So we need to choose between dropping our 85m or 60m player. Our manager's hand-picked transfers. Make it make sense.
The Casemiro/Mount/Bruno midfield
- Thread starter Malone_Post
- Start date
I dont get it. Why is it so hard to be ready for a new season instead of looking like a start of a rebuild? The match against Wolves was horrible in terms of executing a style of play. And the team is not much different from last year (Mount).
When it comes to transfers in and out of the club, very little at United ever makes sense.
I think the idea is that Shaw drifts into midfield, allowing Mount and Bruno to operate further forward. Didn't work thus far though.
While that makes sense, Bruno and Mount are not possession-based ball recycling players. They will more than often lose possession, making us extremely vulnerable for counters down the wings. This tactic may work for City and Arsenal, just do not see it working out for us with the players we have.
None of it really makes sense. We were shite in preseason and we don't seem to have made it work ready for the season. Another few training sessions is unlikely to make a large difference.
It's a poor reflection on coaching and the players if they really didn't understand where they should be.
AWB was decenf last game but we probably need Dalot to start as at least he's comfortable coming inside.
I imagine ETH expected to dominate against Wolves and gave Mount too much freedom to get forward. I saw it as a tactical mistake more so than any individual player's fault.
Mount is capable of playing deeper and closing passing lanes, he was just far too gung-ho which meant we lost control of the midfield, and he didn't get on the ball enough.
Eriksen is hardly an astute defender nor pressing machine and we played well last season with him and Bruno together. No reason that we should expect to be overrun week in, week out.
It wasn't a good debut, but we all need to give this midfield more time to show what they can do. I'm hopeful it'll work out
Mount is capable of playing deeper and closing passing lanes, he was just far too gung-ho which meant we lost control of the midfield, and he didn't get on the ball enough.
Eriksen is hardly an astute defender nor pressing machine and we played well last season with him and Bruno together. No reason that we should expect to be overrun week in, week out.
It wasn't a good debut, but we all need to give this midfield more time to show what they can do. I'm hopeful it'll work out
So after watching a few analysis video on the Wolves shit show, ETH’s idea is for one of the full backs to step into midfield and help Casemiro(?)
So it’s not a midfield 3, it’s a Casemiro/Mount/Bruno +1 FB midfield.
Let’s hope the second showing against Spurs will be more encouraging.
So it’s not a midfield 3, it’s a Casemiro/Mount/Bruno +1 FB midfield.
Let’s hope the second showing against Spurs will be more encouraging.
we played the ten hag way during pre season when the youngsters and the fringe players were one the pitch. When those three were on the pitch they didn’t follow the Rules and the principles (see the Dortmund game). It’ sa tactical issue, casemiro cannot be on his own and the Other 2 far away waiting for the ball. They should be near him, building up the play slowly waiting for an opportunity for a killer pass.
i think that the team will Have change by september and when mainoo will be back, i see him holding the midflied with casemiro plus Bruno in front of them
i think that the team will Have change by september and when mainoo will be back, i see him holding the midflied with casemiro plus Bruno in front of them
I rewatched the highlights, I actually think in this formation Bruno is the problem. He had a shocking game defensively, but that's nothing new - the only thing he offers off the ball in defensive transition is energy and running body, he's one of the easiest players to dribble past and has no positional discipline. Which is not his fault, it's bizarre that ETH watched him for a season and thought this system will make a good use of Bruno.
Mount I thought was not that bad, I can see what he brings to the table. His problem is he is deployed in a role that has very little impact on our game (van de beek role in attack, and the only running body up front when defending - it's not really pressing if that's one player running). Also don't think he is a player who loses possession easily as some say. He should simply be playing deeper also to accommodate Bruno higher up.
This setup we used against Lens and Wolves is completely flawed.
Mount I thought was not that bad, I can see what he brings to the table. His problem is he is deployed in a role that has very little impact on our game (van de beek role in attack, and the only running body up front when defending - it's not really pressing if that's one player running). Also don't think he is a player who loses possession easily as some say. He should simply be playing deeper also to accommodate Bruno higher up.
This setup we used against Lens and Wolves is completely flawed.
We could just drop Mount for Eriksen and use the team that played well for most of last season...aside from that Rashford really needs to be on the left with a striker up top.
I don't really know why we'd skip out Eriksen and go straight down to McTominay. I don't know where this thing that Eriksen can't play in our midfield has come from when him playing there was a big part of our improvement last season and we were never, in any game (complete capitulation at Anfield aside - which Eriksen didn't play in anyway), as wide open as we were against Wolves.
The big worry is that Mount coming in means Bruno is too deep. You don't want him operating too deep as he's more reckless with the ball than most, so ideally you'd have 2 workaholics behind him.
