Criticism is fine (and encouraged) but there are some criticisms thrown at Ole that don't make any sense

[LazyGoal]

Since Ole took over he is 3. behind City and Liverpool with about 20 points. Take now into account how crazy everything was at the end of Mourinho, the internal reperations needed inside the club, the bloated squad, underperforming players and the negative football since van Gaal — I’d say when you sum of bits and parts and look at the total we have now — it’s hard to say he has not done a stellar job.

 

[alexthelion]

. With SAF, if anyone remembers, we always dominated teams. Even when we lost.

Revisionism at its finest.

There were plenty of games under SAF where that wasn't remotely true.

 

[vanrooney]

If this is true (and it only in The Sun), then I'm afraid Ole really is deluded:

• Ole Gunnar Solskjaer has told his Manchester United stars they are better than the club's heroes of '99

should he tell them that they are shit?

 

[Squaaaad]

The only thing that doesn't make sense is how some people would go to the end of the Earth to defend Ole for the job despite all the evidence to the contrary. This reminds me of the dark Moyesy season. It was the same thing then, it is the same thing now, only Ole has at least done something for the club (as a player, but still) to deserve it. The facts are simple - if we do not challenge this season, he has to go. Or at least win the CL. The squad is full of world class players in almost every position. Yes, we have weak links, but so does every other team in existence. For a team to be stacked in EVERY position with class players would mean it would be one of history's greatest like United's Treble, Sacchi's Milan, Pep's Barcelon, etc, and that's not easily accomplishable.

Here's the main problem with Ole that I have - in 3 seasons with United he has done nothing to suggest he has a style or a form he wants to implement and it shows - we're still winning all of our games not because we play amazingly, but simply on individual brilliance because we have class players that can produce something at any given moment. Our passing is shit, our team cohesion is nowhere to be found, players run around headless chickens, there's no real system of play that you can discern. Pep, wherever he goes, you have a system and a style you can immediately notice he is trying to implement. How successful it is, is another matter, but you can clearly see it. This is how Tuchel transformed an obvious shit team of Chelsea (everyone claimed it to be so) into a CL winning one. Why can't we do the same? It's not the players, that's for sure. On paper our squad is easily up there with City and honestly I'd even say it is better than City's. So what is it? Why are we still struggling in all of our matches, still fumbling passes left and right, still look disoriented in attack and defense? Well, the obvious reason would be the coaching.

This is why the Wolves game pissed me off so much. It's not that we were unlucky not to win (thankfully we won), it's because they simply battered and outplayed us like we were a second division team. With SAF, if anyone remembers, we always dominated teams. Even when we lost. Shit happens in football, sometimes a plucky goal comes, sometimes no matter what you do, you can't seem to score, but one thing is for certain - we never allowed to be embarrassed. Or if we did and I can't remember, it was an off-game. With Ole, it's kinda the opposite - even when we win, we win so unconvincingly that it leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I want to see other teams be scared of United, just the way it was used to be, not laugh at us like we're plucky underdogs.

And if Ole can't deliver that this season with the squad he has assembled. And yes, he has been very good at the transfer market, then he has to go and give it to someone else that can. Because we can't wait 20 years for another title win, this club's revenue is driven by its success and the more it takes to achieve said success, the more we lose. Next season we're losing Pogba by the look of things because of it. So the best way to remedy this is bring Zidane in, give him everything he wants and we're surely goin to go back to the top. Might even keep Pogba in. Anything else is simply reliance on a miracle.

And I feckign hate this comparison with SAF. Just because SAF did it, doesn't mean anyone can do it. For one, SAF took a team in a much worse position with much less resources than Ole has. Second, SAF actually had a CV that would shame Mourinho and Guaridola. The stuff he did with Mireen and Aberdeen were nothing short of a miracle, so you knew this guy could deliver. We know nothing about Ole. If we want to make a comparison , the most apt would be with Klopp. Would I be willing to give Klopp time instead of Ole? Hell yes, because you know of his success at Dortmund and Mainz. This club can't be run on sentimentality, it has to be run on pure and brutal pragmatism. It's why Chelsea, City, Real are so successful and why we are not. We no longer have the GOAT manager luxury to bail us out with title wins by playing Tom Cleverley and Wellbeck, we are right back down with the mortals and have to rely on the same tactics as other teams do.

Excellent post.

