability already with very little left for him to work upon.

[The Skipper 20,609]

Mata has likely already peaked because he is not a naturally gifted athlete. He will never be very robust, he will never be fast, he will never have big acceleration, he will never have a big engine. He doesn't have all that in his arsenal to work upon and improve. Not to mention, he can't get down and dirty. You won't ever see crunching tackles and bravely from him. And also he is not physically gifted. He is a very limited footballer. His bread and butter is in being a technical passer of the ball and he has likely peaked in that ability already with very little left for him to work upon.

Everyone knows Mata is not a physical phenomenon, but one thing he'll always have over Oscar is creativity and he will always be the better creative number 10, whether you like it or not.

[Vybz Kartel 1,613]

Mata has the same amount of goals and assists in 3 months that Oscar has in 8 months SMH

[Tomo 21,751]

He didn't even start against West Brom away last season. I'm pretty sure he was rested for the Juventus game and came on probably around the 70th min mark.

Honestly I'm not getting this logic at all. You're basically saying that because Mata played in the games where we lost to teams like West Ham so therefore he wouldn't then have made much of a difference this season - I just think that's really flawed thinking. You're reducing a player's importance based on loses, which are dependent on many factors. Hazard doesn't become useless to us because he was on the pitch when we lost against Crystal Palace. Matic's influence in the team doesn't become irrelevant because he played when we lost to Villa. That's just like arguing that since Messi played when Barcelona lost to Real Valladolid and Granada, so therefore the team isn't any better with Messi.

Not buying this argument.

No im not, stop twisting my words, the point is the fantasy that we would have been creating chances like no tomorrow vs these teams is flawed because Mata has played in many games were we have been absolutely clueless in breaking teams down.

[The only place to be 11,313]

Everyone knows Mata is not a physical phenomenon, but one thing he'll always have over Oscar is creativity and he will always be the better creative number 10, whether you like it or not.

And that is a indisputable fact opinion whether you like it or not.

Mata did very well yesterday against a team who played naive, open football and he had a decent striker ahead of him....so of course that implies he'd do well for us when we've actually been missing a striker all season and face teams who come to defend.

Ryan Giggs has a 100% win record as manager - ergo he's a better manager than Mourinho and Rodgers.

[dee25 1,044]

No im not, stop twisting my words, the point is the fantasy that we would have been creating chances like no tomorrow vs these teams is flawed because Mata has played in many games were we have been absolutely clueless in breaking teams down.

No. I'm not twisting your words, just showing you how flawed this argument is. First all you're assuming that we lost all of these games because we couldn't create chances but I distinctly remember that in the West Ham game, Mata scored a goal and we created a gazillion chances in the first half. In the first half we were absolutely coasting and none of us could envision West Ham walking away with 3 points. Diame came on in the 2nd half and changed the game for them and our defence fell apart. Some of these games we lost not because we couldn't create chances but because our defending then was poor and that's something you're not factoring in. We have a better squad and a better first eleven than we did last season or even two seasons ago.

Of course Mata would be helpful to us in breaking down these teams - that's Mata's skill set, that's what he excels in. Just because we lost games to Villa, two seasons ago doesn't mean that Mata wouldn't have been useful to us when we faced them this season. This isn't me twisting your words, that just you using a flawed argument.

[Polo7 3,496]

He gets two goals and suddenly he is the missing piece in the jigsaw.....only @ Chelsea FC.

[The only place to be 11,313]

He gets two goals and suddenly he is the missing piece in the jigsaw.....only @ Chelsea FC.

What people are saying is he's exactly what we need though.....to bring on after 60 minutes once our striker has scored twice and put the game to bed.

Obviously ignore the fact that we don't have a 20 league-goal-a-season striker to do that, no what we need is that guy for the last half-hour to break down broken-down defences.

[Stingray 9,441]

What people are saying is he's exactly what we need though.....to bring on after 60 minutes once our striker has scored twice and put the game to bed.

Obviously ignore the fact that we don't have a 20 league-goal-a-season striker to do that, no what we need is that guy for the last half-hour to break down broken-down defences.

Now who would be good to bring in after 60 mins and bust a defense like battering ram? I wonder

[Jase 43,479]

No. I'm not twisting your words, just showing you how flawed this argument is. First all you're assuming that we lost all of these games because we couldn't create chances but I distinctly remember that in the West Ham game, Mata scored a goal and we created a gazillion chances in the first half. In the first half we were absolutely coasting and none of us could envision West Ham walking away with 3 points. Diame came on in the 2nd half and changed the game for them and our defence fell apart. Some of these games we lost not because we couldn't create chances but because our defending then was poor and that's something you're not factoring in. We have a better squad and a better first eleven than we did last season or even two seasons ago.

