Would you sell Huddlestone...?

[kernowspur]

Probably not. I think he has to improve quite a bit more to be the player some people believe that he already is. He is certainly not as good as Carrick was when we sold him. However, I think he needs to be given the opportunity to improve, although if Sandro also settles and improves, Hudd may find getting in the team as first choice difficult.

 

[sloth]

Do you think Huddlestone is a better player now that Carrick was in his last 2 seasons for us?

Personally I think the best holding midfielders I have seen in recent times are Alonso and Carrick (Viera wasn't bad either). They both have the composure, reading of the, passing range and sufficient athleticism to play this role to perfection. Sandro looks to have the potential but early days yet.

I guess if Sandro develops into the player we all hope for and Palacios recovers his form, we could afford to sell Huddlestone. Perhaps next summer.

I find it bizarre what has happened to Carrick at Manchester United. Jol built a team around him as a holding midfielder and he seemed to thrive on it. I think he is doing OK at Manchester United, but the fact that Fletcher seems to get more games (not sure he does, but that is my impression) tells me that things are not going that well for him there. Big fish little pond perhaps? Perhaps he is not as good as I thought.

I think Carrick in his last couple of seasons with us was far better than Huddlestone is now. but I did think Carrick was very good then. I don't think his style suits Utd very well. I wouldn't take him back though.

 

[PT]

I don't get it.

Hudd is 23 years old - four years or so off his prime - he's played no end of England U-21 games, has been called up to Capello's recent England squads and subsequently made his debut for England.

Now allegedly SAF is making noises at bringing him in to embellish his moderate Man Utd team.

And some here condone a potential sale? To one of our immediate (literally) rivals?

 

[Wiener]

I think Carrick in his last couple of seasons with us was far better than Huddlestone is now. but I did think Carrick was very good then. I don't think his style suits Utd very well. I wouldn't take him back though.

I would do a straight swap, Carrick for Huddlestone, right now.

 

[mattyspurs]

I don't get it.

Hudd is 23 years old - four years or so off his prime - he's played no end of England U-21 games, has been called up to Capello's recent England squads and subsequently made his debut for England.

Now allegedly SAF is making noises at bringing him in to embellish his moderate Man Utd team.

And some here condone a potential sale? To one of our immediate (literally) rivals?

I know, madness isn't it?

 

[StartingPrice]

I think Carrick in his last couple of seasons with us was far better than Huddlestone is now. but I did think Carrick was very good then. I don't think his style suits Utd very well. I wouldn't take him back though.

But Carrick in his last couple of seasons with us was in a later stage in his career.
I may be mistaken, but I think at the age THudd is now, Carrick was still at WetSpam, and getting a hard time off their crowd:shrug:

I don't get it.

Hudd is 23 years old - four years or so off his prime - he's played no end of England U-21 games, has been called up to Capello's recent England squads and subsequently made his debut for England.

Now allegedly SAF is making noises at bringing him in to embellish his moderate Man Utd team.

And some here condone a potential sale? To one of our immediate (literally) rivals?

And this!

 

[jurgen]

I think SAF's ruse has gone over B-C's head. Public interest in Huddlestone = Huddlestone out with an injury (privately admitting its a neck injury after have his head turned so hard) = a "busy *****" getting a 5th minute booking on Scholes, having to be replaced at half time again using a valuable substitution and throwing Sandro into the deep end.

Having said that in my chain of events Sandro might not have the inbuilt Old Trafford inferiority complex of the rest of the team and blow Utd away.

Back on topic.. no don't sell him. Unless we are upgrading on him. Currently in our squad he is a first choice, rightly (or wrongly, statistically), and theres not a great deal to choose between all the midfielders. If we nabbed a player of a level above who forced him out, or if Sandro becomes that player, fine, but for now, nope. Would we find a player with Huddlestone's credentials, at his age, for that £16m, not so sure. Who has been a first choice, playing in a midfield four, taking a team in the most competitive top flight around into the CL...

 

[markiespurs]

I would do a straight swap, Carrick for Huddlestone, right now.

Thank fuck your not the Spurs manager then.

 

[sloth]

I don't get it.
Hudd is 23 years old - four years or so off his prime - he's played no end of England U-21 games, has been called up to Capello's recent England squads and subsequently made his debut for England.

Now allegedly SAF is making noises at bringing him in to embellish his moderate Man Utd team.

And some here condone a potential sale? To one of our immediate (literally) rivals?

I think I addressed these points already, but to paraphrase what I said before.

On Huddlestone:

• Huddlestone's scope for improvement is limited by his sheer size; he's not going to become more nimble or faster than he already is. The crux of everyone's criticism of him is that he's not dynamic or explosive enough for a DM and is too easily wrong-footed if he pushes up on his man and too passive if he doesn't. He may improve on other aspects of his game, but in these areas age is only going to work against him.

