Would you sack or keep Ole? (Poll reopened)

Sack or Keep OLE?

  • Sack Ole & appoint new coach ASAP

  • Keep Ole & back him to finish rebuild


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
22,545
Location
Somewhere out there
Yes but that's more a case of us underperforming. The point the poster was making was if the team perform to the capabilities we all believe this current squad can, then there isn't many team we can't beat deservedly.
There you go then.

That’s why he has many doubters, he has a squad that can challenge. A squad that is better than all bar 2 (or maybe 3 if you’re generous), and hell looking at City this year, saying 2 might also be generous.
He has a squad that is absolutely able to go past the 80 point mark.
 

Gabagoo

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
246
This basically means that Ole has a good enough squad to challenge for the title, which eventually means that if we under perform than there is something wrong with our coaching, right?
That would be the logical conclusion to make from their premise, yes. Watch them try to turn it around...
 

Fletchageddon

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2010
Messages
290
Does no one else think Pep changed his tactics to play us because Ole has spanked him the past few times we have met? Can no one remember the McTominay goal and the titanic music? Short memories lads.

We are two games off top. Everyone has patchy form. We'd be absolutely flying if we had more than 20 minutes for a pre-season.
 

Di Maria's angel

Captain of Moanchester United
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
14,762
Location
London
Spurs - City:
Possession 33-66
Shots 4-22

Spurs - Chelsea:
Possession 40-60
Shots 6-12

Spurs - Arsenal:
Possession 30-70
Shots 5-11

Us - Chelsea:
Possession 51-49
Shots 14-6

Us - City:
Possession 46-54
Shots 11-9

Please explain to me how our bus parking can be compared to Spurs?
We didn't go all in on the breaks, but we did not just sit back and absorb.
Does no one else think Pep changed his tactics to play us because Ole has spanked him the past few times we have met? Can no one remember the McTominay goal and the titanic music? Short memories lads.

We are two games off top. Everyone has patchy form. We'd be absolutely flying if we had more than 20 minutes for a pre-season.
I reckon teams are wary of the counter attack and the fact that its a major strength of ours. Simultaneously, they're probably also knowledgable of how ineffective we can be when asked to play on the front foot. Hence why you see us with more possession in our big games but also 0 wins and 1 penalty scored.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
22,545
Location
Somewhere out there
Does no one else think Pep changed his tactics to play us because Ole has spanked him the past few times we have met? Can no one remember the McTominay goal and the titanic music? Short memories lads.
It’s not just us though, Pep bottles the CL every season, at Bayern and City by overthinking and deviating from his normal plan.
My guess vs. us is that he knows, take away our counter and we have almost nothing, which was exactly the case.
If KdB has his shooting boots on they go away with a win without breaking a sweat.
 

troylocker

Full Member
Joined
May 2, 2019
Messages
2,499
Why don't we wait till the end of the season to see if Greenwood can be better on the right and not relegate Greenwood to the bench?
Tuanzebe already gives us that depth in quality.
Why don't we aim high enough for a managerial appointment? There is no guarantee but Managers are really cheap compared to players.
It would be great if Greenwood turned out to be a world class right winger, but I still think competition for the 3 spots up top i healthy for the squad. Greenwood at 19 should be happy with being a rotation player untill he really has shown that he deserves to be #1 choice. Our team also screams for more creativity, which Sancho brings.
I agree Tuanzebe has been good when he's been given minutes. I still think we need another quick, quality CB though.

For the last one: There is absolutely no guarantees with changing managers. There is too many variables and different dynamics within a club and squad to make changing the manager anything but a gamble. It is not cheap to change managers, quite the opposite. Buying a manager out of his contract is expensive enough, but then comes changing the coaching team, assistant manager, building their own team, giving the project enough time to settle... and so on. Sacking Ole now would probably cost 20-50M and the only guarantee you'd get would be to be back at square 1 with no guarantees.
 

jamesjimmybyrondean

Full Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
7,052
It’s not just us though, Pep bottles the CL every season, at Bayern and City by overthinking and deviating from his normal plan.
My guess vs. us is that he knows, take away our counter and we have almost nothing, which was exactly the case.
If KdB has his shooting boots on they go away with a win without breaking a sweat.
Applies to us too though.
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
2,804
There you go then.

That’s why he has many doubters, he has a squad that can challenge. A squad that is better than all bar 2 (or maybe 3 if you’re generous), and hell looking at City this year, saying 2 might also be generous.
He has a squad that is absolutely able to go past the 80 point mark.
When was the last time the 4th best team got more than 80 points - if we accept that we have the 4th best squad?

