I watched all the goals from 98/99 season yesterday on MUTV, and what stuck out was the sheer speed of play. It was like everything was on fast forward. Showing all the goals one after another would make it seem like that I suppose, but there was very little patient build up play in our goals, it was a constant bombardment of the opponents box. Amazing crosses in the box by Beckham, ruthless finishing by York, Cole, and Solskjaer, and lightning fast movement in and around the box from Giggs, Scholes, Keane, and Beckham. So if a goalkeeper made a save, at times there were sometimes three players ready to pounce to knock in the rebound. There were very few goals scored outside the box apart from Beckham's free kicks. And as I said, very little patient build up play. There were killer through balls that at times had one of three players able to run the ball into the net. What amazed me was just how simple it all looked. Simply attacking in numbers at high speed, incredible movement off the ball, great timing getting into the box, instinctive positioning, superb crossing, and fantastic finishing. Arsenal, Liverpool, Barcelona, Milan, Bayern, and Juve all struggled to cope with this style of attacking play. I wonder how teams today would have coped with it.
Style of play in the 98/99 season
- Thread starter vidic blood & sand
- Start date
See Liverpool. Sad to say it, but the style is similar but a different formation.
Apparently the game has moved on from that. It hasn’t. Playing at such speed and clinicalness is still the key for me.
Dare I say it, it’s the United way.
Dare I say it, it’s the United way.
Last edited:
I dont know. Liverpool this year seems to be patient and do a lot of build up play where the opposition get tired in the end. Patience and perseverence is the Liverpool keywords for me.
Transition speed has been a key factor football for a while now and yes we were for quite some time under SAF absolute masters of this.
Just a few days ago I watched compilations of Cole, Giggs and Solskjaer and the football on display was just amazing. 4/5 players in the box sniping the rebounds and accurate crossing over and over again.
People like Jose Mourinho would try and manipulate rubbish and say that the game has moved on, when he was more outdated. The spirit of football and united especially should never ever say the game has moved on, the shape of 442 in that fashion maybe has moved on, but the united way should never be thrown out. We should always be on front foot looking to take the game to everyone, because we have the tools to do it, and in pogba, lingard, martial and rashford, those four guys can do it
The united way is DDG, lindelof, Shaw, pogba, martial and rashford which Jose mourinho tried to kill, thankfully we had the antidote before the virus/cancer in jose Mourinho could do even more untold damage
I remember something my own coach once said to me. The main difference between a good and bad team is that the good team want the ball all the time. When you have 10 players who all want the ball the players will automatically make the runs towards the ball carrier or towards the spaces where they can be played. Obviously you still need some sort of structure or else you are just going to see 22 players all chasing the ball like an U6 match.
Fergie did get more "pragmatic" towards the end of his reign though. Being more defensive in European games and of course there was the Redcafe coined zombie passing.
I wonder if Ole will keep to the attacking style all the time or if he will adapt like Sir Alex. He did say we should play our own way and not think about the opposition are doing.
I wonder if Ole will keep to the attacking style all the time or if he will adapt like Sir Alex. He did say we should play our own way and not think about the opposition are doing.
The game has, whether we like it or not, moved on since 1999, the thing is that Ferguson wasn't following any trend back then. United's way of trying to maximize the actual game-time within the 90 minutes by forcing a tempo at a breakneck speed and the persistence on the extra-man up front instead of going 3v3 in the midfield battle wasn't the norm in Europe back then. Hitzfeld's 352 and Lippi's defensively aggressive 433/442 (diamond) which focused on controlling the central channels reigned supreme in the second half of the '90s. Barca were going through their dark ages in the post-Cruyff era and LvG's Ajax was seen more like the wonderful anomaly than the example of how football should be played. The now almost obsolete 442 diamond was still a viable option (see Cuper at Valencia, RM under Heynckes etc.). Finally, France had won the double (WC/Euro) with ultra-cautious tactics and basically... no one up front.
