Looking at this completely objectively (as I at least try always to do) I do not think United are a great team. They are nowhere near as good as United teams of the past but they have players that would challenge for and/or take spots in their team of the 90's.

Ronaldo is obviously the stand out player in their team and has come on leaps and bounds since that excitable little raw kid who was decked by Graham Stuart all that time ago. He is a very special player (I still think he could be much better which is scary) and as such is bound to draw the plaudits.

However if we look at the rest of the side.

Ferdinand and Vidic in a very short time have established a defensive partnership that has seen United concede only 15 goals. Yes I am aware that Evra and Brown have had a say in that but then so have the keeper and midfield but overall it is those two that matter when it comes to that defence.

Evra has been a potent and consistant threat down that left side as well as improving a lot defensively since his move to United.

Nani and Anderson have for me justified their signings showing massive potential and also becoming part of the first team with very little time needed to adapt.

Rooney talent wise is awesome but what he actually gives to United is no where near as much as what he should and could. Again it is a scary thought that he could be so much better and surely one day he will.

Tevez will do well to stay at United the way he is playing. I said in the first place that I didn't see Tevez and Rooney as this dream ticket and I think that my assumption has been proven correct, so far anyway.

Oh and just as a reminder, it is about this time when Ferguson will look to his experience and see Giggs and Scholes. Not bad like to say the least.

So overall are United a one man team? Of course not. Each player in that team has a job to do and it is at this time of the year that the SQUAD come into their own as well (as John O'Shea proved last Season so well).

What annoys me is that United have not been anything special this year, they have just had a very special player and a solid base and are doing what Ferguson knows best, tilting for another assualt up the final stretch of the mountain that is the prem but I am still hopeful that someone might be able to catch them due to the fact they don't look anywhere near the force they have in previous years, at the same time though I am more than aware of the fact that Ferguson can change that perception in the blink of an eye.

I disagree, they are better in my opinion. Considering there is one more consistant challenger to the title "Chelsea" in the 21st century, whereas before it was either Arsenal or Man Utd to win the title.

No way are they better than the team which won the treble.... Out of this team today I think that only 1 or 2 players would make the team back then, Ferdinand and maybe Ronaldo.

Schmeichel

Gary Neville (then)
Rio Ferdinand
Jaap Stam
Denis Irwin

Beckham/Ronaldo
Keane
Scholes (then)
Giggs (then)

Yorke
Cole

i second that.
the above team played as that, a team.
Like i said, put ronaldo in an average team like say portugal and he's not as good,because in internationals every team plays to win .They played Italy the other day i think and ronaldo was non existent.In the big games he comes up short for the most part.I just watched sky do a special on him ,and i was waiting for someone to say what i just said and nobody did.
It leads me to believe that he's a product that sells for them,so a few little details missed in his portfolio is no big deal to them.

Man U's current team is loaded with talent and technically probably better than the treble team,and i don't doubt that if they are all involved in a game more evenly they will be tough to beat.In a few years if they are still together they will be immense.

Ronaldo get's so much of the ball that his numbers are going to be high,let's see how he does against Liverpool ,who's defense i think is overrated,but should be up for the challenge.I know he will do absolutely nothing against Chelsea or Arsenal.

I agree with what Forev said, but i don't agree with what you said.

Portugal are not an average team. Portugal are a fantastic team. You don't reach the world cup semis and the Euro final 2 years before if you are an average team. Let's not forget the semis in 2000 as well.

Ronaldo plays well for Portugal despite what you've said. Well, whenever i've seen him play for them. In the last two major tournaments he was very good, which actually goes against the claim that he doesn't perform against the big teams. Although i do agree with that generally, as for Man U he hasn't performed anywhere near his best against the top teams. For Portugal however, he has put in brilliant performances against France, Spain, Holland etc. It doesn't get any bigger than the euros and world cup, and he has played very well in both. To my annoyance actually. I remember before euro 2004 i hated the guy, and said he shouldn't be anywhere near the first team for that tournament. He left me with egg on my face, as he played very well for such a young player in a huge tournament.

Can't get much bigger?How about Brazil,Argentina,Germany or Italy in the knock out stages?That's where you earn the right to be named with the best,not group stages unless it's a need to win.

All of those teams you mentioned France ,Spain and Holland are the most underachieving teams in the history of world competition.The names are big but their performances have been questionable.France being an exception because they only play well against the likes of italy and in the k.o. stages.When it comes to group matches they leave it late and often scrape through.Now if the game between portugal and france was in the knock out stages then i'll give him his respect for that.You've seen what he has done in the prem against the top teams,so that much can't be questioned the stats speak for themselves.Did you see him against Italy the other day?He was non existent compared to what he does against the likes of Derby and the like.

Look,he's a young player that will improve slightly , but his biggest attribute will be his biggest problem when it comes to being a really effective team player,which is his desire to score goals.

That is one particular year. Not as good as that team but he mentioned the whole 90's. I'm sure this team would be as good as any from that era. It's hard to say though as they don't have time machines so you can go back and play each other.

There is a big difference between a one man team and having one player who is very, very good.

Even without Ronaldo, Man Utd would still have the best defence in the league and attacking choices from Nani, Tevez, Rooney, Saha, Park. They wouldn't be quite as good but they'd still be top four and could probably still win the league, I imagine someone else would possibly step up to the plate in his absence.

