Mason Mount

[MoroccanBlue 5,302]

4 minutes ago, Robchels said:

heh yeah

hard to ignore RLC incisiveness as in goals  but he's likely long ways from getting back to that form.

Mount has an eye for goal as well if he carries those same instincts from the Championship. 

It's his pressing and energy levels I find more suitable for Lampard's football. 

[Henrique 9,133]

This guy is not ready yet. This is not Championship.

He was painful to watch!

[herpthederp 122]

8 minutes ago, Henrique said:

This guy is not ready yet. This is not Championship.

He was painful to watch!

He was better than Barkley.

[Nicco 927]

2 minutes ago, herpthederp said:

He was better than Barkley.

He clearly was not. Terrible decision from Lampard to sub Barkley instead of him.

[killer1257 3,282]

Wasn´t he playing as a winger today?

 

[killer1257 3,282]

Just now, Nicco said:

He clearly was not. Terrible decision from Lampard to sub Barkley instead of him.

Barkley is not famous for having a huge gas tank.

[Vesper 28,830]

I thought he was oki today, there were far worse performances out there

[Vesper 28,830]

1 minute ago, killer1257 said:

Wasn´t he playing as a winger today?

 

yes, a lot of time

[Milan 17,854]

Can't wait to see more of him and see him grow. An exciting prospect.

[robsblubot 3,504]

28 minutes ago, herpthederp said:

He was better than Barkley.

Maybe maybe not, it's hardy the point. Thought both were doing OK, but barkley as a more senior player would've been more likely to influence the game. Like I said, Mount looked promising, but was still ineffective.

37 minutes ago, Henrique said:

This guy is not ready yet. This is not Championship.

He was painful to watch!

Nobody said he was ready, and that was a strange choice by Lamps for me: both starting him and then subbing off barkley instead of Mount in this type of game and considering we were already missing some senior players. Regardless what one thinks of united, this was a difficult fixture.

Still, I see that he has the close control in tight spaces, which makes him a very interesting prospect.

again, Barkley should've remained (for a number of reasons esp goal threat), but that's on lamps with some strange choices before and during the game.

[Jase 43,479]

Regarding Barkley, it feels like Lampard shoehorned him into the XI because of his pre-season form. Ended up playing wide left, which isn't his best position. Could have just gone with Pulisic-Mount-Pedro from the start. 

[robsblubot 3,504]

9 minutes ago, Jason said:

Regarding Barkley, it feels like Lampard shoehorned him into the XI because of his pre-season form. Ended up playing wide left, which isn't his best position. Could have just gone with Pulisic-Mount-Pedro from the start. 

hmm don't follow.

AFAIK Mount did not play last season, but Ross did. So, the one player shoehorned here was Mount (presumably based on pre-season performances which don't matter one bit).

Like I said, regardless of how promising mount is, and I think he is very promising, this was the sort of game to be a bit more conservative and play the established starters as much a possible. And I think Lampard did not do that at all today. For me the thrashing is on lamps, not the players.

[Jase 43,479]

25 minutes ago, Robchels said:

hmm don't follow.

AFAIK Mount did not play last season, but Ross did. So, the one player shoehorned here was Mount (presumably based on pre-season performances which don't matter one bit).

Like I said, regardless of how promising mount is, and I think he is very promising, this was the sort of game to be a bit more conservative and play the established starters as much a possible. And I think Lampard did not do that at all today. For me the thrashing is on lamps, not the players.

My point is both Barkley and Mount had been used as the No.10 in pre-season and both did well. I wasn't surprised to see Lampard picked Mount given they have worked together last season, in the Championship or not. He started with both and they operated like wingers instead of No.10, which certainly doesn't get the best out of them, certainly not Barkley. 

Lampard's team selection was fine today, IMO. I mean it only had 2 players you would consider young or inexperience at this level - Mount and Abraham (plus Pulisic after he came on) and there were 9 other experienced players out there. It was hardly inexperience. If anything, you might argue Lampard's approach play was a tad too aggressive and not being a little pragmatic, if you like and that the senior players let the team down with poor mistakes/decisions. 

[robsblubot 3,504]

15 minutes ago, Jason said:

My point is both Barkley and Mount had been used the No.10 in pre-season and both did well. I wasn't surprised to see Lampard picked Mount given they have worked together last season, in the Championship or not. He started with both and they operated like wingers instead of No.10, which certainly doesn't get the best out of them, certainly not Barkley. 

Lampard's team selection was fine today, IMO. I mean it only had 2 players you would consider young or inexperience at this level - Mount and Abraham (plus Pulisic after he came on). There were 9 other experienced players out there. If anything, you might argue Lampard's approach play was a tad too aggressive and not being a little pragmatic, if you like and that the senior players let the team down with poor mistakes/decisions. 

Fair enough on the Mount point. Still, Ross is the more established PL player of the two at this time.

Completely disagree on the second and I 100% blame lampard for the thrashing. I'm very confident both Mourinho and Cconte would've easily avoided the thrashing by being more pragmatic in order to match the challenge.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm arguing, that the approach was nowhere pragmatic enough for the fixture at hand. Starting Tammy in this game was a very questionable choice (being generous here). For ex, does he (over)rate Zouma perhaps? Given that he let luiz go and then played zouma with only two possession cms protecting him in a tough away match.

[Jase 43,479]

12 minutes ago, Robchels said:

Fair enough on the Mount point. Still, Ross is the more established PL player of the two at this time.

Being established doesn't mean being better. 

12 minutes ago, Robchels said:

Completely disagree on the second and I 100% blame lampard for the thrashing. I'm very confident both Mourinho and Cconte would've easily avoided the thrashing by being more pragmatic in order to match the challenge.