I wish that were the case but Bruno is always furthest forward + will always roam.
Bruno Fernandes stats and ratings | Sofascore
Mason Mount stats and ratings | Sofascore
Casemiro stats and ratings | Sofascore
The weird thing from our midfield three is how much time Casemiro spend in an advanced role. I'm hoping this was just a strange game that was a one off.
I'd prefer Eriksen before McTominay, I'm just aghast that we will be in the same position as we were last year, and be forced to bench our 85m or 60m player in order to create balance in midfield.
We just need to buy a carrick type and there’s plenty of evidence to suggest we’ve been trying to plan to do this in the next few weeks. Then we have nice rotation options for AM role. We’ve lost Fred so his position needs a replacement for sure. There will be games I’m sure where mount and Bruno will be fine once they have afew months under their belts. Mount looked shot for a start not one tackle during the game…
Well we'll see how it goes but that will be on ETH for signing a player and using them to create an imbalance in our midfield. It's going backwards imo. Last season we had no imbalance we just lacked reliable cover. Now we have imbalance and potentially don't even have unreliable cover if both Eriksen and Casemiro are unavailable, like they were for a significant chunk of important games last season.
I wouldn't expect to see Mctominay + Casemiro though if Eriksen is fine.
It’s one game and their first together in the PL.
we started poorly last season also and found our feet. SAF teams were slow starters after years playing together. The window isn’t shut so his plans for our midfield in it’s look and balance for this season are not even known just yet…
True, even against Wolves when everything was going wrong it was a bit alarming that he was still making runs ahead of the ball at times.
Ideally Casemiro should just shield the back four...he has good attacking qualities but he shouldn't burden himself with that duty...leave it to the rest.
He did leave it to the rest to start of with. The rest did sweet feck all unfortunately.
Can we not just get Verratti on loan for a season? He hasn’t gone to Saudi yet and PSG are clearly willing to let him go.
to be totally honest, i didnt understand signing Mount at all, and still am struggling to now. Ive never really thought he was all that at Chelsea..
I will though give him the benefit of the doubt since its only the first game and I trust EtH's judgement 100%
I will though give him the benefit of the doubt since its only the first game and I trust EtH's judgement 100%
We were losing midfield battles quite frequently last season. We didn't have teams running straight through the midfield every game, but we were being outfought quite often. Eriksen's progression from deep was quite good, but his defensive awareness and physicality is poor. For Mount to make any sense at all, I thought the plan would be for him to sit next to Casemiro and provide some defensive stability and energy that we lacked when Eriksen was playing. Not playing in the final third with Bruno and Rashford.
If we benched or moved Mount out of midfield, I would expect Eriksen to return, but it's not solving one of the main issues we had last season.
We absolutely cannot play like that against anybody competent or we'll get a thrashing. ETH will have to change things. He did after our start last season as well.
Not a popular opinion, but we will struggle to control games with Bruno as a midfielder. He is too much of a throwback #10 - 10 years ago he wouldve been one of the top players around but the game has moved on and is now more about pressing, possession and control.
It is quite a popular opinion on here to be fair, the debate is if he is worth the trade off.
Potentially we could end with same midfield duo (Eriksen - Case) with Mason in front of them and Bruno on right
I certainly agree with the general consensus that one game is ample time to draw judgement and write this off as an abject failure……
I would agree Eriksen lacks physicality and another issue is he tailed off badly for the last half hour of games, but I wouldn't agree it was one of our main issues last season. A bigger issue was having no one to adequately stand in for either him or Casemiro.
I don't remember many (if any?) games where we lost the midfield battle by playing both of them. We only lost 3 games all season with them as a midfield pair, and only one before mid April, by which point the entire team looked exhausted. Maybe not a lot of games where we dictated the ball, but we weren't a possession side.
I don't really understand what Mount has shown to suggest he can add defensive qualities to a central midfield. Not that I'm saying you're wrong to assume that's why we signed him, because I think a lot of people thought that. If you don't think Eriksen is physical enough you are definitely not going to like Mount though, and part of the reason he runs around so much is because he doesn't read the game so just ends up chasing it instead, which isn't a trate that will transfer well to CM.
You're also right about the start to last season, but then we had or signed the players to fix it
Haaland made 1 incorrect run close to half time…and Pep bollocked him on the pitch.
I feel this new midfield trio + a supporting FB needs a lot of coaching. EtH needs to be on the edge of his technical area most of the game tbh.
I feel this new midfield trio + a supporting FB needs a lot of coaching. EtH needs to be on the edge of his technical area most of the game tbh.
You would have thought that when ETH hand picks a player like Mount to compliment the midfield, he has the style of play utilising him already in place and it’s a case if coaching him and the other attacking players over the following weeks and months to adopt to ETH’s system with Mount in the side.
