No, not really. Williams has played a decent amount of games. And if you watched some more pressers you'd know the likes of Garner, Gomes and Levitt have struggles with injury and illness this season so they've not been available much.
Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
- Status
Same people who are moaning about "his win rate is 20%" are also whinging about "he has been over a year". The keyboard warriors are failing to see the irony in their own posts.
Surely Klopp should have won that every month so far?
Not being defensive in the slightest. If we're quoting ratios and % then lets at least be factual and clear about it, don't understand why that's rubbed people the wrong way. It's this kind of fake news that leads to people being misled and making ill-informed decisions, it's sensationalist.So Ole has the worst win rate in nearly 40 years
So what's his win rate as permanant manager? That's as relevant stat as any other one.
And you're painfully wrong yet again. Ole having a 0% win rate this calendar year would be based on one football match and hence not very important. Ole having a pathetic win record since being appointed manager would be extremely important given it would spread over 7-8 months which is a material portion of time. Sadly you're highlighting your own agenda here at being so defensive over a clearly relevant and meaningful that show up our managers non peformance. The only reason it's supposedly 'misleading' is becuase it goes against your view. It's like a manager finishing 19th performing terribly and people pointing out to the 10 games he had in the previous season demanding it be taken into account.
As I said, there's no need to lie about something to make it seem a bigger deal than it actually is, we're in enough of a mess as it is without people talking bollocks as well.
100% agree. We simply cannot expect any other manager to do any better than Ole is doing. In fact, we should be thankful to Ole for leaving his job to save us. Ole is working miracles so far and he deserves at least 6 more transfer windows to sort out this mess. Ole said he can do it so trust him please.
Wait, did that post lie? Was that post not factual about Ole's win record since being appointed permanant manager? Or do things that don't suit you convert into non facts?
Of all the transfers to complain about. James has been one of our least shit signings over the last 7 years.Don't dare compare him to Dutch. Dutch had all the charisma in the world. I'd rather spend my time listening to Nigel Farage autobiography audiobook narrated by Neil Warnock than take another one of Ole's press conferences. He is the single most gormless individual we've had at the club. Moyes had more character.
That sums up our transfers in the last 7 years.
From a very informative article about managerial changes in the EPL taking into account data from the past 20 years:
"the bar of expectations is set differently for top-flight clubs and for middling clubs. The five top clubs (Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City and Manchester United) tend to win, on average, 60-70% of the maximum points available in a season and their change threshold is when this figure drops to 50-60%. For the five clubs below them, the normal average in a season is about 45% and the change threshold is around 40%."
Also that new manager bounce is very much a fact and usually doesn't mean that the manager was a genius for the first ten games and then became dross:
"There’s another factor at a relative high: the ‘bounce’, or the improvement in a team’s results following a new appointment. We measured the average points per game recorded by a team in the first 10 matches under a new manager and compared it with the last 10 under the previous manager. In the latest five-year block, nearly 85% of new appointments resulted in a bounce."
And then that bounce doesn't last unless the manager is good enough:
"Bounce is one thing. Maintaining that bounce, or ‘persistence’, is quite another. In 54 of the 74 changes in the 20-year period, the first 10 matches under a new manager saw a bounce in team performance. But in only 21 of these 54 instances was this bounce sustained or improved over the next 20 games. Thus, there are many managers who either experience a non-persistent bounce or no bounce at all but only a few can sustain a bounce."
A great example of quality versus plain bouncy luck:
"stellar example of this bounce and persistence is Antonio Conte at Chelsea in 2016-17, his first season there. Under him, Chelsea added an average of 1.1 points in his first 10 games (compared to the 10 games pre-Conte), and he built on this by adding another 0.25 points in the next 20 games and won the league. Conversely, there’s Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, who added an average of 1 point in his first 10 games with Manchester United but shed 0.6 point in the next 20. Top clubs don’t have time for that."
Read the last line of the above paragraph for added spice.
Takeaways:
1. We are way below the threshold performance level which leads to a manager getting sacked in the PL.
2. Ole's bounce stats should be read separately from the full time post-bounce stats.
"the bar of expectations is set differently for top-flight clubs and for middling clubs. The five top clubs (Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City and Manchester United) tend to win, on average, 60-70% of the maximum points available in a season and their change threshold is when this figure drops to 50-60%. For the five clubs below them, the normal average in a season is about 45% and the change threshold is around 40%."
Also that new manager bounce is very much a fact and usually doesn't mean that the manager was a genius for the first ten games and then became dross:
"There’s another factor at a relative high: the ‘bounce’, or the improvement in a team’s results following a new appointment. We measured the average points per game recorded by a team in the first 10 matches under a new manager and compared it with the last 10 under the previous manager. In the latest five-year block, nearly 85% of new appointments resulted in a bounce."
