Just watched Carragher’s analysis and he echoed what I’ve said earlier. I don’t think the set up was wrong or negative. As we often are - without the ball, we were set up perfectly from an offensive perspective. Shaw and AWB right up there. Back line playing forward. When we did get on the ball and have our moments though, passes going astray left right and centre and that was the key issue. Final pass off so many times yesterday, or transitioning pass not good enough to get us going. That’s a pure quality issue for me, not structural.
Ole's regression in instilling big game mentality
- Thread starter VP89
- Start date
Hold on, what do you think Bruno is? A second striker? Bruno isn't a forward. We are playing with 3 midfielders, Bruno is an attacking one.
What do you suggest Ole should do with the players available? (To show more initaitive in big games, or have more control)
We lack the quality and enterprise to convert half chances into goals - a key requirement to win games against the Top 6. I don't think this is a tactical issue as such.
We’ve drawn 0-0 in all but 2 games against the top 6 Clearly it’s tactical..We’re playing not to get beat. The handbrake is on.
This is because the top teams also have quality on the pitch and importantly - on the touchline. We have clearly shown a lack of attacking ideas against organised and equally talented players. Our individuals are good but not good enough in those games to just win the game off the cuff. The sort of strategy we seem to be adopting only works if you have Messi, Mbappé and Neymar upfront almost. There is a reliance on your individuals to be that much better than the opponents - and ours frankly are not against the better sides. Therefore, the chances of scoring more than one goal are slim.
Spurs try to do similar, and they have better attacking individuals than we do, yet it still isn’t enough. I don’t think we’re playing with the handbrake on at all. We seem to have just reached the limit of our ideas and don’t have the quality to overcome that.
From an attacking perspective, we’re far more of a hopeful team than a deliberate one. It’s all about percentages. And that is against all teams, not just the top ones. When was the last time we scored a goal following some good one or two touch interplay between a few players? Probably the back end of last season I’s say, one of the goals in Martial’s hattrick.
Against smaller teams we’ll play Pogba in the middle for one of the others, but it’s still hopeful football. It’s just increasing the quality you have on the pitch, which in theory increases your chances of creating moments, but still little pattern. This idea that ‘we do have a plan, we’re a counterattacking side’ doesn’t work for me either. Every single team in the world would prefer to attack 3 vs 3 instead of 3 vs 7, but that isn’t the reality of football. Other teams se to create more goalscoring opportunities than us as a collective, be that ‘possession’ teams like City, or a ‘direct’ one like Leeds.
Last edited:
The opposite's tactic also changed between last season and this season, they are not playing that high line anymore than last season.
Also, our front three dead fire this season is also a main reason that we can't win big match this season.
Greenwood narrowly missed the top corner, McTominay messed up an easy pass to send James in as did Bruno to send in Rashford and we should have had a penalty shot. So yes, the chances were pretty much even. But go on...have another whine about not scoring at the Bridge against a back 5 plus Kante...
Bingo.
Then you should think another side, this set of squad maybe only cater the counter plan. Wan-Bissaka cannot attack the side line well, Fred and McT cannot pass well, Mason / Martial cannot press well etc. Any other game plans can be adopted to fit this squad set? We cannot play a high press football because some of the starting lineup players are unable to do that, we cannot play a pass-go-pass because some of the starting lineup players are unable to do that. Our lineup is good at counter only. Our lineup and play style today is always the same as other match this season, problem is the players are lack and inconsistent to get spark in big match due to the quality.
A high quality counter attack team like 08 Manutd can also be deadly, fluid and dominate the game, but we are still a half-product team nowaday.
Last edited:
Similar squad and a similar amount of depth!? Then you should compare both bench in terms of transfer fee last match.
Also, our players were looked amazing when Ole was appointed to our caretaker in first two months.
Nah, Bruno is no midfielder. He participates much less in buildup play from the back these days (compared to begging of the season for example).
We have Matic, we have van de Beek, both would suit midfield 3 very well. Against Chelsea we could've gone with Matic sitting behind Fred and van de Beek if we REALLY wanted to get some more control in midfield. McTominay didn't look fully fit.
Anyway, that's all irrelevant because Ole never goes for it so surely at this stage of the season it's not going do change. This is his vision of football. But lets not pretend we can't do anything else. Playing 4 forwards in a game which you're happy to draw makes little sense and is clearly not working in terms of attacking and scoring goals.