 

[justsomebloke]

I don’t think you need 11 first team players of your own choosing and over 150 games in charge before you impose your preferred style of play on a team. Why is that Pep, Tuchel, Klopp and Conte managed to get their teams playing in a clear and distinct style within 15 games while Ole hasn’t done so after 10x the time?

It took Klopp several seasons to translate his style to a title with Liverpool, and Pep didn't do it immediately either. Tuchel had the good fortune to inherit a squad that fit well with how he likes to play.

Ole didn't, but he actually did get his team playing a clear and distinct style immediately. It just wasn't sustainable, because he didn't have the squad for it. Hence the rebuild after the 18/19 season, since when there's been tinkering and adjustments, to the point where it no longer seems all that clear what the ultimate destination is. You can bemoan that, but that's where the point comes in that if you do, then you also need to accept there's a tradeoff with shorter-term gains.

 

[Bebestation]

People seem to criticise that Ole doesn't have a clear and distinct style.

I'm personally quite excited to see how this develops.

He is arguably 3-4 players away (achievable in a Jan and a Summer transfer window) before having a complete squad that is just pure quality and capable of playing in a complete freedom.

Managers usually buy players that suit their tactics; watching the opposite of that and see how some players play in cohesion like recent performances of Pogba and Bruno in partnership is great.

 

[horsechoker]

should he tell them that they are shit?

Exactly

 

[Bobcat]

I am not really sure what you're saying here. There have been quite a few coaches over the years that have relied on a few players' stardust to see them over the line. Mourinho is one example (though he was also a great coach too). I disagree that it's next to impossible to draw the line between coaching/tactics and a player's individual talent. Sure, coaching can enhance it but it's also often fairly clear when a manager doesn't have a viable system. Look at Tim Sherwood at spurs. Won some games but didn't have a clue...had a couple of players that dragged them over the line.

Surely you can’t watch our consistently disjointed midfield and movement and not ask questions about what the coaches are doing on the training ground. Especially with Michael Carrick sat next OGS.

This is my only real problem with Ole and his coaching team. I don’t expect peak Ajax or Barca tiki-taka. But it is inexcusable to see players all but running into each other occupying the same spaces in midfield, not showing for the ball properly and basically playing as if they’ve never kicked at a ball at one another. It’s happened so many times.

So yes, when a 50-50 ball cannons out to our central defender who plays a tidy ball to our young starlet on the wing who then goes on to score a goal he had no business scoring fans will quite rightly cite individual brilliance rather than tactical nous. It’s not unreasonable. It’s perfectly reasonable in fact.

It is an issue. It can’t be denied. I love OGS and the direction he has taken the squad the past couple of years. But this issue has to be sorted and cannot be explained or rationalized away. Because that is every bit as bad as laying in wait to pounce on every bad performance or dropped point as if it’s the end of the world.

The thing is, with a certain section of our "supporters" they give him none of the credit if a player performs well and all of the blame if they dont. When Liverpool last won the league, they had Salah, Mane and TAA to name a few absoloutely battering teams week in and week out and pretty much everyone lined up to praise Klopp. No doubt Liverpool played well as a collective that season, but those three in particular often managed to drag them over the line in games they were struggling

Last season you had Mane tripping over himself and TAA not even getting close to hitting the numbers he had in their title winning season. That does not mean Klopps coacing suddenly turned to shit

And that bolded part are the very basics. The stuff they teach U10's. Carrick et.al are not that clueless

 

[anant]

The issue with half our support base is we have one set of rules for Ole and a completely different set of rules for other managers. We fail to realize that managers arent given a longer/shorter leash because of what they've done in previous jobs and in most cases their performance in previous seasons also holds little weight (unless of course the manager has been there for a significant amount of time).

Then, there are the one-off results we seem to put a lot of weightage on - case in point losses to Villarreal and SHU last season, without failing to realize that if similar logic was applied to other managers, literally all of them can be branded "PE Teacher". For some other instances, like Fred's substitution (or lack of) vs PSG, I wish people think of the possible reasons. 70 mins vs that front 3 with Matic instead of McT would be a suicide move because of what Fred can offer in games like these (and I dont even rate Fred this highly). It was a gamble that didnt pay off, but however flawed the logic may be, it wasnt something that was stupid.

There is a set of people who believe that if we don't win CL this year, he needs to go. Now, I am expecting a good strong run in CL, but this expectation of CL or bust needs some kind of fixing. City have arguably had the best squad in Europe in last 4 years. Do you think City should sack him? He lost to Lyon in 2020 afterall!