• His other main weakness is he lacks drive or fire-in-his-belly, this might be fine in a side brimming with others of that type, but we aren't and the two players waiting in the wings to replace him are like that (it seems).

• The squad is blessed with creativity but may lack steel. As such his strengths are less needed than his weaknesses missed.

The point you make about Utd wanting him therefore he must be good was also previously addressed and went something along the lines of, Utd have different strengths and weaknesses to us, it is quite possible for one side to have an abundance of one player type and a dearth of another and for another team to have the opposite balance.

Lastly, the argument is anyway simply a variation of the "if they're selling him, why do we want him" one that does the rounds every transfer window.

It's worth noting that Arsenal built their stadium on the back of Wenger's ability to purchase under-valued players and sell over-valued ones.

 

[phil]

But Carrick in his last couple of seasons with us was in a later stage in his career.
I may be mistaken, but I think at the age THudd is now, Carrick was still at WetSpam, and getting a hard time off their crowd:shrug:

No SP, same age. Carrick was, just, 23 when he signed and 25 when he signed for United.

I think I addressed these points already, but to paraphrase what I said before.

On Huddlestone:

• Huddlestone's scope for improvement is limited by his sheer size; he's not going to become more nimble or faster than he already is. The crux of everyone's criticism of him is that he's not dynamic or explosive enough for a DM and is too easily wrong-footed if he pushes up on his man and too passive if he doesn't. He may improve on other aspects of his game, but in these areas age is only going to work against him.

• His other main weakness is he lacks drive or fire-in-his-belly, this might be fine in a side brimming with others of that type, but we aren't and the two players waiting in the wings to replace him are like that (it seems).

• The squad is blessed with creativity but may lack steel. As such his strengths are less needed than his weaknesses missed.

The point you make about Utd wanting him therefore he must be good was also previously addressed and went something along the lines of, Utd have different strengths and weaknesses to us, it is quite possible for one side to have an abundance of one player type and a dearth of another and for another team to have the opposite balance.

Lastly, the argument is anyway simply a variation of the "if they're selling him, why do we want him" one that does the rounds every transfer window.

It's worth noting that Arsenal built their stadium on the back of Wenger's ability to purchase under-valued players and sell over-valued ones.

My views exactly.

 

[PT]

On Huddlestone:

• Huddlestone's scope for improvement is limited by his sheer size; he's not going to become more nimble or faster than he already is. The crux of everyone's criticism of him is that he's not dynamic or explosive enough for a DM and is too easily wrong-footed if he pushes up on his man and too passive if he doesn't. He may improve on other aspects of his game, but in these areas age is only going to work against him.

• His other main weakness is he lacks drive or fire-in-his-belly, this might be fine in a side brimming with others of that type, but we aren't and the two players waiting in the wings to replace him are like that (it seems).

• The squad is blessed with creativity but may lack steel. As such his strengths are less needed than his weaknesses missed.

In theory you are right. In practise however, Huddlestone has been a consistent factor in our midfield of the last three or more seasons, and given our penchant for player turnover, has played with all kinds of partners.

Harry sees Huddlestone as a bedrock of his core. He admires the guys versatility in a 23 man squad where he can play three positions.

We can argue our stances for as long as we care to but Capello and Redknapp know their stuff and Tom is integral to their current and future plans.

 

[sloth]

In practise however, Huddlestone has been a consistent factor in our midfield of the last three or more seasons, and given our penchant for player turnover, has played with all kinds of partners.

He had a good season last year and we qualified for CL, so he's CL quality at least. Whether he's the answer long-term is another matter. This is a big season for him, he's got to hold onto his place now and it could be tough; we've got good players waiting in the wings and our transfer horizon has broadened as our profile's risen.

Harry sees Huddlestone as a bedrock of his core. He admires the guys versatility in a 23 man squad where he can play three positions.

I'm not so sure, I think he sees huge potential in Tom, but if he doesn't live up to it he'll soon drop out of favour. for me he has been living up to it thus far, but he has to push on again.

We can argue our stances for as long as we care to but Capello and Redknapp know their stuff and Tom is integral to their current and future plans.

I think all we can safely argue is that Tom is integral to Harry's current plans.

Capello's given no indication of seeing Huddlestone as integral to his current plans. And who can say what their future plans are for Huddlestone?

 

[Mr Pink]

I think I addressed these points already, but to paraphrase what I said before.

On Huddlestone:

• Huddlestone's scope for improvement is limited by his sheer size; he's not going to become more nimble or faster than he already is. The crux of everyone's criticism of him is that he's not dynamic or explosive enough for a DM and is too easily wrong-footed if he pushes up on his man and too passive if he doesn't. He may improve on other aspects of his game, but in these areas age is only going to work against him.