Chances were not even because Greenwood did not have a clear cut chance, McTominay didn't find the pass so no chance actually materialised and the penalty is not a chance creation but an unforced error. We didn't actually carve them up from open play and when we looked like we might be able to, McTominay fluffed up the opportunity to create a chance for Greenwood/Rashford to shoot.
Even if I were to take the McTominay opportunity, that's still less chances created.
As I said, the stats show you're chatting out of your arse. We had less shots, less shots on target, less chance creation and less XG. All you can say is "back 5 and Kante" which shows all your logic is tremendously broken
Last edited:
They are not playing high line because anyone with a pair of eyes can see that our only tactic is those games is to sit back and break on the counter. If they don't play with high lines we are toothless as it has been this year.
Front three dead fire? Can't have it both ways we are either an excelent attack with most goals in the league or we have dead fire attackers.
It's not like our front three have had numerous chances that they missed, we barely create any chances at all.
We have lost 2 of those games so are you saying the other teams like City, Liverpool, Chelsea lack attacking ideas? because they didn't score against us either.
I am not sure if you have watched our games compared to Spurs, we play nothing like Spurs?
We have scored alot of goals following some good work. Bruno v Everton, Bruno V Leicester have all come from good plays?
To address your final point, other teams like Leeds have created more chances? We are third in list of big chances created behind City and Liverpool, where are you getting your information from?
And the Arsenal one would have been 0-0 as well but for a Pogba moment of madness.
I don’t see it necessarily as playing not to get beat. The key difference from last year is we aren’t taking our chances and the opposition are also being far more cautious against us.
Chelsea, to me, played not to lose on Sunday, despite it being much more important for them to win than it was for us (if we acknowledge the title is gone). City and Liverpool did likewise in the matches against us and Arsenal don’t have much attacking intent generally.
If McT finds Rashford in the last minute for the winner, it would have been a perfect away performance.
That's in the first 45 mostly, which is actually completely different to how we looked to set out against Chelsea in the reverse fixture, against City, Liverpool and arguably Arsenal too.
Well I’m not saying that City lack attacking ideas, because they don’t. Liverpool do though, and Chelsea do to a lesser extent I reckon.
We don’t ‘play like Spurs’ - we have similar attacking principle in that we rely on individual brilliance from attacking players. The goals that you have mentioned are perhaps not the type I’s have had in mind. Bruno’s goal vs Everton was not as a result of creating a goalscoring opportunity. Obviously we pass the football, all teams do. The goal against Leicester was a good through pass, I mean a goal like Nani’s vs City in the Community Shield years ago, off the top of my head. That kind of chemistry doesn’t seem to be there to me. Yes, we have given final passes when it’s been on and scored, but quickly passing our way through teams to score an easy finish is rare for us.
As for your last point, you may well be right, depending on how these things are classified - but Leeds appear to create more chances than us to me when I watch them. They seem to have, or at least did in the earlier parts of the season, a number of games where they are having more than 20 shots on goal.
That is true, I am speaking solely of the Chelsea game, as the thread timing suggested to me that it was inspired by this. In our earlier season games, we’ve set up more defensively for sure, looking solely to counter attack, which I don’t like, unless a team is levels above us. But there is enough evidence for me to see it isn’t Ole’s vision. We went to Paris this season and took the game to PSG, as mentioned, we took the game to Chelsea the other day, and against Liverpool in the FA Cup, we took the game to them too. In fact, similarly to that Liverpool game, we lined up with Pogba in the middle against Arsenal at Old Trafford instead of McFred, but we were still not at the races yet for the season and they outplayed us.
My opinion, based on things I’ve seen and things Ole has specifically said on the matter, is that he wants us to be more progressive in the big games in the longer term, and has been working towards that slowly. With all coaches, he has to work with the strengths of his squad though, which I imagine he will be trying to change going forward. We’re not going to pass around top teams with McFred in midfield, and in some of the big games, Pogba has either been injured, or has been off form. There’s also the concerns about him going the other way, but Ole has tried to work him into the team in bigger games by starting him wide instead of just a sprinter who will run in behind on the counter - which says to me that he wants us to still have control in the midfield area rather than just looking to transition when we get a chance.