I like what Ole is doing with this squad and it’s clearly getting there but I don’t think it’s significantly better than Chelsea or Spurs and it’s behind Liverpool and City. As such, shouldn’t we reasonably be in a battle for 3rd? If we get between 70-75 points this season that will be a good return.
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
2,804
It’s not just us though, Pep bottles the CL every season, at Bayern and City by overthinking and deviating from his normal plan.
My guess vs. us is that he knows, take away our counter and we have almost nothing, which was exactly the case.
If KdB has his shooting boots on they go away with a win without breaking a sweat.
He missed one chance didn’t he? Might as well say that if Rashford had kept his foot onside before Walker kicked him that we’d have comfortably won without breaking a sweat.

The reality was that both teams were fairly cautious and didn’t take too many risks. It was a 50-50 game which neither side deserved to win (or lose).
 

Mainoldo

New Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2004
Messages
22,965
And if he does, of course he should get the sack.
But the premise he brought up was building the best side in the world and winning a trophy. I don't get how that's supposed to be a negative? Isn't that what we're all hoping for?!
But of course it was a fake argument countered with "but it won't happen", and that was the intention all along.

"Haha, Ole-inners hoping we build the best side in the world and lift a trophy".

Turn it around, then.

"Haha, Ole-outers hoping we sack Ole, bring in a world class manager, build the best side in the world and lift a trophy. Like that would ever happen."
To me it’s night and day. Buy Dan James or Buy Eden Hazard. Right now we have Dan James as a manager. I don’t care if he promised to work harder than Eden Hazard. He’s just not cutting it.
 

anant

Correctly predicted Italy to win Euro 2020
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
8,258
It’s not just us though, Pep bottles the CL every season, at Bayern and City by overthinking and deviating from his normal plan.
My guess vs. us is that he knows, take away our counter and we have almost nothing, which was exactly the case.
If KdB has his shooting boots on they go away with a win without breaking a sweat.
City had just 9 shots in the game. Only once have they had lower number of shots (vs Pool).
City had just 2 SOT. Only once have the had lower number of SOT (vs Pool)
I can go on about passes into penalty area, final third, progressive passes, etc. all of which are lower than what you expect from them.
 

justsomebloke

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2020
Messages
5,861
Looking at the media as well as this board, I think realistically Solskjær is going to have to deliver very, very strong results to overcome doubters.

There is now a smothering narrative about amateurishness and naivety from which people won't easily step back. Just look at the coverage in The Guardian for example, with Barney Ronay's arrogant rubbish leading the way. That's going to matter no matter how unreasonable and badly founded it is.

It's like everyone held their breath for a little bit and reminded themselves that patience was needed, and now they've run out of breath and have forgotten all about that and suddenly United has to not only contend for and win titles, they have to do so by obliterating the opposition consistently and in an entertaining fashion. If they don't, Solskjær is obviously an idiot.

It's enough to make you despair of mankind when you look, for instance, at what is written about Chelsea compared to what is written about United. United is spoken about as if they have performed way below expectation, and are standing at the foot of the precipice. Sky Sports wrote after the City game that the result at least "arrested the slide". "Slide"? They had four straight PL victories ahead of that game. What "slide" would that be?

Chelsea on the other hand is being talked about in glowing terms as a title contender. Fixed their defensive issues, made great signings - and above all, being guided towards dominance by an exciting, promising English manager whose previous experience is, er, Derby County. Whereas United is being guided by some nonentity who, apart from a previous stint in the PL, has only worked in some yobbo league on the outskirts of Europe.

How is that, though? They finished behind United last season. So far this season, they have yet to string together more than three consecutive wins in the PL, compared to United's four. Their average points taken is 1.8, same as United. Their record against top teams (Liverpool, City, United, Chelsea, Tottenham, Leicester) is 0-2-1, same as United. And unlike United, they lost their last PL game. All this with a better and deeper squad than we have. So what exactly has Frank Lampard achieved that OGS hasn't? How has his team been more consistent, or better? Why is OGS on the brink, while the issue isn't even remotely on the horizon for Lampard?

And another thing. The 0-0 Manchester derby was a shameful and awful performance indicative of grave issues with both teams, while the 0-0 Tottenham-Chelsea game wasn't?

Here's what the BBC wrote about that game:

Tottenham returned to the top of the Premier League despite being held by Chelsea in a highly-competitive yet goalless London stalemate.

The eagerly-anticipated fixture between two teams in excellent form failed to produce a goal as both sides cancelled each other out at Stamford Bridge.