This was the football world Mourinho came to dominate and then Guardiola came to turn upside down with his Barcelona. And when that change occurred, United were closer to Mourinho's tactics than to Pep's which shows how hard Fergie found it to cope with European competition and Chelsea's raising of the bar in the PL. This is also one of the reasons why Guardiola mentioned Ferguson as his idol in English football. What you see every time you watch videos from United in the 90s is not a simple "loosening of the reins" as some want to think. You see world-class footballers being presented with the toughest of riddles to solve: Keepers who know they'll have plenty of work to do because the plan is never to slow down the tempo, defenders with acres of space to cover, midfielders constantly outnumbered, wingers who had to work their socks off to create chance after chance and forwards who had to outscore the opposition. It was not some kind of military hazing (not sure if I'm using the right word here), it was a manager who demanded of his players to produce good football at all times because anything else wasn't acceptable.
It worked because SAF envisioned it, embraced it and then kept it all together with his sheer brilliance but the "prima materia" were there for him to work with. Whether we have the right players now, it remains to be seen and it's a question more important than who the next manager will be. Hopefully, Ole, as someone who has worked with SAF in the '90s, will help us see how high the ceiling of this squad is. By the way, you should watch the 93/94 season. It's Fergie's most entertaining United by far IMHO.
This was the football world Mourinho came to dominate and then Guardiola came to turn upside down with his Barcelona. And when that change occurred, United were closer to Mourinho's tactics than to Pep's which shows how hard Fergie found it to cope with European competition and Chelsea's raising of the bar in the PL. This is also one of the reasons why Guardiola mentioned Ferguson as his idol in English football. What you see every time you watch videos from United in the 90s is not a simple "loosening of the reins" as some want to think. You see world-class footballers being presented with the toughest of riddles to solve: Keepers who know they'll have plenty of work to do because the plan is never to slow down the tempo, defenders with acres of space to cover, midfielders constantly outnumbered, wingers who had to work their socks off to create chance after chance and forwards who had to outscore the opposition. It was not some kind of military hazing (not sure if I'm using the right word here), it was a manager who demanded of his players to produce good football at all times because anything else wasn't acceptable.
It worked because SAF envisioned it, embraced it and then kept it all together with his sheer brilliance but the "prima materia" were there for him to work with. Whether we have the right players now, it remains to be seen and it's a question more important than who the next manager will be. Hopefully, Ole, as someone who has worked with SAF in the '90s, will help us see how high the ceiling of this squad is. By the way, you should watch the 93/94 season. It's Fergie's most entertaining United by far IMHO.
Last edited:
There's a lot about that era that is enviable in terms of our style of play, but the main reason we don't see attacking like that anymore is because you don't see defending like that anymore. Whilst the standard of individual defending at the very top arguably dropped, increased professionalism and money meant teams became far better at defending as a unit. It therefore became important to either pull teams out of their defensive shape using patient passing or to hit them on the counter so they don't have time to get organised. At the same time, counter attacking football became more difficult as defenders got quicker, which is why some of the goals we scored in the late noughties were so impressive.
Similarly, defensive drilling made crossing a lot less effective. United teams in the 90s scored plenty from crosses. Some were pinpoint crosses to pick out a man, but plenty were balls put into good areas whilst multiple players attacked the box. In the 2000s the rest of the league started catching up to what Arsenal were doing in the early-mid 90s, who themselves were catching up to the likes of Milan in the late 80s. That basically meant that in the Premier League at least, swinging crosses into 'good areas' for forwards to attack was no longer a reliable source of
goals, which is why teams are now far happier to give the opposition space out wide, like in our infamous 82-cross game against Fulham under Moyes after which he was rightly ridiculed for being outdated. There was a lot said about quality of crossing after that game as well, but really it's that defenders are drilled on where to position themselves to clear those types of crosses, so scoring from generally requires an individual mistake from a defender or individual brilliance from a forward.
So whilst there's a lot of things we could and should take from United teams of '94 and '99, those things are generally things like desire, ambition, the aim to entertain, rather than tactical cues. The reason Fergie is revered as a manager ultimately was his ability to keep building great teams whilst adapting to enormous changes on and off the field. Part of his brilliance was recognising that what worked in '94 wouldn't in '99 or '08.