But City didnt score against us either? Also, you mention we lack quality against equally talented players? How does that explain 2 goals against Leicester, 3 goals against Everton, 2 goals against PSG, 5 goals against Leipzig? Or even 2 goals against Liverpool in the cup?
How many goals that season did we score like the Nani goal? We have scored some good goals this season but how often do teams score with one twos and such intricate play?
There have been matches where we have had chances to score with such plays, but if this United does it posters like you will always say "Its not the manager, its individual brilliance". So what do you want? team goal or individual brilliance?
20 shots on goal means more chances?
If thats the case, we are 3rd highest in average shots per game, so I am not sure what metric you are using to say loads of other teams create more than us?
The problem isn't the attitude, the problem is that some of our players have been poor in these games.
If Bruno had the same form here as he had in other games, or if Rashford, Martial and Mason had the same form as last season - we wouldn't be having this discussion.
But you an also turn it around - if we had lost one of these games against Liverpool and one against Chelsea - where would we be then ?
If Bruno had the same form here as he had in other games, or if Rashford, Martial and Mason had the same form as last season - we wouldn't be having this discussion.
But you an also turn it around - if we had lost one of these games against Liverpool and one against Chelsea - where would we be then ?
I wrote the OP
To be fair I said in the OP:
" If we played in our previous big games like how we did in the first half against Chelsea today, we'd have undoubtedly clocked up 6-9 more points than we have. But I look back on a large sample size of "big" games and can only really deduce 45 minutes of proactive football taking the game to the opponent. And it's not good enough - he needs to address this."
City were off form at the time. They played us again and beat us 2-0, as when both teams tried to go for it, they are clearly a bigger attacking threat. This, of course, is all aside from the obvious that they are better at creating chances than us and there’s little point in trying to debate that at all.
We will always score goals. Sheffield scored 2 against us. I’m talking about the method of them. Percentage football, counter attacks, not-guaranteed genius. And you’re mentioning how many goals we have scored against supposedly top teams in a conversation around us failing to score from open play against the traditional big 6 all season. That’s obviously what I’m on about. In those games, we’ve lacked attacking ideas.
As I said, you can have your point regarding Leeds. Who am I to argue with statistics. I’ve told you my opinion comes from simply watching them. Perhaps the numbers disagree with my eyes. I’ve seen them go to Anfield this season and score 3, creating (what looked to the naked eye anyway) far more chances than we did, and the same against other big teams. Whereas I’ve left a lot of our big games thinking what might have been if a one Cavani chance went in, in what was generally a game of few chances.
This is what happens when analysis is made on the basis of results instead of performances.
Looking at the performances a year ago and now - and I’m talking about tactics, not quality - we are playing differently now and more attacking minded. Before, we used to tailor our formation to the opposition, play with a low block and have more emphasis on counterattacks from deep.
Now we play 4-2-3-1 even against the best, press high much more, higher line more, more variation between counter and possession. These are tactical choices with higher risk.
What is interesting is that now we have teams like Chelsea set up more to nullify us than to dominate us, even at home.
This is also explained in iterviews by Solskjær and diverse players - we played more reactive tactics a year ago because we were not good enough yet to get results any other way. Now we play more ambitiously our own style because we choose to, even if we’re not yet at the level were we regularily beat top teams that way.
We have sacrficed tactical ingenuity and results (consistently beating better teams) for development and progress. The trade of is that weholdnour own against the top teams even in a phase of development, and we pick more points against the lesser teams.
If you have a method of scoring goals, after 3/4 goals other managers will know the methods and stop them...
So are you saying we are top scorers in the PL by fluke? Like you said earlier we are a hope for individual brilliance like Spurs but they are better, but still we are top scorers? I dont understand how that happens without some kind of method?
If that is the case, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs all have very good talented players, why are we still scoring more than them?
Regards to open play, City have shown that scoring penalties is not easy, since when do we discount penalties?
Well then we’re not disagreeing. We had a few big games, in what I’d call a specific set of circumstances, where we have lined up particularly negatively this season.I wrote the OP
To be fair I said in the OP:
" If we played in our previous big games like how we did in the first half against Chelsea today, we'd have undoubtedly clocked up 6-9 more points than we have. But I look back on a large sample size of "big" games and can only really deduce 45 minutes of proactive football taking the game to the opponent. And it's not good enough - he needs to address this."