Then, there is a group that goes 3 seasons without a trophy. Well, in the 1st season, we were out of 2 competitions by the time he was appointed. And irrespective, winning FA cup or LC is not a sign of progress, and I dont think winning them and finishing even 2nd will classify as a successful season. League has to be the bread and butter for us and progress and eventually success needs to be measured on basis of performances in the league.

We finished 2nd last season ( I dont think we are the 2nd best fwiw) and you hear arguments like Klopp had his defence out for the season. And I agree with that as well. But, this is the same argument which a lot of us were using in 19/20 when Pog was injured, Martial, Rashy, McT, Fred were out for significant portions of time at different moments in time as well. So, if you were Ole out then and not giving weightage to this argument then, then I expect you to say that our tactically inept manager was better than hipster Klopp last season. And while we are at this, I believe Salah, Mane, Firmino, Thiago, Fabinho, TAA, Robertson, etc. are still good enough to beat likes of Southampton, Burnley, etc.

And lastly, is the argument around individual brilliance. How highly do people even rate our side that they think a side with no tactical acumen can have an enviable record against every top side? Hell, which was the last side that finished in top 4 on consecutive occasions in PL whose manager was tactically inept? Squad strength is arguably the most important factor that decides team performance - there is a reason why players are paid more than managers and there is a stronger correlation between wage budget and team finish than manager reputation vs team position. So, even if we relied on few moments of individual brilliance, then so what? Take Salah's dribbling out of his game, KDB's passing ability and I think those sides will be considerably weaker as well. So, I don't see an issue in relying on Bruno's ability to take the gane by the scruff of the neck.

Look, I'm not saying Ole is perfect or he doesn't have flaws. Neither am I saying he's as good as Pep or SAF, but I hope people atleast analyze his performance in the same way they analyze any other manager as well

 

[largelyworried]

It took Klopp several seasons to translate his style to a title with Liverpool, and Pep didn't do it immediately either. Tuchel had the good fortune to inherit a squad that fit well with how he likes to play.

Im not talking about winning a title. Im talking about seeing a style of play imposed on the team. Klopp took about 5 or 6 games to get them going, after which they high pressed their way to two statement away victories early on, beating Chelsea 3-1 and City 4-1. Those games had Klopp written all over them - super high tempo press and overloads from wide and deep areas. The quality and fitness of the team weren't there and they barely climbed the table all season, dropping tonnes of points against dross. But in terms of the style of play, it was clear as crystal that they were replicating what had been done at Dortmund. Pep took even less time. By the time they played us at Old Trafford in his 4th league game, that team had Pep written all over it. It wasn't title-winning quality, but the football was just typical of what we've seen in the rest of his time.

Ole didn't, but he actually did get his team playing a clear and distinct style immediately. It just wasn't sustainable, because he didn't have the squad for it. Hence the rebuild after the 18/19 season, since when there's been tinkering and adjustments, to the point where it no longer seems all that clear what the ultimate destination is. You can bemoan that, but that's where the point comes in that if you do, then you also need to accept there's a tradeoff with shorter-term gains.

This makes no sense. Why would a manager be able to impose his style of play on players he doesn't like or want in the first 20 games, but then never be able to do it again over the next 130 games with more and more players he does want? I suspect you're seeing what you want to see here.

 

[justsomebloke]

Im not talking about winning a title. Im talking about seeing a style of play imposed on the team. Klopp took about 5 or 6 games to get them going, after which they high pressed their way to two statement away victories early on, beating Chelsea 3-1 and City 4-1. Those games had Klopp written all over them - super high tempo press and overloads from wide and deep areas. The quality and fitness of the team weren't there and they barely climbed the table all season, dropping tonnes of points against dross. But in terms of the style of play, it was clear as crystal that they were replicating what had been done at Dortmund. Pep took even less time. By the time they played us at Old Trafford in his 4th league game, that team had Pep written all over it. It wasn't title-winning quality, but the football was just typical of what we've seen in the rest of his time.



This makes no sense. Why would a manager be able to impose his style of play on players he doesn't like or want in the first 20 games, but then never be able to do it again over the next 130 games with more and more players he does want? I suspect you're seeing what you want to see here.

