Gibbo

[Ihaters]

Gibson will never receive the same ridiculous hype as Fellaini does. Nobody is saying he is unreal (like people do with Fellaini), they're saying that he is our best central midfielder, including Fellaini.

It is a bit ridiculous to try and compare a winger to a central midfielder, despite them both being midfielders. They are completely different roles, stick Gibson or Fellaini on the wing and you will see what I mean.

He is our best midfielder, and it will show, because it has already been shown.

Injuries are his/our problem, but when he isn't injured he is brilliant.

Are you saying its only comparable anywhere along the centre in which case Pienaar and Fellaini have both played there, and are better so my above comment still stands, or are we just saying CM, not DM or AM in which case yes.. he's probably better than not having anyone at all as even Osman is an AM, or are we just comparing him to DM's? Is he better than Neville? Yes
That's slightly refining your initial statement of him being our best midfielder though.
If its a genuine choice of our midfielders Fellaini>Pienaar>Gibson>Mirrallas
If its out of only that particular role that Gibson plays then Gibson = Gibson as there are no other CM's in our squad.

 

[GoatJR]

And who is then lad?

This is gonna be good, hes gonna say Fellaini and then list a load of stats, but what Bradley doesnt know is that Fellaini is now a Second Striker, almost like a target man and can no longer be considered a midfielder, he will counter with some more stats that prove how limited his actual football knowledge is, cos any fool can see how pivotal Fellaini is to our current style of play whilst playing in the SS Role, watch lads, hes gonna mug himself RIGHT OFF

How do you get it like that

 

[Ihaters]

How do you get it like that

I believe he used magic

 

[Count Duckula]

Are you saying its only comparable anywhere along the centre in which case Pienaar and Fellaini have both played there, and are better so my above still tands, or are we just saying CM, not DM, or AM in which case yes.. he's probably better than not having anyone as even Osman is an AM, or are we just comparing him to outright DM's? Is he better than Neville? Yes
That's slightly refining your initial statement of him being our best midfielder though.
If its a genuine choice of our midfielders though
Fellaini>Pienaar>Gibson>Mirrallas
If its out of only that particular role then Gibson = Gibson as there are no other CM's in our squad.

I'm saying he is our best central midfielder, as in he is the best player we have who can play CM.

He isn't the only CM in our squad at all. Supposedly, Fellaini is a CM, as is Osman and Neville. However they can also play other positions such as the second striker in Fellaini's case, and Right Back and Right Wing in Neville and Osman's respective cases.

 

[Ihaters]

I'm saying he is our best central midfielder, as in he is the best player we have who can play CM.

He isn't the only CM in our squad, at all. Supposedly, Fellaini is a CM, as is Osman and Neville. However they can also play other positions such as the second striker in Fellaini's case, and Right Back and Right Wing in Neville and Osman's respective cases.

CM would be their 2nd or even 3rd best positions.
Osman AM
Fellaini DM or AM
Neville RB, DM
You can shoehorn them into CM in which case yes Gibsons better than Osman or Neville, but we still have better midfielders.
Are you now arguing instead of 'he's our best midfielder' that 'he's our best in his position?' Because if you are then I agree and I think most would. He is our best CM but he's not our best midfielder.

 

[Count Duckula]

CM would be their 2nd or even 3rd best positions.
Osman AM
Fellaini DM or AM
Neville RB, DM
You can shoehorn them into CM in which case yes Gibsons better than Osman or Neville, but we still have better midfielders.
Are you now arguing instead of 'he's our best midfielder' that 'he's our best in his position?' Because if you are then I agree and I think most would. He is our best CM but he's not our best midfielder.

It is nonsense to differentiate between DM and CM as if they are two separate positions. They aren't separate positions, a DM is just a CM who tends to be more defensive in their play. Just like an AM is a CM who is more attacking in their play.

Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard play as Central Midfielders, but they are referred to as attacking midfielders because of their style of midfield play, not because they play in a separate position that is referred to as being an 'attacking midfielder'.

I'm not having it that Fellaini or Neville aren't considered to be central midfield players just because they tend to be more defensive in their central midfield play (arguably so in Fellaini's case). They are both CM's, as is Osman, although Fellaini has been playing as a second striker for ages now, and performs far better in this role IMO.

I'm saying he is our best central midfielder, and that Fellaini, Osman and Neville are all said to be central midfielders.

 

[Brennan]

It is nonsense to differentiate between DM and CM as if they are two separate positions. They aren't separate positions, a DM is just a CM who tends to be more defensive in their play. Just like an AM is a CM who is more attacking in their play.

Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard play as Central Midfielders, but they are referred to as attacking midfielders because of their style of midfield play, not because they play in a separate position that is referred to as being an 'attacking midfielder'.

I'm not having it that Fellaini or Neville aren't considered to be central midfield players just because they tend to be more defensive in their central midfield play (arguably so in Fellaini's case). They are both CM's, as is Osman, although Fellaini has been playing as a second striker for ages now, and performs far better in this role IMO.

I'm saying he is our best central midfielder, and that Fellaini, Osman and Neville are all said to be central midfielders.