We went a man down early against Spurs, otherwise I don’t see that we went out there to try and sit back. We scored first.
Having lost every home game so far, and Chelsea on a similarly shit run, we both practically declared a ceasefire for that game as both teams needed to stop rots. As we’ve agreed, we played the same team again, on their own patch no less, and took the game to them.
I think league games against City and Liverpool, we simply showed them the respect that they had probably earned at the time, and didn’t come out swinging at them. Perhaps we could have been more front footed, I don’t know, but we have to also be honest with ourselves. At the time, there was little sense in going to Anfield where Liv hadn’t lost for 3 years and naively come out swinging at them. In the Cup fixture that followed, our approach was different.
I’d like to think that with some more changes, we will attack more big teams, but I don’t see Ole as a negative coach at all, he clearly wants us to be front-footed, and we will be where we feel we can get away with it. But I don’t want to see us just going out and ‘losing the right way’ for the sake of it. I’d rather win the same game 1-0.
Last year we were doing well against top 6 and not against lower clubs, this season’s the opposite. Hopefully next season we will be able to execute a higher level of play against all clubs in the Prem.
Whether we admit it or not, this was always a rebuilding season. I seriously doubt a single caftard expected us to be in the hunt for the PL trophy -- a proper title challenge -- this late in the season. We're on the right path, holding top sides to clean sheets, but we lack firepower up front. Hopefully Woody can convince his masters to support Ole in bringing in one or two attacking players to upgrade on Martial, Lingard, Mata and James, at least two of whom I expect to be relieved of duty this summer.
If you don't think we had carved them open only to have a poor pass let us down then I don't know what to say. And Greenwood narrowly missed the top corner after getting off a great shot at the edge of the 18. Amazing how you can recognize their unforced error but can't recognize ours. Go support CHelsea. This team obviously isn't for you if all you want to do is whine rather than support the team...Chances were not even because Greenwood did not have a clear cut chance, McTominay didn't find the pass so no chance actually materialised and the penalty is not a chance creation but an unforced error. We didn't actually carve them up from open play and when we looked like we might be able to, McTominay fluffed up the opportunity to create a chance for Greenwood/Rashford to shoot.
Even if I were to take the McTominay opportunity, that's still less chances created.
As I said, the stats show you're chatting out of your arse. We had less shots, less shots on target, less chance creation and less XG. All you can say is "back 5 and Kante" which shows all your logic is tremendously broken
We didn't make an unforced errors like that. The Greenwood shot was a good effort off target but it wasn't a great chance. McTominay failed to pass in the other incident so its not a chance created.
The stats have proven you wrong, the game has proven you wrong. You're so blind in your bias that anything factual is deemed favouring the opposition, don't bother discussing with me because you have zero footballing logic.
Yes, although we are the most goals (maybe replaced by ManCity today) but our front three (Rashford, Greenwood & Martial) are misfire in this season.
For your information (Stat from https://www.sofascore.com/)
| Premier League | Rashford | Greenwood | Martial | |||
| 19/20 | 20/21 | 19/20 | 20/21 | 19/20 | 20/21 | |
| Total Played | 31 | 26 | 31 | 20 | 32 | 21 |
| Goals | 17 | 9 | 10 | 1 | 17 | 4 |
| Shot per game | 2.5 | 1.7 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| Goal Per Game | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.2 |
| Goal Conversion | 22% | 20% | 31% | 5% | 29% | 13% |
| Big Chances Missed | 13 | 9 | 2 | 4 | 10 | 8 |
| Big Chances Created | 9 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Key Pass | 1.1 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| Premier League | Man United | Liverpool | Man City | Man City | ||
| 19/20 | 20/21 | 19/20 | 20/21 | 19/20 | 20/21 | |
| Match | 38 | 26 | 38 | 26 | 38 | 27 |
| Goals Scored | 66 | 53 | 85 | 47 | 102 | 56 |
| Shot per game | 10.9 | 10.1 | 11.2 | 10.8 | 13.8 | 10.7 |
| Goals per game | 1.7 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 1.8 | 2.7 | 2.1 |
| Goal Conversion | 16% | 20% | 20% | 17% | 20% | 19% |
| Big Chances per game | 2.3 | 2.6 | 2.9 | 2.8 | 3.7 | 2.9 |
| Big Chances missed per game | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 1.6 | 2.2 | 1.8 |
| Counter attack | 32 | 15 | 38 | 13 | 29 | 14 |
In above stats, only Rashford is kept the form between two season, Mason and Martial as our main strikers are dropped a lot when our team is created and scored more than last season.