• His other main weakness is he lacks drive or fire-in-his-belly, this might be fine in a side brimming with others of that type, but we aren't and the two players waiting in the wings to replace him are like that (it seems).

• The squad is blessed with creativity but may lack steel. As such his strengths are less needed than his weaknesses missed.

The point you make about Utd wanting him therefore he must be good was also previously addressed and went something along the lines of, Utd have different strengths and weaknesses to us, it is quite possible for one side to have an abundance of one player type and a dearth of another and for another team to have the opposite balance.

Lastly, the argument is anyway simply a variation of the "if they're selling him, why do we want him" one that does the rounds every transfer window.

It's worth noting that Arsenal built their stadium on the back of Wenger's ability to purchase under-valued players and sell over-valued ones.

You make some good points Sloth, particularly the point about teams needing different types of players to compliment their own blend of players.

But as you know we have exhausted the strengths and weaknesses of Hudd on here, and I think you will agree that his strengths outweigh his weaknesses enough for us to be playing him regularly given the resources at our disposal.

For me there is no real getting away from the fact that Hudd was integral to our team which enjoyed the success we did last season. Not saying that warrants him starting every week because of that and he has to push on now, but all the same I dont think it gets the recognition it deserves - not you personally Sloth.

Also there is no substitute for experience - I can only see him getter as times goes on providing he's still playing regularly.

As much as I hate to admit it Wenger is a genuis at buying under rated players - thats a standard most will struggle to match.

Unless he goes off the boil I dont see any reason why he wont command a regular starting spot through out the course of the season, injuries permitting.

 

[StartingPrice]

No SP, same age. Carrick was, just, 23 when he signed and 25 when he signed for United.
quote]

Well, that's pretty much my point...folk are comparing the Carrick which had two great years with us and then signed for United, with THudd now. That means a 25 year old Carrick with a 23 year THudd. Therefore, Carrick was just slightly younger than 23 when he was still at WetSpam.

 

[Son_Of]

Absolutely would not sell him, he's got his best years ahead of him and we need those years to be spent at Tottenham Hotspur.

However, if he wanted to go, there would be no point in keeping him, so £30m+ would soften the blow.

+1 on all counts

 

[Wiener]

Thank fuck your not the Spurs manager then.

The same could be said for pretty much everyone on this site, including yourself. Pretty witless put down though - most probably copied and pasted from any one of a thousand posts on this site.

Carrick, played as a classic holding midfielder, has few equals. Despite being played slightly differently at Manchester United, he has still managed to be a key player in team that has won the CL and League. He is clearly a notch or two or above Huddlestone, and despite the fact that at 29 he probably only has 2 or 3 good years left in him, I would rather go for proven class than the potential of Huddlestone.

Without wanting to challenge your capacity for both imagination or reason too much, personally I believe Redknapp's very attacking approach is too risky. If he continues with it, I think we will find it difficult to finish top 4 (our no.1 priority always). Carrick as a holding midfielder in place of Huddlestone, playing with Modric, Jenas or Sandro depending on tactics would, I would believe yield results.

But as you say, thank fuck I am not the Spurs manager as I really don't have a fucking a clue.

 

[Mr Pink]

There is not a shot in hell that Carrick has been playing as well as Huddlestone over the last year or so and I certainly wouldn't want Carrick back in place of him.

Carrick has dipped ever since the Champions League final 2009, most knowledgeable United fans will tell you that.

 

[Wiener]

There is not a shot in hell that Carrick has been playing as well as Huddlestone over the last year or so and I certainly wouldn't want Carrick back in place of him.

Carrick has dipped ever since the Champions League final 2009, most knowledgeable United fans will tell you that.

As far as I know Carrick hasn't consistently been played in the classic holding role since he left us. Furthermore Manchester United didn't have a great season last time out. Not sure it's just a Carrick problem. United fans have been spoilt over the last decade. Their whining must be taken with a pinch of salt.

Furthermore, while I do rate Huddlestone, and don't deny his important role in our 4th place finish last season, it is possible to upgrade on him. IMO the core of our team is Gomes, King, Modric, Bale, VDV and possibly Lennon. It would be hard to improve on these players. Finishing 4th this season while playing CL will be quite a challenge. I think Carrick would offer the composure, experience and quality we need.

 

[SpurSince57]

Of course I'd sell him. £10m-£12m would come in very handy.

Don't know what the club would have to say about it, mind, but the money would be in a Swiss account and I'd be on my way to Rio.

 

[StartingPrice]

Of course I'd sell him. £10m-£12m would come in very handy.

Don't know what the club would have to say about it, mind, but the money would be in a Swiss account and I'd be on my way to Rio.

SS57 in amazing "Love/Lust tryst with Rio FergiFund" scoop confession admisssion - read all in "SPs News of the Droogs" Issue 1...out this Thursday at all good stockists (ony £93.71 per issue:grinEek