If that makes no sense to you, perhaps you should read up a little. That United played a very clear and distinct style during Solskjærs first half-season ought not to be news. As you may recall, that all went awry late in that season, a big part of which was that the style (relying heavily on intensive pressing, quick transition and lots of running) couldn't be sustained by a squad that consisted of too many of the wrong kind of players, and all of whom had Mourinho-level conditioning, which in turn stimulated injuries, which in turn exposed the limitations in the squad's depth, and forced the abandonment, or at least suspension, of a style of play the team simply wasn't able to execute. Which really is the chief point I'm making here: If you stick to a style without having the squad it requires, you lose points. If you adjust the style to what you have, you lose fewer points (provided you do it well), but then you move away from or at least postpone the transition to the style and identity you want. I'm not saying that one is right and the other is wrong, I'm simply pointing out that there is a trade-off involved.

Following that first half-season, he's really gone through a number of phases as the squad has changed, and certainly been much more adaptation-oriented than he was initially.

I would highly recommend this excellent series: The Different Tactical Eras of Ole Gunnar Solskjaer: Part One - by Pauly Kwestel - Kwest Thoughts (substack.com)

 

[georgipep]

By the time they played us at Old Trafford in his 4th league game, that team had Pep written all over it. It wasn't title-winning quality, but the football was just typical of what we've seen in the rest of his time.

I suggest you go and check what Pellegrini did with that "wasn't title-winning quality" squad.

 

[largelyworried]

If that makes no sense to you, perhaps you should read up a little. That United played a very clear and distinct style during Solskjærs first half-season ought not to be news. As you may recall, that all went awry late in that season, a big part of which was that the style (relying heavily on intensive pressing, quick transition and lots of running) couldn't be sustained by a squad that consisted of too many of the wrong kind of players, and all of whom had Mourinho-level conditioning, which in turn stimulated injuries, which in turn exposed the limitations in the squad's depth, and forced the abandonment, or at least suspension, of a style of play the team simply wasn't able to execute. Which really is the chief point I'm making here: If you stick to a style without having the squad it requires, you lose points. If you adjust the style to what you have, you lose fewer points (provided you do it well), but then you move away from or at least postpone the transition to the style and identity you want. I'm not saying that one is right and the other is wrong, I'm simply pointing out that there is a trade-off involved.

Following that first half-season, he's really gone through a number of phases as the squad has changed, and certainly been much more adaptation-oriented than he was initially.

I would highly recommend this excellent series: The Different Tactical Eras of Ole Gunnar Solskjaer: Part One - by Pauly Kwestel - Kwest Thoughts (substack.com)

The argument you made about his football being unsustainable & causing injuries made sense back at the end of his partial season - that's exactly what I believed back then. But that was a seriously long amount of time ago now. His failure to get a clear & consistent style of football imposed on his group of players for over two years undermines the arguments that seemed sensible at the time. Hindsight gives us a new perspective. Quite simply, the idea that he could do it back then in just a week or two with crap players, but not again for two full seasons with better players, is so illogical that it forces reconsideration of what we saw at the time.

I suggest you go and check what Pellegrini did with that "wasn't title-winning quality" squad.

I mean, they literally didn't win the title that season, which is why I say it wasnt title winning. But whatever, the point is he got them playing Pep style football pretty quickly.

 

[Polar]

I haven’t engaged myself much in the Ole in/out discussion lately. I think it’s difficult to assess mangers and coaches tactical or game changing abilities.

Overall I’m happy with where we are and where we’re heading, and that’s what really matters Unfortunately it took me some time to make it as simple as that. In the mean time I wasted to much time on negativity (some people are negative always).

Stay positive like @Wumminator. It makes life happier

 

[big rons sovereign]

Revisionism at its finest.

There were plenty of games under SAF where that wasn't remotely true.

Yeah, I don't really recall being a possession dominant side. Not until the later fergie years or LVG (shudder) and we were shit at it.

 

[Strelok]

Revisionism at its finest.

There were plenty of games under SAF where that wasn't remotely true.

Yeah that's true.

There's a considerable numbers of matches we looked very average, or even worse and somehow scrapped a win back then. We're famous for our comebacks under him anyway.

Btw anyone could tell me what was our clear style of play under SAF? Because tbh I feel it's a lot like the current one with Ole. Fast, direct, with good pacey wingers and good strikers. And a solid defense. Even the average midfield part in his last years.

If my memory serves me right SAF didn't have a clear style like Pep or Klopp. He simply made the best use of his players. Imo it's actually the best tactic. The best tactic is simply whatever get the best out of the players available to you.

 

[SirReginald]

All the points raised in the original post are all well and good apart from the reasoning behind not being tactically inept.

“You don’t win as often as we do from behind”

You guys won a staggering 31 points last season from behind. Absolutely amazing achievement as it is, is t a great statistic actually.