Of course Mata would be helpful to us in breaking down these teams - that's Mata's skill set, that's what he excels in. Just because we lost games to Villa, two seasons ago doesn't mean that Mata wouldn't have been useful to us when we faced them this season. This isn't me twisting your words, that just you using a flawed argument.

This is the thing I don't quite get with some people TBH. I get that with Mata in the team, there are gonna be some issues but after watching what he did for us in the past 2 1/2 years, it's kinda nonsensical to suggest he won't have helped us to make a difference in some of the games we've dropped points this season. Not saying he would have instantly helped us to win those games but certainly made a difference with his killer pass, ingenuity in the final third that is missing from most of our players. And as you pointed out, those defeats with him in the team were hardly his fault. You mentioned the West Ham game and take for instance the West Brom one. Wasn't even Mata's fault in those defeats that we missed chances and our defence f**k up at the back and conceded stupid goals.

And sorry to be posting this again but it feels rather apt to do so again...

True but TBF, that wasn't the case when Mata was still around under Mourinho. Was given a role with responsibilites (especially defensively) but still able to create chances. It's just that comparing him with our other AMs, he can give us that X-factor and create something from nothing for others (apart from Hazard) in final third. Not talking just about playing those through balls, 1-2s with the others but also chances like ball over the top of the opposition's defence when they are parking the bus/defending in numbers in front of us (e.g. Ba's FA Cup goal against United, Torres' league goal against Swansea two seasons ago) and it's these kind of chances at times, this kind of ingenuity, that is missing from our play when the opposition are being stubborn against us.

[The only place to be 11,313]

certainly made a difference with his killer pass,

To whom?

[Strike 7,763]

And that is a indisputable fact opinion whether you like it or not.

indisputable either way

[dee25 1,044]

This is the thing I don't quite get with some people TBH. I get that with Mata in the team, there are gonna be some issues but after watching what he did for us in the past 2 1/2 years, it's kinda nonsensical to suggest he won't have helped us to make a difference in some of the games we've dropped points this season. Not saying he would have instantly helped us to win those games but certainly made a difference with his killer pass, ingenuity in the final third that is missing from most of our players. And as you pointed out, those defeats with him in the team were hardly his fault. You mentioned the West Ham game and take for instance the West Brom one. Wasn't even Mata's fault in those defeats that we missed chances and our defence f**k up at the back and conceded stupid goals.

And sorry to be posting this again but it feels rather apt to do so again...

That's the thing, if the argument was that when Mata plays, we become vulnerable at the back......*that* I would get. That makes logical sense. But I absolutely can not take anyone seriously who can sit there with a straight face and say to me "Mata wouldn't make a difference to our attack because two seasons and four managers ago, he played when we lost to Villa" That's nonsense. It's not only nonsense, it's confirmation bias. Obviously no one is saying that Mata would create a zillion chances for us; no one is saying that if Mata plays we would suddenly be winning every single game. No one is saying anything of that such. What people are saying is that Mata's strength is that he's a set piece specialist and his creativity, and ability to pick out teammates with incisive passing is unrivalled by anyone in our squad. Those qualities would be an asset for us right now. Undoubtedly.

[The only place to be 11,313]

That's the thing, if the argument was that when Mata plays, we become vulnerable at the back......*that* I would get. That makes logical sense. But I absolutely can not take anyone seriously who can sit there with a straight face and say to me "Mata wouldn't make a difference to our attack because two seasons and four managers ago, he played when we lost to Villa" That's nonsense. It's not only nonsense, it's confirmation bias. Obviously no one is saying that Mata would create a zillion chances for us; no one is saying that if Mata plays we would suddenly be winning every single game. No one is saying anything of that such. What people are saying is that Mata's strength is that he's a set piece specialist and his creativity, and ability to pick out teammates with incisive passing is unrivalled by anyone in our squad. Those qualities would be an asset for us right now. Undoubtedly.

Good point - if you ignore his deficiencies and the fact that football is a team game where players are required to defend and attack, and view that equation in a vacuum that doesn't take into account the players in our team or the way teams set up against us then yes, he might have been an asset.