And this is what the BBC wrote about the Manchester derby, under the heading "Absence of fans felt in soulless, dismal Manchester derby":

Any fans who wished they could be here might have been swiftly put off by the over-cautious, cat-and-mouse approach from Manchester United manager Ole Gunnar Solskjaer and Manchester City counterpart Pep Guardiola.

This was a game that started, finished and nothing much happened in between. Local honour was satisfied in a very unsatisfactory match.


There were 20 shots (4 on goal) in the Manchester derby. There were 18 shots (4 on goal) in the London derby. Obviously "Highly competetive yet goalless stalemate....as both teams cancelled each other out" is as applicable to one game as to the other. So is "over-cautious, cat and mouse approach", and "This was a game that started, finished and nothing much happened in between. Local honour was satisfied in a very unsatisfactory match."

Watching football being discussed and analysed is at times like watching some weird collective entity responding to people's emotions rather than to reality. As if we're in a Terry Pratchett novel. And the journos are as bad as anybody.
 
Last edited:

Skåre Willoch

Full Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
4,218
To me it’s night and day. Buy Dan James or Buy Eden Hazard. Right now we have Dan James as a manager. I don’t care if he promised to work harder than Eden Hazard. He’s just not cutting it.
We bought Bruno Fernandes, you know. World class. And he's performing like the world class player he is. Before him we had the choice between Jesse Lingard and Andreas Pereira (or an injured/inconsistent Paul Pogba). The results have improved since Bruno's arrival, as they should. A) Because he is world class, and B) Because he is used right/ the team is built around him.

So it does really matter a lot whether we buy "Dan James or Eden Hazard".
 

matsdf

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
596
There you go then.

That’s why he has many doubters, he has a squad that can challenge. A squad that is better than all bar 2 (or maybe 3 if you’re generous), and hell looking at City this year, saying 2 might also be generous.
He has a squad that is absolutely able to go past the 80 point mark.
Let's see if he can achieve that then, and stop throwing hissy fits along the way.
 

rotherham_red

Full Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
7,407
There you go then.

That’s why he has many doubters, he has a squad that can challenge. A squad that is better than all bar 2 (or maybe 3 if you’re generous), and hell looking at City this year, saying 2 might also be generous.
He has a squad that is absolutely able to go past the 80 point mark.
He's a big reason why this squad is seen in that light though. You can't just say that this squad is great and ignore his role in said squad's development, or that Ole doesn't deserve to have a job or manage a group of players like this, when he's a big part of why they are seen in this light.

Cast your mind back when Ole let go of Lukaku, Sanchez, and Smalling et al (and was forced to let go of Herrera) without getting replacements in for at least half of them. The risk that he took in putting his faith in to some of the players I mention below was massive, and the fact that it paid off is something Ole and the players have never really got their due credit for.

Fred and McTominay were seen as jokes, Martial and Rashford were talented but far from being guaranteed sure things, Shaw was a write off. He brought in Maguire and AWB to improve the defence which was midtable quality the season before, and above all else, he brought Bruno in to the team. He brought through Greenwood and Williams from the academy, and will continue to bring through the best possible kids in to the team - not just paying lip service to it like Jose did before him, or like Lampard did the moment he was able to spend some money.

Just look at the improvements made by some of those I listed. Martial and Rashford almost doubled their previous best goals returns that season. Greenwood equalled Best, Rooney and Kidd as a teenage Utd striker in his first season. Fred went from a joke figure, to actually being one of our most important players (a far cry from when I made a thread proposing exactly that at the start of last season and being lambasted for it). These things don't happen in a vacuum, and Ole has played a big role in them happening.

Now, I'm more than open to the idea that Ole in the long-term might very well not be up to it and might not be the man who wins us #21 or #4, but for me, I want him to at least be given a chance to succeed or fail on that metric (as long as he attains the base level of a top 4 finish). That means bringing in the players he wants on time, rather than either a) getting them 6/12 months late and almost fecking up our season in the process (Bruno, the long hoped for Lukaku replacement), or b) not bringing any of them in at all (Grealish, Sancho et al). Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case during Ole's time at the club (while Jose and LvG were able to squander the vast sums they were given).

Give him a full squad (i.e. bring in a starting calibre RW, DM, CB, and ST) and see where we land is all I ask. If we're still in a dog fight for top 4 after those incomings, then we will have to accept that it hasn't worked out and wish him all the best, but right now, I do think he did a fantastic job last season, and decent job this season, all things considered. And irrespective of what happens next, the next man in (if Ole doesn't work out) will have a far, far better and coherent playing squad to deploy than what the previous managers had been left with, Ole included.
 