It is not a strength to come from behind that many times. In an era of truly excellent teams like Barcelona and Bayern, how often did they fall behind in a game? They did not need to claw their way back into a game because they dominated for almost 90 mins a game.

Could you even repeat that feat? It seems on paper to be one of those unexplainable, freak stats.

But that doesn’t even address the fact that you went behind in the first place. If you have a title challenging squad, like you claim you do, why are you going behind that many times? If you are right about your starting 11 then what Is the issue? The manager getting his tactics wrong from the start is probably what you need to question ladies and gentleman.

Ole has taken you as far as he is capable to go. It’s not a dog. Everyone has their limits and he has shown time and again he isn’t an elite manager. Results against Pep mean nothing at the end of the day. A season is more than 2-3 games. Now that he has been backed with funds it will be make or break for him. He will be gone before the end of this season and you’ll end up with crazy Conte (I love him but he is mad) by Christmas.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Since Ole took over he is 3. behind City and Liverpool with about 20 points. Take now into account how crazy everything was at the end of Mourinho, the internal reperations needed inside the club, the bloated squad, underperforming players and the negative football since van Gaal — I’d say when you sum of bits and parts and look at the total we have now — it’s hard to say he has not done a stellar job.

If he's done a 'stellar' job I don't know how you would describe the job done by the managers of our rival clubs. Interstellar?! Legendary? People have to understand we need a top manager to win big trophies. Ole has done well in stabilising the ship and all but he needs to show he can turn us into a team that looks brilliantly coached (and hence capable of winning the big honors). Despite the squad building and incremental improvements I don't see a top class team there. Hopefully this is the season as 4 seasons is more than enough time given what we spend.

 

[Wumminator]

All the points raised in the original post are all well and good apart from the reasoning behind not being tactically inept.

“You don’t win as often as we do from behind”

You guys won a staggering 31 points last season from behind. Absolutely amazing achievement as it is, is t a great statistic actually.

It is not a strength to come from behind that many times. In an era of truly excellent teams like Barcelona and Bayern, how often did they fall behind in a game? They did not need to claw their way back into a game because they dominated for almost 90 mins a game.

Could you even repeat that feat? It seems on paper to be one of those unexplainable, freak stats.

But that doesn’t even address the fact that you went behind in the first place. If you have a title challenging squad, like you claim you do, why are you going behind that many times? If you are right about your starting 11 then what Is the issue? The manager getting his tactics wrong from the start is probably what you need to question ladies and gentleman.

Ole has taken you as far as he is capable to go. It’s not a dog. Everyone has their limits and he has shown time and again he isn’t an elite manager. Results against Pep mean nothing at the end of the day. A season is more than 2-3 games. Now that he has been backed with funds it will be make or break for him. He will be gone before the end of this season and you’ll end up with crazy Conte (I love him but he is mad) by Christmas.

That wasn’t the reason he’s not tactically inept, the reason he’s not tactically inept is because he’s just gone on a record breaking run of form away from home.

 

[The United]

I think his tactical knowledge is decent and will improve. His issue is that he may be lacking motivation skill (before the game). We never really consistently play with front foot in 1st halves of the games which is a big issue for us.

We will have to see if he can improve on that this season.

 

[justsomebloke]

The argument you made about his football being unsustainable & causing injuries made sense back at the end of his partial season - that's exactly what I believed back then. But that was a seriously long amount of time ago now. His failure to get a clear & consistent style of football imposed on his group of players for over two years undermines the arguments that seemed sensible at the time. Hindsight gives us a new perspective. Quite simply, the idea that he could do it back then in just a week or two with crap players, but not again for two full seasons with better players, is so illogical that it forces reconsideration of what we saw at the time.



I mean, they literally didn't win the title that season, which is why I say it wasnt title winning. But whatever, the point is he got them playing Pep style football pretty quickly.

Sorry, but you're not listening. What I am pointing out is precisely that since that time, it seems that he has not tried to implement a consistent style or system, but has rather taken the approach of adapting to the strengths and limitations of the squad, going through a number of phases during that period. Which is something that has both pluses and minuses.

 

[kthanksbye]

I think he has been the perfect appointment to clear the mess that was created by the previous managers who had short term fixes in mind.
The squad is almost complete barring a DM and a backup RB, he has made us competitive again and in another window or two we should be clearing out the deadwood. So in conclusion he has been a success in my opinion.

Having said that, I don't think he is the man that is going to bring us trophies, for that we're going to have to hire someone like Conte and allow him to build on the work Ole has done.