Similarly, defensive drilling made crossing a lot less effective. United teams in the 90s scored plenty from crosses. Some were pinpoint crosses to pick out a man, but plenty were balls put into good areas whilst multiple players attacked the box. In the 2000s the rest of the league started catching up to what Arsenal were doing in the early-mid 90s, who themselves were catching up to the likes of Milan in the late 80s. That basically meant that in the Premier League at least, swinging crosses into 'good areas' for forwards to attack was no longer a reliable source of
goals, which is why teams are now far happier to give the opposition space out wide, like in our infamous 82-cross game against Fulham under Moyes after which he was rightly ridiculed for being outdated. There was a lot said about quality of crossing after that game as well, but really it's that defenders are drilled on where to position themselves to clear those types of crosses, so scoring from generally requires an individual mistake from a defender or individual brilliance from a forward.
So whilst there's a lot of things we could and should take from United teams of '94 and '99, those things are generally things like desire, ambition, the aim to entertain, rather than tactical cues. The reason Fergie is revered as a manager ultimately was his ability to keep building great teams whilst adapting to enormous changes on and off the field. Part of his brilliance was recognising that what worked in '94 wouldn't in '99 or '08.
Last season Liverpool yes, but without the genger pressing. That team was great at transition the ball from the back to the attack and could still win many games against lesser opponents. But you need more patience and more intelligence to win against big clubs. What strikes the most is how SAF had great players in every position, even bench players were good players; but nowadays we have to put up with the like of Fellaini, Lukaku, Matic, Lingard and some people try to convince us they are actually very good for United.
I dobt think its comparable to anything now as the game was a lot different back then.
They had the United vs Liverpool game from that season on mutv recently for example, and if that game happened now there have been about 8 red cards. There was also very little control to anything. It was fact yes but basically just let chaos insue and hope players produce bits of quality to win the game in amongst it.
Nowadays teams want to control games or will let the other team control it.
Speed always wins though. You look at the 2008 United team and it's the same. Everything is direct and at lightning speed. Liverpool play similar now, and spurs when they're on form. Real Madrid, Barcelona, PSG do it but better than any of the English teams.
They had the United vs Liverpool game from that season on mutv recently for example, and if that game happened now there have been about 8 red cards. There was also very little control to anything. It was fact yes but basically just let chaos insue and hope players produce bits of quality to win the game in amongst it.
Nowadays teams want to control games or will let the other team control it.
Speed always wins though. You look at the 2008 United team and it's the same. Everything is direct and at lightning speed. Liverpool play similar now, and spurs when they're on form. Real Madrid, Barcelona, PSG do it but better than any of the English teams.
Will be interesting to see us away from home against a good team.
Beckham made it work. For me he’s was the best crosser in the world bar none. His game didn’t rely on beating a man to get space for a cross, it was basically first time crosses right into dangerous areas. All the forwards had to do was anticipate them
What's a genger pressing?
There is nothing comparable to 1990s Man Utd OP. It was the best of times.
Sir Alex built a team that was capable of beating anyone. Individually they all had tremendous quality but the sum was even greater than the parts.
The defining quality was work rate, that's what brought it all together. Maybe that's why Ole says a United team should never be outworked?
Imagine playing 442 against the top teams of that era. How much work back and forward everyone had to do to avoid being outnumbered in defence and to create overloads in attack. 1990s United worked ridiculously hard. The likes of Keane and Beckham took pride in destroying the old bleep test. The whole team had this insane work ethic, which meant they never gave up and just kept going.
They would wear teams down like a blacksmith smashing metal against an anvil. It wasn't tiki taka but you'd lose count of the times we'd get to stoppage time and the opposition looked ropey from having had to contend with us for 90 minutes.
When teams played United they knew they were in a battle. Having to maintain that intensity was too much for most teams. Eventually there would be a lapse in concentration and we'd be in. We could afford to sling loads of crosses in because we'd earned the right, we'd battered them to the point where we knew a good ball in the right area would cause panic and our quality would allow us to punish any mistakes.
The highlights don't tell that story. They don't show Giggs slide tackling a full back and leaving him flustered. They don't show Andy Cole bullying a centre half with his power. They don't show Scholes leaving a foot in to let them know he's there. The highlights make it look like all Becks had to do was cross it, but they don't show how much off the ball running has opened that space for him or why the opposition defence can't track Yorke as he rises for a header cos they just don't wanna be buffeted by United players anymore, and are panicking about just how many bodies we're throwing forward.