Mainoldo

New Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2004
Messages
22,965
We bought Bruno Fernandes, you know. World class. And he's performing like the world class player he is. Before him we had the choice between Jesse Lingard and Andreas Pereira (or an injured/inconsistent Paul Pogba). The results have improved since Bruno's arrival, as they should. A) Because he is world class, and B) Because he is used right/ the team is built around him.

So it does really matter a lot whether we buy "Dan James or Eden Hazard".
1. Bruno is not world class. Let’s get that clear.

2. The judgement of a manager is not what he does with the best players he gets but how he actually manages what he has and quite frankly I don’t see anything special that we couldn’t have got if we just gave Alan Pardew the job and have him £200m.
 

jamesjimmybyrondean

Full Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
7,052
Does it? What big chance did we miss?

I recall KDB missing 2 pretty much open goals.
Honestly don't remember the chances in the match that much. What I mean is that our players also didn't have their shooting boots on. In the end the missed chances don't matter. What matters is the performance and the result and I'd say they were even
 

troylocker

Full Member
Joined
May 2, 2019
Messages
2,499
Yep that's the underdog
All these matches were matches against sides where we were favourites to win....To come back and win all these matches after conceding first shows strong mentality, not an underdog mentality.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
There you go then.

That’s why he has many doubters, he has a squad that can challenge. A squad that is better than all bar 2 (or maybe 3 if you’re generous), and hell looking at City this year, saying 2 might also be generous.
He has a squad that is absolutely able to go past the 80 point mark.
Why arent we giving him the chance to do so? The manager of the 3rd best squad finished 3rd last year, is above one of those sides who has a better squad and within touching distance of the other.
Most points from anyone in the league since Jan, in another thread its stated we have 43 points from a possible 54 against non traditional top 6 sides since Feb (the we cant beat lower sides myth needs to die a fecking death) so consistency isnt an issue.
What even is the argument coming the other way?
Its like the top 4 race last year when fans gave him shit for not finishing in the top 4 in the future, just months of it based on something that didnt happen yet (or at all)
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
2,804
Does it? What big chance did we miss?

I recall KDB missing 2 pretty much open goals.
One was offside - assuming you are thinking of the one where Maguire blocked and I’m not totally forgetting one. They had the Mahrez/De Bruyne chance, which was the best opportunity of the match but, in my recollection, basically nothing else. If Pogba had let the ball run to Greenwood or Bruno had got the weight of his pass right after the flowing move down the right, we would also have had two one on ones. They won’t count as chances but they were just as good situations as any City had.
 

wolvored

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
9,871
He's a big reason why this squad is seen in that light though. You can't just say that this squad is great and ignore his role in said squad's development, or that Ole doesn't deserve to have a job or manage a group of players like this, when he's a big part of why they are seen in this light.

Cast your mind back when Ole let go of Lukaku, Sanchez, and Smalling et al (and was forced to let go of Herrera) without getting replacements in for at least half of them. The risk that he took in putting his faith in to some of the players I mention below was massive, and the fact that it paid off is something Ole and the players have never really got their due credit for.

Fred and McTominay were seen as jokes, Martial and Rashford were talented but far from being guaranteed sure things, Shaw was a write off. He brought in Maguire and AWB to improve the defence which was midtable quality the season before, and above all else, he brought Bruno in to the team. He brought through Greenwood and Williams from the academy, and will continue to bring through the best possible kids in to the team - not just paying lip service to it like Jose did before him, or like Lampard did the moment he was able to spend some money.

Just look at the improvements made by some of those I listed. Martial and Rashford almost doubled their previous best goals returns that season. Greenwood equalled Best, Rooney and Kidd as a teenage Utd striker in his first season. Fred went from a joke figure, to actually being one of our most important players (a far cry from when I made a thread proposing exactly that at the start of last season and being lambasted for it). These things don't happen in a vacuum, and Ole has played a big role in them happening.

Now, I'm more than open to the idea that Ole in the long-term might very well not be up to it and might not be the man who wins us #21 or #4, but for me, I want him to at least be given a chance to succeed or fail on that metric (as long as he attains the base level of a top 4 finish). That means bringing in the players he wants on time, rather than either a) getting them 6/12 months late and almost fecking up our season in the process (Bruno, the long hoped for Lukaku replacement), or b) not bringing any of them in at all (Grealish, Sancho et al). Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case during Ole's time at the club (while Jose and LvG were able to squander the vast sums they were given).