On paper, yes but let's not forget that Mourinho hasn't been able to set his teams properly in big games for years now and if you remember with Conte, he set us up to lose only 1-0 at Man City last year and set us not to even bothered tackle them at all. 

15 minutes ago, Robchels said:

Yes, that's exactly what I'm arguing, that the approach was nowhere pragmatic enough for the fixture at hand. Starting Tammy in this game was a very questionable choice (being generous here). For ex, does he (over)rate Zouma perhaps? Given that he let luiz go and then played zouma with only two possession cms protecting him in a tough away match.

The team's structure is definitely not solid yet but it's kinda hard to say for certain that we should have been more pragmatic today. If it was City, Liverpool or Spurs, then I would definitely say we need to be pragmatic but this isn't a great United side. Took the game to them and created a number of chances, had Abraham gotten at the end of that Azpi cross, had we not hit the woodwork in the first half, the game could have been completely different. The individual mistakes made matters worse and United's 2nd and 4th goals probably shouldn't have been counted as well - the former for a foul and the latter was a head injury treatment on Zouma (two United players were apparently trying to stop play).

[Superblue 6,370]

1 hour ago, Robchels said:

hmm don't follow.

AFAIK Mount did not play last season, but Ross did. So, the one player shoehorned here was Mount (presumably based on pre-season performances which don't matter one bit).

Like I said, regardless of how promising mount is, and I think he is very promising, this was the sort of game to be a bit more conservative and play the established starters as much a possible. And I think Lampard did not do that at all today. For me the thrashing is on lamps, not the players.

If Mount didn't play today, then Pulisic would have so the idea of established starters doesn't really hold up for that particular example because both are young and relatively inexperienced.

The only other 'established starters' I can assume is Alonso and Giroud (taking the assumption that Kante isn't fully fit). For me, Emerson was one of the better players and I'm more than happy if he establishes himself first choice this season and the Tammy/Giroud debate is a difficult one. There were times when Tammy gave the ball away cheaply but the idea that Giroud doesn't do that quite a bit too is a bit of a myth in itself. I can completely see why Lampard started Tammy who is far more mobile and energetic and I do feel in the first half the move was justified because we put the United defence under quite a bit of pressure and had some good joy winning the ball back high up the pitch and Tammy was part of that pressure.

The only other options for Lampard with the squad at his disposal today was to play Tomori for Zouma which would have meant being even more inexperienced and playing Kante from the start. However Kante likely wouldn't have played the full 90 minutes and we were well in the game until we conceded the second in the 64th minute anyway and whilst they clearly posed a threat on the counter they had been contained pretty well up to that point.

[Magic Lamps 11,653]

34 minutes ago, Jason said:

Being established doesn't mean being better. 

On paper, yes but let's not forget that Mourinho hasn't been able to set his teams properly in big games for years now and if you remember with Conte, he set us up to lose only 1-0 at Man City last year and set us not to even bothered tackle them at all. 

The team's structure is definitely not solid yet but it's kinda hard to say for certain that we should have been more pragmatic today. If it was City, Liverpool or Spurs, then I would definitely say we need to be pragmatic but this isn't a great United side. Took the game to them and created a number of chances, had Abraham gotten at the end of that Azpi cross, had we not hit the woodwork in the first half, the game could have been completely different. The individual mistakes made matters worse and United's 2nd and 4th goals probably shouldn't have been counted as well - the former for a foul and the latter was a head injury treatment on Zouma (two United players were apparently trying to stop play).

Mourinho got hammered badly often enough in his career even when setting up for a 0-0.  I dont think he would have done better today with the players on offer. Lets not forget we have our 3 best players missing and another 2 possible starters out as well. 

Conte maybe but then again a coach can not plan for individual mistakes. I agree we should not have been as open in midfield which Lamps is partly to blame for. But then again he had 0 defensive midfielders available today. How are you gonna park the bus without a number 6? 

Not scoring at all with all the effort we out in however is a worry. Even apart from the woodwork with all those shots you should score at least once.

[robsblubot 3,504]

18 hours ago, Superblue_1986 said:

If Mount didn't play today, then Pulisic would have so the idea of established starters doesn't really hold up for that particular example because both are young and relatively inexperienced.

The only other 'established starters' I can assume is Alonso and Giroud (taking the assumption that Kante isn't fully fit). For me, Emerson was one of the better players and I'm more than happy if he establishes himself first choice this season and the Tammy/Giroud debate is a difficult one. There were times when Tammy gave the ball away cheaply but the idea that Giroud doesn't do that quite a bit too is a bit of a myth in itself. I can completely see why Lampard started Tammy who is far more mobile and energetic and I do feel in the first half the move was justified because we put the United defence under quite a bit of pressure and had some good joy winning the ball back high up the pitch and Tammy was part of that pressure.

The only other options for Lampard with the squad at his disposal today was to play Tomori for Zouma which would have meant being even more inexperienced and playing Kante from the start. However Kante likely wouldn't have played the full 90 minutes and we were well in the game until we conceded the second in the 64th minute anyway and whilst they clearly posed a threat on the counter they had been contained pretty well up to that point.

Think pulisic has quite a bit more experience at top level than mount, as much as I like him.

kante is a tough one: if he were sitting on the bench, I think he should have started otherwise he should not be sitting there. If he can’t play 90, sub him.

regarding giroud and Tammy,’sorry that’s not debatable. They belong in completely different footballing tiers. Giroud was, along with hazard, our best player in the last cup win. So, starting Tammy made no sense to me. And his poor performance was very predictable.

no need to start a striker in this game either. Play Pedro there for ex.

for me playing 2 possession cms for this game was also questionable. Stick Alonso there, or literally anyone else even yoko guy. Populate the middle to avoid the predictable thrashing. 

Think folks here were underestimating United. They have very dangerous attackers and miss who can punish you for every mistake, as they did.