And then that bounce doesn't last unless the manager is good enough:
"Bounce is one thing. Maintaining that bounce, or ‘persistence’, is quite another. In 54 of the 74 changes in the 20-year period, the first 10 matches under a new manager saw a bounce in team performance. But in only 21 of these 54 instances was this bounce sustained or improved over the next 20 games. Thus, there are many managers who either experience a non-persistent bounce or no bounce at all but only a few can sustain a bounce."
A great example of quality versus plain bouncy luck:
"stellar example of this bounce and persistence is Antonio Conte at Chelsea in 2016-17, his first season there. Under him, Chelsea added an average of 1.1 points in his first 10 games (compared to the 10 games pre-Conte), and he built on this by adding another 0.25 points in the next 20 games and won the league. Conversely, there’s Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, who added an average of 1 point in his first 10 games with Manchester United but shed 0.6 point in the next 20. Top clubs don’t have time for that."
Read the last line of the above paragraph for added spice.
Takeaways:
1. We are way below the threshold performance level which leads to a manager getting sacked in the PL.
2. Ole's bounce stats should be read separately from the full time post-bounce stats.
Last edited:
It's a misleading stat that tries to state his win ratio is much lower than it actually is, which is why it was posted in the first place.
The stat states that since being 'appointed as manager' not 'appointed as permanent manager' which is misleading and open to interpretation. I don't know why you can't just post the actual stats and then go on to say, "here are his stats since becoming perm also", what's wrong with that?
If I cared about his ratio I wouldn't have posted the accurate ones, would I? Stats are often used to prove someone's argument is bulletproof but the reality is they're almost always misused or misinterpreted. Just be as accurate as you can, that's all I'm asking for, so people can come to their own conclusions without being lied to. Don't understand why that's so hard for people to grasp...
Case and point. Low standards. Bought a one dimensional speed merchant for 15 million who is not getting on the bench for City or Liverpool or Chelsea. If I'm investing in potential, I need an actual proven coach and a player with more technical ability.
Isnt that why we watch the matches? Im not impressed with what ive seen. An outdated Molde level manager with an inflated ego. He is living his dream on our expense and some of you are happy to let him, even though it will set us back as a club even further. The only light in the tunnel is we'll soon see him run back to Norway with his tail between his legs.
The tweet was:
"Ole Gunnar Solskajer Win % at Cardiff: 30%
Ole Gunnar Solskjaer Win % FT at United: 29.5%"
His actual win % at United is 50.85%.
Why 29.5? Wasn't he the manager in his first four months? Why not 50.85?
Likewise you can make the case in the other direction. His win % in the last 30 days is 57%. Fergie's overall win % was 59%.
That tweet is literally the definition of sensationalism. If you fail to see that then you should try reading some studies on sensationalism and sensationalised statistics.
Agreed that it is not Ole only but the point I am trying to make is we are light in Midfield, yet we play a 4-2-3-1 and away from home we seem to encounter same problems where our midfield gets over run, why not try something different?
I'd like to listen to that as well but I can't find it on Amazon - where did you get it?
Who put 10p in you? Getting involved in a conversation half way through and getting the complete wrong end of the stick...
This window is actually a bigger test than the summer one i think. With the injuries to Pogba and McT the recruitment you end up making could be the difference between a European spot or not.
How many windows before everyone realise that it's Ed + the Glazers who are the problem? We are in the position now of needing and want to reiterate that, we NEED, a midfielder. Ole has done the right thing by getting rid of the rotten apples in the barrel. It is the glazers though who are not backing the team with a) the funds or b) the right negotiator. Ole has done incredibly well with the squad he has. He has really brought Fred, Rashford, Greenwood, Williams and Mctominay on. He needs more depth and he needs to get rid of the players that don't want to be there (Jones + Pogba). However he needs to time to change the team. This isn't Football Manager.
Ye I don't know. Maybe. People complain about no system etc. If 4-2-3-1 or similar is the way he wants us to go, why not stick with it. New players coming in will hopefully be bought for that set up and slot in without much tweaking to the rest..
This is known for a while now.
Ed Woodward cannot do anything right, how can such a man be in charge of such a big operation is beyond me.
He gets bullied by other clubs, does not move quick enough. it is embarrassing to have him as the CEO.
This is where people get it wrong. He is not a defensive coach, he is a clueless coach. A defensive coach is someone who will make sure the defence is organised and top defensive coaches have an attacking pattern aka Simeone's Madrid, Jose's Inter, Lippi's Italy 2006 team, Conte's chelsea side.
Ole wants to play an attacking brand of football but does not know how to execute it and that is why when we don't have any space we struggle to break down opponents. He does not know how to execute his ideas. If he was really a master of defensive football we would be looking far more organized than this and would have an attacking pattern set.