Give him a full squad (i.e. bring in a starting calibre RW, DM, CB, and ST) and see where we land is all I ask. If we're still in a dog fight for top 4 after those incomings, then we will have to accept that it hasn't worked out and wish him all the best, but right now, I do think he did a fantastic job last season, and decent job this season, all things considered. And irrespective of what happens next, the next man in (if Ole doesn't work out) will have a far, far better and coherent playing squad to deploy than what the previous managers had been left with, Ole included.
So another 300 mill at least will see the squad sorted then we judge him on the most ever spent by one manager in 3 years?
 

RumHam

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 23, 2020
Messages
21
Looking at the media as well as this board, I think realistically Solskjær is going to have to deliver very, very strong results to overcome doubters.

There is now a smothering narrative about amateurishness and naivety from which people won't easily step back. Just look at the coverage in The Guardian for example, with Barney Ronay's arrogant rubbish leading the way. That's going to matter no matter how unreasonable and badly founded it is.

It's like everyone held their breath for a little bit and reminded themselves that patience was needed, and now they've run out of breath and have forgotten all about that and suddenly United has to not only contend for and win titles, they have to do so by obliterating the opposition consistently and in an entertaining fashion. If they don't, Solskjær is obviously an idiot.

It's enough to make you despair of mankind when you look, for instance, at what is written about Chelsea compared to what is written about United. United is spoken about as if they have performed way below expectation, and are standing at the foot of the precipice. Sky Sports wrote after the City game that the result at least "arrested the slide". "Slide"? They had four straight PL victories ahead of that game. What "slide" would that be?

Chelsea on the other hand is being talked about in glowing terms as a title contender. Fixed their defensive issues, made great signings - and above all, being guided towards dominance by an exciting, promising English manager whose previous experience is, er, Derby County. Whereas United is being guided by some nonentity who, apart from a previous stint in the PL, has only worked in some yobbo league on the outskirts of Europe.

How is that, though? They finished behind United last season. So far this season, they have yet to string together more than three consecutive wins in the PL, compared to United's four. Their average points taken is 1.8, same as United. Their record against top teams (Liverpool, City, United, Chelsea, Tottenham, Leicester) is 0-2-1, same as United. And unlike United, they lost their last PL game. All this with a better and deeper squad than we have. So what exactly has Frank Lampard achieved that OGS hasn't? How has his team been more consistent, or better? Why is OGS on the brink, while the issue isn't even remotely on the horizon for Lampard?

And another thing. The 0-0 Manchester derby was a shameful and awful performance indicative of grave issues with both teams, while the 0-0 Tottenham-Chelsea game wasn't?

Here's what the BBC wrote about that game:

Tottenham returned to the top of the Premier League despite being held by Chelsea in a highly-competitive yet goalless London stalemate.

The eagerly-anticipated fixture between two teams in excellent form failed to produce a goal as both sides cancelled each other out at Stamford Bridge.


And this is what the BBC wrote about the Manchester derby, under the heading "Absence of fans felt in soulless, dismal Manchester derby":

Any fans who wished they could be here might have been swiftly put off by the over-cautious, cat-and-mouse approach from Manchester United manager Ole Gunnar Solskjaer and Manchester City counterpart Pep Guardiola.

This was a game that started, finished and nothing much happened in between. Local honour was satisfied in a very unsatisfactory match.


There were 20 shots (4 on goal) in the Manchester derby. There were 18 shots (4 on goal) in the London derby. Obviously "Highly competetive yet goalless stalemate....as both teams cancelled each other out" is as applicable to one game as to the other. So is "over-cautious, cat and mouse approach", and "This was a game that started, finished and nothing much happened in between. Local honour was satisfied in a very unsatisfactory match."

Watching football being discussed and analysed is at times like watching some weird collective entity responding to people's emotions rather than to reality. As if we're in a Terry Pratchett novel. And the journos are as bad as anybody.

Great post.
 

Bilbo

TeaBaggins
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
14,208
Looking at the media as well as this board, I think realistically Solskjær is going to have to deliver very, very strong results to overcome doubters.

There is now a smothering narrative about amateurishness and naivety from which people won't easily step back. Just look at the coverage in The Guardian for example, with Barney Ronay's arrogant rubbish leading the way. That's going to matter no matter how unreasonable and badly founded it is.

It's like everyone held their breath for a little bit and reminded themselves that patience was needed, and now they've run out of breath and have forgotten all about that and suddenly United has to not only contend for and win titles, they have to do so by obliterating the opposition consistently and in an entertaining fashion. If they don't, Solskjær is obviously an idiot.