Worryingly so far and in particular on Monday night, it’s like we’ve won Mount in a raffle and he met his team mates at 7.59pm on Monday to have a kick about and see what they could muster.
I’m going to need a lot of convincing that adding Mount to the two already in there is the answer to all our midfield problems.
Worryingly so far and in particular on Monday night, it’s like we’ve won Mount in a raffle and he met his team mates at 7.59pm on Monday to have a kick about and see what they could muster.
I’m going to need a lot of convincing that adding Mount to the two already in there is the answer to all our midfield problems.
I didn't want Mount at all. I'm making an assumption as to what ETH's plan was for him. I don't understand why we'd sign a player that Chelsea mainly played as a #10 and ask him to play as a #8. If we're going to try and expect Casemiro to basically play midfield alone, we're going to have a bad time.
The fact that we've signed Mount suggests to me that ETH wasn't completely happy with what Eriksen was doing. I appreciate him for bringing progressive passing ability from deep that we haven't had for a while. I can't look past the games where he was doing very little defensively. These were the games that we got thrashed in and the games where the opposition were dominating midfield. We didn't lose many games, but there were a lot of very dodgy performances. Midfield needs technical ability and legs. In my view, our midfielders aren't safe enough on the ball to be weaker on the physical side of things.
I'm interested in what ETH will do. If we're not going to sign Amrabat, Mount will have to play deeper than he did against Wolves. My copium is that Mount said couple years ago that he sees himself more as a #8. The Wolves game was an experiment and the setup will change when it's proven that it doesn't work. It will all work out in the end...
Yeah that's fair enough. I'm lost why he's signed Mount. I was hoping it was just to give us something different in attack or in linking the midfield to the attack, since he does have qualities that are different from Bruno and our forwards. He can be very good around the edge of the box when the space isn't there in behind. Even in pre season though it was obvious that wasn't the plan.I didn't want Mount at all. I'm making an assumption as to what ETH's plan was for him. I don't understand why we'd sign a player that Chelsea mainly played as a #10 and ask him to play as a #8. If we're going to try and expect Casemiro to basically play midfield alone, we're going to have a bad time.
The fact that we've signed Mount suggests to me that ETH wasn't completely happy with what Eriksen was doing. I appreciate him for bringing progressive passing ability from deep that we haven't had for a while. I can't look past the games where he was doing very little defensively. These were the games that we got thrashed in and the games where the opposition were dominating midfield. We didn't lose many games, but there were a lot of very dodgy performances. Midfield needs technical ability and legs. In my view, our midfielders aren't safe enough on the ball to be weaker on the physical side of things.
I'm interested in what ETH will do. If we're not going to sign Amrabat, Mount will have to play deeper than he did against Wolves. My copium is that Mount said couple years ago that he sees himself more as a #8. The Wolves game was an experiment and the setup will change when it's proven that it doesn't work. It will all work out in the end...
I don't think we got thrashed as such with Eriksen. A couple of times early in the season, but one was away to City, one involved a De Gea capitulation, and both were pre Casemiro being in the first team. Then the Anfield debacle Eriksen was injured and didn't play. It is clear ETH wants to change something in that area but I'm lost on how he does that without signing another midfielder. I can't invisage a way that Bruno and Mount in the same midfield 3 will work
We still need a proper CM. Mount, Bruno and Eriksen are all naturally AMs, all 3 are fighting over one position essentially. Need Amrabat ASAP.
If Casemiro suffers an injury or burnout we only have McTominay to protect our back four. Why are so many on here oblivious to this and can't see what a massive problem this could be for us this season? Our midfield is a shit show.
Maybe the club should have just forked over the money for Fernandez and Caicedo. They are going to be sensational together.
But at least we got to spend £210m on Casemiro, Antony and Mount.
If they both live up to their potential and Chelsea get several years out of them, £220m (or whatever their fees added up to) will be seen as a steal.
Lacking a backup DM is not a shit show. We’re after another midfielder anyway.
How highly do you rate Amrabat? A stop gap or along term starter material? Looks like a squad player to me albeit he appears to have qualities we need.
Was it player's confusion? I don't think AWB bombing forward on the right side at every opportunity was on him. It looked like he's just following instruction. Then like you said, it caused defensive instability (plus Case and Martinez didn't look match fit).
If this will be EtH's formation going forward, then that's Pavard interest does make sense. Otherwise if we go back to regular 4-2-3-1, then we really need attacking RB.
Last edited:
Tbf if Chelsea had signed Casemiro, we wouldn't have finished top four and they definitely wouldn't have ended up being the second best team in Chelsea. Antony is better than some of the rubbish they've signed in the same positions as well.
Really not sure how people are using a team that spent a record amount of money in order to finish 12th as an example of what we should have done.