I think if Ronaldo had played for Derby this season then yes they wouldn't be getting relegated. Part of their problem is a total lack of confidence anyway so with Ronaldo picking them up draws, wins etc.. the rest of their team would play a lot better. I don't think they could manage top half, but they wouldn't go down. It's difficult to say really. If you look at Villarreal though in Spain where an average team had one world class player in Riquelme and managed to get one missed penalty away from a Champions League final it shows you how much of a difference one world class player can make no matter who he is surrounded by.

hmm... there's always something wrong with our right winger.. last time i was ever questioned.. how we could survive without beckham?.. and now.. how good would we be without ronaldo..

the answer is.. i dunno.. fergie seems to always find the right person for the position.. XD

so.. maybe in the future.. there'd be another similar question coming up.. lol..

It was in the knock-out stages.



Argentina are also one of the big under-achievers.





You mean Carlos Queiroz.

well.. sticky.. they're a team.. technically..

To those of you who think Ronaldo is carrying the team, look at it this way: Do you see him dropping back to get the ball? Marking like Ferdinand or Neville or a host of other players? Not that I want to take anything anyway from the boy, I reckon he is probably the best attacking player in the world right now. He's pure magic with the ball at his feet, he scores loads of goals, he gets the glory.

Now, just for a second, ignore the media hype and look at what Rooney does, for argument's sake. He's a forward. He hasn't been scoring many goals lately, so what gives?

Rather than being a selfish prat and standing in one spot, Rooney covers the length of the field like you would have expected Patrick Vieira to not so many moons ago.

He marks up, tackles well, creates space for other attacking players and bags the occasional goal when the chance arises. Just because he isn't scoring goals doesn't mean Rooney is past it. Far from it.

Do you see Torres, Adebayor, Drogba or any other forward you care to name making goal-saving tackles? I think not.

Next time you judge a player, look at everything they do on the pitch, not just the stats at the end of the game.

Hence Fergie has kept Rooney in his first 11.

Dirk Kuyt does most of that. What a player!


Err, yes. He's always back for corners. He's one of Chelsea best players in the air, and is very good defensively. Alan Hansen described as one of the best strikers at defending he has ever seen.

Rooney does get back a lot, but that not his job. Having him back there often doesn't help the team, and can cost the team sometimes defensively, as well as obviously going forward. Remember the Portsmouth game? Where should Rooney have been? And where was he? And who led to the penalty? Yep - the one and only Rooney_79586.shtml'>Wayne Rooney. He shouldn't have been defending put he was, and then he makes a has of it by running towards Kranjar when Anderson was on him, which left Baros COMPLETELY unmarked in the box with no one near. The got the penalty, scored, you lost.

Oh and what about when Super Wayne was defending for England in the Russia game? Shocking peic of defending in the box to give away the penalty. Nice work son.

Drogba is much better defensively and does more. He wins the ball in the air and knocks it on, brings it down and holds it up, brings other players into play, defends, runs, passes, as MOST importantly for a striker, scores - A LOT.

But why bring him into it. We're talking completely differently classes here. It's not fair on Wayne.

Without Ronaldo we are a good team and we will be a good team. He is scoring goals because he is at right place at right time.

Rooney is much more important than Ronaldo. We have faced all defeats when Rooney wasnt available. Rooney is a constant threat and Ronaldo takes advantage of it and scores goal and even Manucho will do the same thing when he will play for United.

Not quite laddy.

Forgotten the Portsmouth game already?

Rooney played that one...unfortunately for Man Utd, because he led to the penalty.


You can't really say who's te most important though, because Ronaldo hasn't been unavailable for longer than a few games in years. When i was suspended for 3 games though, you really struggled.

NO WE DIDN'T!

I've told you numerous times now when you've spouted that crap that you're talking out of your arse. Stop using it and actually research stuff you're coming out with.

We won 2 and lost 1 without him (the match at City we should have actually won). The two games at the beginning HE PLAYED, we drew.

VDS

Neville Rio Vidic Evra

Hargreaves

Nani Scholes Giggs
Rooney Tevez


This team would win the league IMO.With Ronaldo United are clearly the best team in the country.Head and shoulders the best.Without him they'd only win it by about 3 points.

You did struggle.

You scraped 1-0 wins from what i remember. Didn't you have to rely on a Saha header late on to win one of them? And wasn't the other one a Vidic header also quite late in the game?

Obviously it's difficult remembering exactly who scored and how the game panned out as it was early in the season.

First two games we were rubbish against Reading and Pompey, Ronaldo played. Next game without Ronaldo we lost to a good City side away which we really should have won and then we went on to win the next two without him.

He came back against Everton, was the worst player on the pitch and Vidic won the game with a late header. The next game he played against Chelsea he was nowhere again and even though Chelsea had 10 men he did nothing. In fact he didn't score his first goal until the end of September when Quedrue gift wrapped it from him.

I think this proves conclusively that we did not "really struggle" without him and really the team was just crap at the beginning of the season.

Furthermore, if you did want to put United's poor start down to missing a player.... It was Rooney who got injured on the opening day of the season and missed a month, who we really missed at the beginning of the campaign.

So essentially without Ronaldo you lost 1-0 and then scraped two 1-0 wins.

Hardly banging 'em in. And we all know the only player that has bee banging 'em in for Man U this season is United.