It's enough to make you despair of mankind when you look, for instance, at what is written about Chelsea compared to what is written about United. United is spoken about as if they have performed way below expectation, and are standing at the foot of the precipice. Sky Sports wrote after the City game that the result at least "arrested the slide". "Slide"? They had four straight PL victories ahead of that game. What "slide" would that be?

Chelsea on the other hand is being talked about in glowing terms as a title contender. Fixed their defensive issues, made great signings - and above all, being guided towards dominance by an exciting, promising English manager whose previous experience is, er, Derby County. Whereas United is being guided by some nonentity who, apart from a previous stint in the PL, has only worked in some yobbo league on the outskirts of Europe.

How is that, though? They finished behind United last season. So far this season, they have yet to string together more than three consecutive wins in the PL, compared to United's four. Their average points taken is 1.8, same as United. Their record against top teams (Liverpool, City, United, Chelsea, Tottenham, Leicester) is 0-2-1, same as United. And unlike United, they lost their last PL game. All this with a better and deeper squad than we have. So what exactly has Frank Lampard achieved that OGS hasn't? How has his team been more consistent, or better? Why is OGS on the brink, while the issue isn't even remotely on the horizon for Lampard?

And another thing. The 0-0 Manchester derby was a shameful and awful performance indicative of grave issues with both teams, while the 0-0 Tottenham-Chelsea game wasn't?

Here's what the BBC wrote about that game:

Tottenham returned to the top of the Premier League despite being held by Chelsea in a highly-competitive yet goalless London stalemate.

The eagerly-anticipated fixture between two teams in excellent form failed to produce a goal as both sides cancelled each other out at Stamford Bridge.


And this is what the BBC wrote about the Manchester derby, under the heading "Absence of fans felt in soulless, dismal Manchester derby":

Any fans who wished they could be here might have been swiftly put off by the over-cautious, cat-and-mouse approach from Manchester United manager Ole Gunnar Solskjaer and Manchester City counterpart Pep Guardiola.

This was a game that started, finished and nothing much happened in between. Local honour was satisfied in a very unsatisfactory match.


There were 20 shots (4 on goal) in the Manchester derby. There were 18 shots (4 on goal) in the London derby. Obviously "Highly competetive yet goalless stalemate....as both teams cancelled each other out" is as applicable to one game as to the other. So is "over-cautious, cat and mouse approach", and "This was a game that started, finished and nothing much happened in between. Local honour was satisfied in a very unsatisfactory match."

Watching football being discussed and analysed is at times like watching some weird collective entity responding to people's emotions rather than to reality. As if we're in a Terry Pratchett novel. And the journos are as bad as anybody.
Good post, and you are absolutely right. Anybody who spends a reasonable amount of time on this forum is going to find it very hard to keep that patience and belief because the amount of negativity that's written on here will certainly sway many people. They will then add to that negativity, and so the snowball grows.

The only differences between ourselves and Chelsea right now are that Lampard got every player he wanted this summer, and they got through their CL group. I suspect we would also have gotten out of that group, and Chelsea might well have struggled with our one. Its small margins. I suspect these media sites get a lot more clicks on the negative articles because people seem eager to feed on it, and they will know from reading social media that there is a large appetite from our fanbase to hate on everything at the moment, so its a safe bet to follow that trend.
 

Giggsy13

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2016
Messages
4,243
Location
Toronto
I'd say it's more of an underdog mentality. Which we've had for a few years now.
Back in the day, our ability to come back was a sign of our strong mentality now it’s being labelled an underdog mentality. More instances of selective memory. It seems you’ve forgotten how rare comebacks were under Moyes and LVG. Once we went down it was as over. Jose had his moments re: the 3-2 city result but our team has shown more resilience under Ole. It takes time to build a winner especially when there was such a huge mess to clean up from previous managers.

City’s instant success under Pep has skewed our view of things. We can’t expect our owners to spend like city. It took Klopp 4 years to win a trophy and 5 to win the league. Ole is in his second full season. If he fails to win a trophy and/or fails to close the gap with the dippers and city then by all means let him go.
 

jamesjimmybyrondean

Full Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
7,052
Back in the day, our ability to come back was a sign of our strong mentality now it’s being labelled an underdog mentality. More instances of selective memory. It seems you’ve forgotten how rare comebacks were under Moyes and LVG. Once we went down it was as over. Jose had his moments re: the 3-2 city result but our team has shown more resilience under Ole. It takes time to build a winner especially when there was such a huge mess to clean up from previous managers.