The problem is getting players. We have a system but not buying the players for it. It is good that we know a system but if the CEO is not brave enough to back the manager then there is a bigger issue.
In the god damn shitter.
I can't disagree with that either
Hopefully OGS will get the backing he needs.Wow, this may be a contender for worst post of the decade.
Ole clearly has us going in the right direction, he just needs 8 transfer windows.
We already saw this last summer. We done nothing to reinforce midfield at all, losing Herrera & Fellaini in the process. If we recruited well last summer, we wouldn't be in this situation now. I can only see the problem compounding this summer too as Woodward is hopeless at bringing in more than 3 players. He even admitted it himself.
So we can only bring in 3 players max, making it impossible to even replace the players we're losing in the process each year, but we're rebuilding apparently?
Last edited:
Just 8? Why not 10
My confidence in the team grew in this December period when we started winning games.
I was really looking forward to the new year as I thought Pogba coming back would give us an immense boost, our players were coming back to Form.
But now after this injury to Scott, Pogba and others as well, I don't think we will be able to make up during the rest of the period. Also, I don't think we are going to win Europa League as well due to the amount of injuries we have had in this critical period.
Our only hope is that we get back Pogba and Scott and hope that we start being more consistent.
I know this is a bit negative but this is truth as of now.
On the other hand, if we end up buying a couple of good players in this transfer window (which is highly unlikely), you never know what might happen.
I was really looking forward to the new year as I thought Pogba coming back would give us an immense boost, our players were coming back to Form.
But now after this injury to Scott, Pogba and others as well, I don't think we will be able to make up during the rest of the period. Also, I don't think we are going to win Europa League as well due to the amount of injuries we have had in this critical period.
Our only hope is that we get back Pogba and Scott and hope that we start being more consistent.
I know this is a bit negative but this is truth as of now.
On the other hand, if we end up buying a couple of good players in this transfer window (which is highly unlikely), you never know what might happen.
How exactly this is a Ed-Glazer problem when they have spent 130m this year ? Our beloved coach decided to go for all British and bought 2 overrated players while we could have achieved the same result with Smalling and Young .
Except for 1-2 years the owners have continously backed the managers in the last decade.
Ed + Glazers are responsible for 6 years of failure, creating a vastly overpaid, entitled squad full of losers. Extending the contracts of deadwood rubbish like Young, Jones & Mata.
Ole is responsible for knowing we were losing Herrera, Fellaini & Matic's legs had gone to an already dead midfield, he blew the budget on overpriced defenders instead. Zero excuses, considering that he had months to assess the squads priorities.
He is also responsible for not having a plan B and the team being clueless in front of deep defences.
Lastly, if he starts Mr 0 goals 0 assists as our chief creator ever again, he deserves to be sacked on the spot.
Last edited:
Mata was hailed as the saviour when we signed him. Sanchez, ADM too.
You can only blame them for not creating a DoF position but they have continously backed all managers with transfer kitty. It's not their problem that the managers decided to spent it on duds.
Because 10 would be silly. 8 it is thenJust 8? Why not 10
The buck stops with them. Having no dof after all these years of failure is a huge indictment on them. Them not creating a robust structure for our manager to thrive in is totally on them. Moyes, LVG & Mourinho have all come out afterwards criticising the structure directly above them. Woodward extending Mourinho's contract only to pull the rug from under him the following summer after finishing 2nd was another.
I disagree that they have continuously backed the managers each year. We are averaging 70m net since Mourinho's first summer 3 years ago. According to Ed, we can only bring in 3 players max each summer. We have lost double than that this past year alone (Fellaini, Herrera, Lukaku, Smalling, Sanchez, *Matic' legs gone so he might as well be gone too*).
Why can other clubs bring in more than 3 players easily, yet it's impossible for us?
And people actually believe we're rebuilding?
The Ole supporters can't have it both ways. If our midfield is the poorest then why did he not buy anyone else? Surely there plenty of midfield players then available at very reasonable rates? He could get any two from the PL and according to his supporters they should be better.
If that is not the case and our midfield is not the poorest but reasonable then why are we so poor? It means he does not know how to get the best out of them. A good or even a decent manager decides how to play depending on the players he has and how they can perform. It would be utterly stupid to ask this United team to play like Barca or for that matter City or Liverpool. But properly coached and set up they can play like Leicester or Wolves or Sheffield United.
If that is not the case and our midfield is not the poorest but reasonable then why are we so poor? It means he does not know how to get the best out of them. A good or even a decent manager decides how to play depending on the players he has and how they can perform. It would be utterly stupid to ask this United team to play like Barca or for that matter City or Liverpool. But properly coached and set up they can play like Leicester or Wolves or Sheffield United.
My sarcasm detector exploded like a Michael Bay movie in the past few pages of this thread
No!
- Status