It didn't always work, mind, we never erred on the side of caution though. When the old legends talk about taking risks, never giving up that 90s United is what I think of.
Sir Alex built a team that was capable of beating anyone. Individually they all had tremendous quality but the sum was even greater than the parts.
The defining quality was work rate, that's what brought it all together. Maybe that's why Ole says a United team should never be outworked?
Imagine playing 442 against the top teams of that era. How much work back and forward everyone had to do to avoid being outnumbered in defence and to create overloads in attack. 1990s United worked ridiculously hard. The likes of Keane and Beckham took pride in destroying the old bleep test. The whole team had this insane work ethic, which meant they never gave up and just kept going.
They would wear teams down like a blacksmith smashing metal against an anvil. It wasn't tiki taka but you'd lose count of the times we'd get to stoppage time and the opposition looked ropey from having had to contend with us for 90 minutes.
When teams played United they knew they were in a battle. Having to maintain that intensity was too much for most teams. Eventually there would be a lapse in concentration and we'd be in. We could afford to sling loads of crosses in because we'd earned the right, we'd battered them to the point where we knew a good ball in the right area would cause panic and our quality would allow us to punish any mistakes.
The highlights don't tell that story. They don't show Giggs slide tackling a full back and leaving him flustered. They don't show Andy Cole bullying a centre half with his power. They don't show Scholes leaving a foot in to let them know he's there. The highlights make it look like all Becks had to do was cross it, but they don't show how much off the ball running has opened that space for him or why the opposition defence can't track Yorke as he rises for a header cos they just don't wanna be buffeted by United players anymore, and are panicking about just how many bodies we're throwing forward.
It didn't always work, mind, we never erred on the side of caution though. When the old legends talk about taking risks, never giving up that 90s United is what I think of.
Watching Giggs run rampage against Serie A defences was quite fascinating to see.
I recently watched some of our treble winning teams games.
Full games.
The Fa cup final vs Newcastle,Semi vs Arsenal all of our Champions League games as well and i noticed our style of play was not that good at all but the goals we scored was.
Our players often miscontrolled the ball,lost possesion under no pressure and we often hoofed the ball up from the back but as i said the goals were scored were great.
Full games.
The Fa cup final vs Newcastle,Semi vs Arsenal all of our Champions League games as well and i noticed our style of play was not that good at all but the goals we scored was.
Our players often miscontrolled the ball,lost possesion under no pressure and we often hoofed the ball up from the back but as i said the goals were scored were great.
I think Beckham is one of the few players in the history of the game who would still get world class assist numbers from 'proper' crosses in the modern game.
Having said that though, if he'd come through now he likely wouldn't have got a chance out wide, he'd be pinging passes out to an inside forward instead of swinging them in to a striker.
We hoofed the ball when we had to or had an outside chance of making it count. Don't forget we had great, direct attackers back then who actually did make it count sometimes. Countless goals we scored in and around this period came after a long kick.
Don't see why and when has direct, long ball become forbidden. We passed the ball quickly, back and forth. Ole did that in his first two games, too. Every chance we have we play it forward. As long as it's not the only route I much prefer 'hoofing' to horizontal, zombie passing eventhough it may look neater.
Is this even in question? You hear crossing you think Beckham it's always been that simple even outside the shores. Same with FKs.
We had best crosser (Beckham), ball-winner (Keane), passer (Scholes) and dribbler (Giggs) in the world in our 4 midfield positions which helped a lot
.
What I felt about that team and Sir Alex other great teams is that whenever we had the ball we were capable of scoring.
Even if we went behind it didn't seem to matter as it seemed that no matter how many you score we are going to score more than you
. What I felt about that team and Sir Alex other great teams is that whenever we had the ball we were capable of scoring.
Even if we went behind it didn't seem to matter as it seemed that no matter how many you score we are going to score more than you
Last edited:
This.