City’s instant success under Pep has skewed our view of things. We can’t expect our owners to spend like city. It took Klopp 4 years to win a trophy and 5 to win the league. Ole is in his second full season. If he fails to win a trophy and/or fails to close the gap with the dippers and city then by all means let him go.
Back in the day we wouldn't have played 7 defensive minded players and still bottled a game we needed at least a draw in. We give our all when the odds are on us to lose and when the team is under scrutiny. But when the pressure is on us to succeed we've bottled it more times than not.

By the way having an underdog mentality isn't saying we are mentally weak. It still means we have a strong mentality but it's still not strong enough to take us to where we want to be.
 

VP89

Pogba's biggest fan
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
31,122
In our remaining fixtures of 2020, I would want to see him avoid fielding 2 DMs. Fred + one of Pogba/VDB with Bruno would be a great way to show intent.
 

Lentwood

Full Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
6,783
Location
West Didsbury, Manchester
Looking at the media as well as this board, I think realistically Solskjær is going to have to deliver very, very strong results to overcome doubters.

There is now a smothering narrative about amateurishness and naivety from which people won't easily step back. Just look at the coverage in The Guardian for example, with Barney Ronay's arrogant rubbish leading the way. That's going to matter no matter how unreasonable and badly founded it is.

It's like everyone held their breath for a little bit and reminded themselves that patience was needed, and now they've run out of breath and have forgotten all about that and suddenly United has to not only contend for and win titles, they have to do so by obliterating the opposition consistently and in an entertaining fashion. If they don't, Solskjær is obviously an idiot.

It's enough to make you despair of mankind when you look, for instance, at what is written about Chelsea compared to what is written about United. United is spoken about as if they have performed way below expectation, and are standing at the foot of the precipice. Sky Sports wrote after the City game that the result at least "arrested the slide". "Slide"? They had four straight PL victories ahead of that game. What "slide" would that be?

Chelsea on the other hand is being talked about in glowing terms as a title contender. Fixed their defensive issues, made great signings - and above all, being guided towards dominance by an exciting, promising English manager whose previous experience is, er, Derby County. Whereas United is being guided by some nonentity who, apart from a previous stint in the PL, has only worked in some yobbo league on the outskirts of Europe.

How is that, though? They finished behind United last season. So far this season, they have yet to string together more than three consecutive wins in the PL, compared to United's four. Their average points taken is 1.8, same as United. Their record against top teams (Liverpool, City, United, Chelsea, Tottenham, Leicester) is 0-2-1, same as United. And unlike United, they lost their last PL game. All this with a better and deeper squad than we have. So what exactly has Frank Lampard achieved that OGS hasn't? How has his team been more consistent, or better? Why is OGS on the brink, while the issue isn't even remotely on the horizon for Lampard?

And another thing. The 0-0 Manchester derby was a shameful and awful performance indicative of grave issues with both teams, while the 0-0 Tottenham-Chelsea game wasn't?

Here's what the BBC wrote about that game:

Tottenham returned to the top of the Premier League despite being held by Chelsea in a highly-competitive yet goalless London stalemate.

The eagerly-anticipated fixture between two teams in excellent form failed to produce a goal as both sides cancelled each other out at Stamford Bridge.


And this is what the BBC wrote about the Manchester derby, under the heading "Absence of fans felt in soulless, dismal Manchester derby":

Any fans who wished they could be here might have been swiftly put off by the over-cautious, cat-and-mouse approach from Manchester United manager Ole Gunnar Solskjaer and Manchester City counterpart Pep Guardiola.

This was a game that started, finished and nothing much happened in between. Local honour was satisfied in a very unsatisfactory match.


There were 20 shots (4 on goal) in the Manchester derby. There were 18 shots (4 on goal) in the London derby. Obviously "Highly competetive yet goalless stalemate....as both teams cancelled each other out" is as applicable to one game as to the other. So is "over-cautious, cat and mouse approach", and "This was a game that started, finished and nothing much happened in between. Local honour was satisfied in a very unsatisfactory match."

Watching football being discussed and analysed is at times like watching some weird collective entity responding to people's emotions rather than to reality. As if we're in a Terry Pratchett novel. And the journos are as bad as anybody.
Pretty much spot on and similar to several posts I have made myself.

If I’m being rational, I think the media like to hammer Utd and whip up controversy because that generates clicks and sells papers.

With my conspiracy hat on, I think some actively want Utd to fail and are constantly looking to unsettle the club. For me, the last thing we need is to be constantly changing managers.

My main issue is that some Utd fans swallow all this garbage hook, line and sinker. I have to say, for me it looks like there’s a clear difference of opinion between those of us who live in Manchester and actually go to games and the louder voices on the Internet who probably have never been to OT in their lives.