 

[dinostar77]

See

I've been meaning to make this thread for a while. There seems to be some people who think that there are fervent Ole inners who can't take any criticism of the club. That is simply not true. What I (and others evidently) on this forum can't stand are illogical and stupid arguments. Here are some of them:

1) Ole is inept tactically
The fact Manchester United have just set a record for the longest unbeaten record is evidence of this. You simply can not go that long in the most competitive league unbeaten if you don't have a clue what you are doing. The fact that Ole has the best record against Pep of anyone who has ever played against him (as far as I am aware) should also go to dismissing that fallacy. If you want to argue that tactics can be improved, then I would love to read your posts. I don't really understand a lot about football myself. But the idea that he's completely useless is thrown around here a lot and it doesn't follow.

2) Ole is poor at changing the game
The simple fact that we have come from behind to win so often is proof that this is also nonsense. We gained thirty-one points from being behind at different points last year. That is insane. The idea that follows that Ole doesn't react quick enough or is poor at making subs is therefore silly as well. Are there instances where Ole didn't make the exact decision you would have done? Sure. Is Ole clearly understanding the pattern of the games and adapting accordingly. Well obviously.

3.) Ole has ignored the midfield problem
Not at all. He just can't solve everything at once. We are now seeing Ole assembling the most exciting United team for almost a decade. But there probably is an issue with our midfield. The problem is before this window there was also a problem with our right wing and our CB. At centre back we've just signed a world class defender (as far as we can assume so far) and means we now have a great back up option in Lindelof to rotate. Otherwise we were one injury away from relying on Baily and Tuanzebe. Sancho will hopefully prove to be an exceptional talent in a role where we literally had Greenwood and Dan James. Now of all the pressing concerns we had, CB and RW seemed to be a massive priority. Effectively we've spent 90 million this summer and upgraded both significantly.

4.) Ole has kept the deadwood around/we are fleeced for our player sales.
Now this one I get but some people have both these views simultaneously. We know there are some players in the squad that are not up to our standard. However, you simply can not get rid of these players for nothing else you will have a weaker position in the transfer market next time. I've seen some people say we should just accept a couple of million for Lingard and get him to West Ham. If you do that, you won't get £25 million for James later in the window. Ole has absolutely turfed out around 15 first team players in his time at the club who weren't good enough and now we finally look to have a squad of players ready to contribute. Lest you forget that Young, Valencia, Rojo, Darmian, Fellaini, Sanchez, Smalling, Perreira were all around the first team when he arrived and have since been deemed no longer good enough.

Again, there are issues with the team. If you want to point out we often go behind in games and make it hard for ourselves, that is fair enough. If you want to argue that Ole should have strengthened midfield rather than CB that is also fair enough, it's just much more complicated than flat out saying he has ignored it.

No-one wants a forum where people can't complain. We just want reasonable posts and some of you have clearly decided Ole is not good enough and make up any old reason to justify your opinion.

See the final against Villarreal and other games. Hes a limited manger who himself says his strongest skill is man management rather than tactics. If he does win a major trophy with the team he has now he deserves to be sacked.

Granted away form is great but thats because ole only has one gameplan which works away from home.

 

[Strelok]

I think he has been the perfect appointment to clear the mess that was created by the previous managers who had short term fixes in mind.
The squad is almost complete barring a DM and a backup RB, he has made us competitive again and in another window or two we should be clearing out the deadwood. So in conclusion he has been a success in my opinion.

Having said that, I don't think he is the man that is going to bring us trophies, for that we're going to have to hire someone like Conte and allow him to build on the work Ole has done.

Conte? You've never watched his football? He's the new Mourinho mate.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Conte? You've never watched his football? He's the new Mourinho mate.

Yeah Mourinho used to be brilliant

 

[largelyworried]

Sorry, but you're not listening. What I am pointing out is precisely that since that time, it seems that he has not tried to implement a consistent style or system, but has rather taken the approach of adapting to the strengths and limitations of the squad, going through a number of phases during that period. Which is something that has both pluses and minuses.

I addressed this right at the outset, that argument doesn't stack when you've been in charge for 150+ games and have a first team almost entirely of your own choosing.

 

[kthanksbye]

Conte? You've never watched his football? He's the new Mourinho mate.

I have, and he's not. He just won the Italian league before leaving Inter, his teams are tactically astute and score enough goals to win titles.
From the available managers, he's easily the best option for us.