Such a hallmark of our play in the past. Hitting teams on the counter with lightning speed as soon as we win the ball back and there was always width on the counter to stretch the opposition defense out of shape.
I also miss the one-touch passing in and around the opposition penalty area.
People call the way we played in the 90s as outdated and old fashioned football? And they think pressing is a modern thing? The Dutch of the 70s were doing it too and so successfully.
I thought the FA Cup semi was still one of the best games ever when I watched it again on YouTube. The battle between Keane and Petit in particular was phenomenal. No passing the ball just for the sake of it but just pure 4-4-2 adrenaline. I guess it depends on what you like to watch.
You are right though in that the style can seem a bit old fashioned. We did hoof it at times and our tactics were very reckless. We also played some great stuff too.
This was outrageously efficient. If you watch all of his killer assists from the right, he never had to beat his defender. Just make a quick, inch perfect cross every time. He was unplayable, every defender's nightmare.
I think a lot of the reason we could dominate teams with pure speed back then is because our players had superior training facilities, better stamina and work ethic hammered into them. As the money in football grew the differences evened out. Nowadays it is a lot more competitive on that part and more focused on tactics. Down the road SAF had Carrick and Scholes and naturally we used more time on the build up. The thing is we always had those collective forward bursts upfield, in-between slower play. Last few seasons under SAF and after, we haven't really seen that at all. It has been completely lost.
I don't care about 4-4-2 or stuff like that. It is not in the United DNA, neither is Klopp or Pep. To me it doesn't matter as much if we press, sit back, or dominate possession. The important thing is that we have those gung-ho bursts at least in patches throughout a game. A way to scare the opposition into submission and let them know who we are and that we are gonna get our goal. It is the only thing I want, and to be fair, it seems that Ole is feeling the same way. He gets us
I don't care about 4-4-2 or stuff like that. It is not in the United DNA, neither is Klopp or Pep. To me it doesn't matter as much if we press, sit back, or dominate possession. The important thing is that we have those gung-ho bursts at least in patches throughout a game. A way to scare the opposition into submission and let them know who we are and that we are gonna get our goal. It is the only thing I want, and to be fair, it seems that Ole is feeling the same way. He gets us
It is not the same having Beckham delivering the crosses and having Young or Valencia.
There's something to that, but this was still the era where we didnt have a goalkeeper coach until 98 or something like that. We obviously had it better than someone like QPR or Wimbeldon, but for a club our size, we still had a basic staff until about 99/2000. I read Tony Coton's autobiography recently and couldnt believe we didnt have a full time goal keeping coach until Coton came in. Schmeichel just used to have a few kids from the academy kick about with him, and a coach would join in one day a week.
Cheers, I didn't know that.
Sorry it's "gegenpressing", the style of pressing Klopp uses in his teams. You can read more about it if you do some search on google.
You should have a look at some of the goals and extended highlights from 92/93 and 93/94. The pace we counter attacked with was frightening. Parker and Irwin as attacking fullbacks overlapping with sharpe/giggs and my personal favourite, Kanchelskis. Simple, effective, exhilarating.
Last edited by a moderator:
I remember those seasons, and had the season reviews on video. Would love to watch them again but need a VCR
Having Hughes and Cantona in the same team was fantastic. Both could do the extraordinary. Similar to when we had Berba, Rooney, and Ronaldo in the same team.
I was joking
Last edited by a moderator:
For me we had the most impressive options upfront and in midfield.
Cole and Yorke could run rings around defences with small triangles....Teddy could unlock a massed defence or power in a header...and any ball toward Solskjaer usually meant an early strike on goal before anyone could react.
Add in support from Giggs, Scholes and Beckham with Keane to wrestle control of the ball and we could score at any second in any game.
Cole and Yorke could run rings around defences with small triangles....Teddy could unlock a massed defence or power in a header...and any ball toward Solskjaer usually meant an early strike on goal before anyone could react.
Add in support from Giggs, Scholes and Beckham with Keane to wrestle control of the ball and we could score at any second in any game.
Beckham and Fellaini in the same team...
On one hand, it would be a trophy filled time...On the other, it would make me wanna puke
On one hand, it would be a trophy filled time...On the other, it would make me wanna puke