It’s got nothing to do with “being a top Red” - I can’t put myself in that category anymore, but I do feel that we could do without these “fans” who take to the Internet and wail every single time we don’t win a football match.

For me, things are as good right now as they have ever been post-SAF, but we where never going to go from 7th to title winners in 18mnths. We need to keep making strategic decisions, spending money wisely, bringing the right characters into the club and getting better one step at a time.
 

Giggsy13

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2016
Messages
4,243
Location
Toronto
Back in the day we wouldn't have played 7 defensive minded players and still bottled a game we needed at least a draw in. We give our all when the odds are on us to lose and when the team is under scrutiny. But when the pressure is on us to succeed we've bottled it more times than not.

By the way having an underdog mentality isn't saying we are mentally weak. It still means we have a strong mentality but it's still not strong enough to take us to where we want to be.
I do unfortunately remember Fergie playing for the draw at the Ethiad in 2012 and it failed miserably. Look not trying to attack you, just more trying to put things in perspective. Ole got it wrong against Leipzig, it was overly cautious.

I would say that your view on whether or not we can hit the next level is certainly a valid one that I actually share with you. But I do take a different view of our resilience this year and our ability to come back in games under Ole. To me that is a squad that is developing a stronger mentality.
 

RumHam

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 23, 2020
Messages
21
Back in the day, our ability to come back was a sign of our strong mentality now it’s being labelled an underdog mentality. More instances of selective memory. It seems you’ve forgotten how rare comebacks were under Moyes and LVG. Once we went down it was as over. Jose had his moments re: the 3-2 city result but our team has shown more resilience under Ole. It takes time to build a winner especially when there was such a huge mess to clean up from previous managers.

City’s instant success under Pep has skewed our view of things. We can’t expect our owners to spend like city. It took Klopp 4 years to win a trophy and 5 to win the league. Ole is in his second full season. If he fails to win a trophy and/or fails to close the gap with the dippers and city then by all means let him go.
It wasn't even instant though, he was trophy-less in his first year despite everything being laid-out and prepared for him at City from at least two years (and probably longer) before he arrived. The structure of the club had a long-term plan to build a squad and philosophy that would fit Pep, he came in and built on this then won the league in his second full season and again a year later. No doubt that team was incredible, but it hasn't lasted and he's now having to re-build the team, lo and behold it takes time.

The context couldn't be any further from what we have had. Ole was appointed on a whim after we'd just spent the previous five years flipping between different managerial styles (i still cannot believe we went LVG to Mou) and buying players on the basis of making headlines and 'likes'.

Agree with you, give him till the end of the season, stop the constant conjecture (not necessarily on here but especially on social media) which heaps pressure on him, the players and club and then take stock. At the moment, we are placed-ok, if we have a good four weeks we will be well in contention, it could go the other way, nobody knows at the moment.
 

rotherham_red

Full Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
7,407
So another 300 mill at least will see the squad sorted then we judge him on the most ever spent by one manager in 3 years?
If the other managers before him hadn't screwed the pooch as much as they did, he most likely wouldn't have needed to spend as much. Also, such a view also disregards the fact that unlike LvG and Jose, Ole has had to sell almost as much as he has bought. Lukaku paid for Maguire. Telles was paid for by Smalling. It's genuinely not the same situation as Jose and LvG, or even Moyes.
 

Skåre Willoch

Full Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
4,218
1. Bruno is not world class. Let’s get that clear.

2. The judgement of a manager is not what he does with the best players he gets but how he actually manages what he has and quite frankly I don’t see anything special that we couldn’t have got if we just gave Alan Pardew the job and have him £200m.
Both horrible takes.

1. Bruno has been world class since he came, 100%. You might disagree, but then I feel sorry for you. That means your bar is set incredibly/unrealistically/unfairly high, and your view on football and players abilities in general is as negative as your view on Manchester United.

2. Yeah. For sure. Pardew, Bruce, bloody Boris Johnson, just give them £200m and we would be about as good/bad as we are right now.
 

Skåre Willoch

Full Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
4,218
Don't you know for some fans, you are meant to coach Dan James into a Hazard?
Yeah, I forgot. Sorry. Every decent manager but Ole transforms average players to world beaters. None of them even need a transfer budget, as they just create magical talent out of thin air.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,555
1. Bruno is not world class. Let’s get that clear.

2. The judgement of a manager is not what he does with the best players he gets but how he actually manages what he has and quite frankly I don’t see anything special that we couldn’t have got if we just gave Alan Pardew the job and have him £200m.

1. Who has created most chances in the PL? Who has most goal involvements since Jan?

2. Name me a manager that has won stuff without buying players?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.