 

[Eriku]

You're being too nice. He's not even close to being average.

And yet has the best head to head record against Pep. Pep Guardiola is my idol?

Listen, thinking Ole’s not good enough is one thing, but not even average? Idiotic hyperbole.

edit: missed the bolded bit. Nevermind me

 

[roonster09]

And yet has the best head to head record against Pep. Pep Guardiola is my idol?

Listen, thinking Ole’s not good enough is one thing, but not even average? Idiotic hyperbole.

That wasn't about Ole, it was for Arteta.

 

[Eriku]

That wasn't about Ole, it was for Arteta.

Yikes! Cheers for that.

 

[Josep Dowling]

It’s a tough one for me. To say Ole has no tactics and then he’s beaten Pep’s City many times. We beat Poch’s Spurs by playing wide forwards and beating the press, and have done similar to beat Liverpool. The issue we have is not being the underdog. Ole is fantastic with counter attacking tactics but we simply don’t dominate games. I still think this is to do with the midfield issue more than anything. We need a tempo passer akin to Carrick in there. The other thing I would say is this hasn’t been an issue just with Ole. We also had slow tepid passing under Van Gaal and Mourinho as well.

Because of the money spent Ole is running out of excuses not to win a trophy. He must win something within the next two season otherwise I expect him to be replaced. It would be a shame because you just want him to succeed. He’s United through and through and for the first time since Fergie I like the squad of players.

 

[Von Mistelroum]

I’ve struggled a bit with this too. My head tells me that Ole isn’t good enough but my heart says the opposite.

being realistic though, looking through our very expensively put together Squad, you surely have to say that failure to win anything this season needs to be looked at as sackable? We’ve won nothing so far and now we have a stacked side full of top class players. Yes midfield is a mess but it’s been a mess for some time and Ole hasn’t remedied this for whatever reason so it can only be on him. The rest of the Squad though…we have more than enough world class and top class talents to beat anyone on our day. If some of that potential isn’t shown with Oles best season in management then will it ever be?

 

[justsomebloke]

I addressed this right at the outset, that argument doesn't stack when you've been in charge for 150+ games and have a first team almost entirely of your own choosing.

Yes you did, but it missed the point then and still misses the point now. Because you appear to assume that putting in place a very clear, identifiable and consistent system is something that every manager should do, and would do if he was able to. But, doing that is not simply a skill, it is also a choice. Some managers have a very clear system, and adhere to it consistently. Pep, Klopp, Arteta for example. Other managers have an essentially adaptive approach, happy to vary formations and playing style from one game to another. Others yet, perhaps the majority, have some clear ideas and principles and preferences, but are also prepared to adjust style to circumstances and the nature of the squad, and evolve a style of play over time. I think OGS fits into that category. Obviously, the feasibility of sticking to a formula with a given squad varies wildly from case to case, and so there is not a clear answer to which approach is the better.

It seems pretty plain to me (and I refer you again to the excellent analysis in the link I gave you) that after his initial system broke down in the spring of 2019, OGS has taken a relatively adaptive approach to style. I wouldn't overstate it - there are strong elements of continuity too, but all in all I think it's warranted to speak of a number of stylistic phases during his tenancy. In other words, he hasn't tried to implement a consistent system, which you seem to take for granted that every manager should and would.

It can be debated whether or not that has been the right approach. Personally, I'm inclined to think he has been a little more adaptation-oriented than I would have liked, but then again it's easy to see the reasons and the results have on the whole been good.

I'd expect the same approach to continue, and that we'll look stylistically different this season compared to last - but not very radically so.

 

[Strelok]

I have, and he's not. He just won the Italian league before leaving Inter, his teams are tactically astute and score enough goals to win titles.
From the available managers, he's easily the best option for us.

I can't see the future so I don't know if Ole would win us things. Same could be said regarding Conte. But even if 100% Conte would win us things I'd say a big no thanks.

For some silverwares are the most important thing, but for me the most important thing is to be entertained each week. I'm happy enough with the current football and 100 % do not want to see that Mourinho football back here. And the mess. Talking about that possibility alone gives me PTSD.

 

[largelyworried]

Yes you did, but it missed the point then and still misses the point now. Because you appear to assume that putting in place a very clear, identifiable and consistent system is something that every manager should do, and would do if he was able to. But, doing that is not simply a skill, it is also a choice. Some managers have a very clear system, and adhere to it consistently. Pep, Klopp, Arteta for example. Other managers have an essentially adaptive approach, happy to vary formations and playing style from one game to another. Others yet, perhaps the majority, have some clear ideas and principles and preferences, but are also prepared to adjust style to circumstances and the nature of the squad, and evolve a style of play over time. I think OGS fits into that category. Obviously, the feasibility of sticking to a formula with a given squad varies wildly from case to case, and so there is not a clear answer to which approach is the better.