Nonsense indeed.

Fellaini is a great defensive midfielder and a good attacking midfielder but apparently when he is a CM he loses all of his talent and becomes worse than Gibson ?

 

[pfim]

Gerrard and Lampard have played all over, so not the best examples.

Surely there is a difference between an AM and a DM. I doubt anyone would want to see Phil Neville closer to goal. This is by design and of course there is a difference between the two positions. Especially if we're talking about a diamond midfield in a 4-4-2 or the AM role in a 4-5-1. These players have different attributes and take up different positions on the pitch.

Saying they are considered "attacking midfielders" because of their syle of play is fundamentally wrong. They take up different positions on the pitch.

 

[Ihaters]

It is nonsense to differentiate between DM and CM as if they are two separate positions. They aren't separate positions, a DM is just a CM who tends to be more defensive in their play. Just like an AM is a CM who is more attacking in their play.

Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard play as Central Midfielders, but they are referred to as attacking midfielders because of their style of midfield play, not because they play in a separate position that is referred to as being an 'attacking midfielder'.

I'm not having it that Fellaini or Neville aren't considered to be central midfield players just because they tend to be more defensive in their central midfield play (arguably so in Fellaini's case). They are both CM's, as is Osman, although Fellaini has been playing as a second striker for ages now, and performs far better in this role IMO.

I'm saying he is our best central midfielder, and that Fellaini, Osman and Neville are all said to be central midfielders.

So when its Neville, Gibson and Fellaini, there is no difference in the role of Neville and Fellaini? No different traits required in defending to linking up play? No difference to amount of tackling and shooting?
CM is a link between the DM and AM. Second striker is another name for AM.. Its the same thing, his job is to link with the other midfielders and maybe get a ball or two to Jelavic whilst joining the attacks. He's still a midfielder, he spends most of his time running around the top half and their box, whereas a DM spends his time running our half and our box whereas a CM rarely enters either box but covers both halves.
He is our 3rd best midfielder behind Felliaini and Pienaar but amidst the central midfielder possibilities he is no 1, because Fellaini doesn't play there. If you say he does then Gibbo is second best CM then.

 

[Brennan]

Gerrard and Lampard have played all over, so not the best examples.

Surely there is a difference between an AM and a DM. I doubt anyone would want to see Phil Neville closer to goal. This is by design and of course there is a difference between the two positions. Especially if we're talking about a diamond midfield in a 4-4-2 or the AM role in a 4-5-1. These players have different attributes and take up different positions on the pitch.

But Fellaini can do it all, he kicks ass wherever he goes on the pitch.

Gibson is a solid player for us, but I just can't believe people are proclaiming him better than Fellaini, who along with Baines is one of our two best players.

 

[Count Duckula]

Nonsense indeed.

Fellaini is a great defensive midfielder and a good attacking midfielder but apparently when he is a CM he loses all of his talent and becomes worse than Gibson ?

Madness

It makes perfect sense.

You think Fellaini is a great central midfielder, I don't.

I think Gibson is better than Fellaini in central midfield, you don't.

There is no madness, just a difference in opinion.

 

[Brennan]

It makes perfect sense.

You think Fellaini is a great central midfielder, I don't.

I think Gibson is better than Fellaini in central midfield, you don't.

There is no madness, just a difference in opinion.

And sometimes opinions can be wrong, such as anybody saying the earth is flat, or that Fellaini isn't a great central midfielder.

 

[Count Duckula]

So when its Neville, Gibson and Fellaini, there is no difference in the role of Neville and Fellaini? No different traits required in defending to linking up play? No difference to amount of tackling and shooting?
CM is a link between the DM and AM. Second striker is another name for AM.. Its the same thing, his job is to link with the other midfielders and maybe get a ball or two to Jelavic whilst joining the attacks. He's still a midfielder, he spends most of his time running around the top half and their box, whereas a DM spends his time running our half and our box whereas a CM rarely enters either box but covers both halves.
He is our 3rd best midfielder behind Felliaini and Pienaar but amidst the central midfielder possibilities he is no 1, because Fellaini doesn't play there. If you say he does then Gibbo is second best CM then.

The second striker is not an orthodox position. The reason it is referred to as being a second striker is because they play every bit as close to the striker as they do to the midfield. It certainly isn't a CM role.

Whereas, I disagree that there are specific positions for defensive or attacking central midfield play. The player is still playing central midfield, they may just be more defensive or attacking in their play.

Your last sentence is laughable by the way.

 

[Count Duckula]

And sometimes opinions can be wrong, such as anybody saying the earth is flat, or that Fellaini isn't a great central midfielder.

He is so great in central midfield that he hasn't played a full game in that position for months, and when he has dropped back we have fell apart and conceded.

 

[Brennan]

He is so great in central midfield that he hasn't played a full game in that position for months, and when he has dropped back we have fell apart and conceded.

Yeah, let's just ignore his past two seasons shall we. Saying we fell apart because Fellaini moved from behind the striker is absurd, he was destroying everybody in midfield for a good year and a half before Moyes started playing him behind the striker.