It seems pretty plain to me (and I refer you again to the excellent analysis in the link I gave you) that after his initial system broke down in the spring of 2019, OGS has taken a relatively adaptive approach to style. I wouldn't overstate it - there are strong elements of continuity too, but all in all I think it's warranted to speak of a number of stylistic phases during his tenancy. In other words, he hasn't tried to implement a consistent system, which you seem to take for granted that every manager should and would.

It can be debated whether or not that has been the right approach. Personally, I'm inclined to think he has been a little more adaptation-oriented than I would have liked, but then again it's easy to see the reasons and the results have on the whole been good.

I'd expect the same approach to continue, and that we'll look stylistically different this season compared to last - but not very radically so.

Previously you said we're not really playing as Ole would like, and that was because of our personnel. Now you're saying that we are playing as Ole would like, its just that he's more of a pragmatist. Which is it?

 

[jackal&hyde]

Same people made their minds up early on that they don't rate him and, have been with their heads in the sand ever since, pretending 3ed in his first full season and 2ed in his second was expected or even underachieved given our position.

He is doing a very good job and people are creating straw man arguments now, like pretending to see in to the future with what we might or might not win, putting good results (records even) on player quality alone and bad results on the manager. It's all very stupid really and it just goes to show how much of a difficult time some have to accepting they were wrong.

 

[romufc]

I can't see the future so I don't know if Ole would win us things. Same could be said regarding Conte. But even if 100% Conte would win us things I'd say a big no thanks.

For some silverwares are the most important thing, but for me the most important thing is to be entertained each week. I'm happy enough with the current football and 100 % do not want to see that Mourinho football back here. And the mess. Talking about that possibility alone gives me PTSD.

I do agree that the Conte / Jose football is bad to watch and Ole in some games entertains us.

if we want to win the league, I struggle to see us do it under Ole. Alot of people say its just 3 games in however; the 3 games the blueprint has been exactly the same for 18 months.

Smash teams like Leeds at OT one week and go to Southampton and struggle to win. Go to Wolves and get a win that was a steal. It is happening too often.

Alot of people say we struggle to break low blocks down but that isn't entirely true, we struggle to beat any team that actually is coached well.

Villareal, a mid block where we struggle to get the ball to the forwards, same again this season where we struggle to get our creative players on the ball.

Its pain to watch everytime we go to the opponents third the move breaks and the opposition counter very well.

I watch Chelsea, Liverpool, City who barely allow the opposition in their half, you can count the number of times the opposition gets into their half.

 

[Schmeichel's Cartwheel]

What's his style of play? Because all I see is quick counter attacks against teams that come at us. There seems to be no plan when it comes to breaking teams down. We were embarrassing on the ball at times in the Southampton and Wolves games.

With Ole it's the same as it's always been. He's a manager who has been able to clear the majority of the deadwood. The majority of his signings have been good. He creates a good atmosphere with the squad. But, he needs to surround himself with better and more experienced coaching staff, because his weakness has always been tactically.

 

[Schmeichel's Cartwheel]

I’ve thought for a while that the problem isn’t Ole, but the coaches he surrounds himself with. He is loyal, which is admirable, but I believe we need a world class assistant instead of Carrick, Phelan, etc.
Ferguson’s best years, in my opinion, were when he brought in experienced International coaches like Carlos, Rene and others.
I back Ole and believe in him and this team, but I think that an “experienced” right hand man is what Ole needs.
Great OP @Wumminator and agree, we wouldn’t have put together this great away run is Ole was out of his depth. I’m excited for this season!!

He picks the coaches, therefore it's his problem.

 

[Strelok]

Alot of people say we struggle to break low blocks down but that isn't entirely true, we struggle to beat any team that actually is coached well

That's actually not really true imo. We've managed to play pretty well against some very well coached team under famous managers. You can't say teams under Pep, Klopp, Tuchel, Biesa, Nuno, Hassenhult, Rodgers, Nagelsmann etc. are not well coached.

I'd say we're inconsistent and usually have issues when facing teams with a good midfield without McFred. If my memory serves me right most of the matches we struggled in the last 18 months were without one of them. Or both.