It means that we improved the score and goal conversion in other players but our main strikers are poor in terms of goal conversion. If they can improve or be replaced by a more stable striker, we will be a higher goal score team.
Perfectly put. Its a shame that more posters cannot see this
He's chatting bullshit though. Our Liverpool game this season was no different to last year. Our game vs City was as much them tailoring cautiously to us as it was us to them, both Arsenal games this season was no different to last. And Spurs was a diabolical implosion.
It's quite funny, Ole and Maguire would come out after the Liverpool game and say "the way we approached the game shows how far we've come" and posters lap it up. If I'm not mistaken had less shots on target, same possession to the fixture last season (something like 33%) and tailored the team around the opposition. There was no "progression" in our approach to the game even though Liverpool looked like shadows of themselves.
This idea that Chelsea also only set up to nullify us is very odd. They played the same system they have played in every game under Tuchel and brought Kante in but that's about it. They actually had evens possession, better chance creation, stronger XG and more shots. They didn't set up to just contain us. We dominated about 35 mins of the first half before they took better control in the second. And their change in approach isn't a reflection of how far we've come - it's a reflection of them having changed their manager.
Last edited:
Are you suggesting that how @Grande feels about this, and what I've agreed with, is because we've been told to think that? I like you as a poster, but its more than a little patronising if you are suggesting that we are sheep.
Look, I'm happy to agree to disagree on this because quite frankly I'm not overly invested in this topic. Top 6 games are ultimately a means to an end and often decided on very small margins. Its not at all uncommon for a club with a similar starting XI to win that mini-league one season and struggle the next, or vice versa. Recently, we are a penalty decision and a huge Pogba chance from winning at Anfield and Stamford Bridge (though I do agree that Chelsea overall had the better goal attempts).
This thread isn't about that though. Its about our approach to these matches, and I personally do feel that we have been more progressive in these fixtures and had better control of these games than we did last season. I can't think of a single match (maybe PSG away at a push) where we've had a backs-to-the-wall look about us. Our problem is that it simply isn't clicking in the final third and there are various reasons for that, but I don't think any of those reasons are down to our approach or the way that the team is being asked to play.
No that's not in reference to you specifically. But there is a narrative that is being put out and accepted without actually evaluating. For example that poster claimed Chelsea had set out just to nullify us which they obviously didn't.
It is patronising though when you say its a shame "other posters cant see this" - when much of the points he made were false.
If you were to take some of the big games we've had you'll find a 1-2 good performances, e.g. Second half vs Leipzig, first half vs Chelsea. However you'll find a lot of drab ones - Liverpool for the 90, City was not bad but not exactly progressive, Arsenal for me was not anywhere near an improvement, Leicester probably a bit better but Tottenham was an implosion.
We actually played teams that were in much better moments last season that you can argue warranted a deeper approach (city and liverpool being rampant). But this season those teams were also not the same when we played them, and yet we were more cautious. Chelsea at OT is another example where we didn't bother for the first 60 minutes.
So this concept that we are suddenly improving in our outlook on these games is just false. An improvement would be taking the game to a broken Liverpool side with no fit CBs not chucking Pogba on the right wing and trying to hit on breaks with 34% possession, as an example. That is not progression.
Last edited:
This season we are poor against 'Top 6' but should we ignore all other big games and focus only on league games vs top 6 teams?
I mean the manager is same, players are same but we won away at PSG, outplayed them at home, won 5-0 vs Leipzig and won 3-2 vs Liverpool FA cup.
All these teams are better than Arsenal, Spurs for sure. So there must be something else for our league form, instead of just Ole's regression.
Although not clear in the OP, my inference was more the Premier League, although the semi final narrative doesn't help either. I've held the view that an overly cautious approach against each of the bigger sides will yield a disappointing point total compared to a more proactive one. That's why I had stated we would have gotten more points if we played the same way in other games as we did in the opening 45 vs Chelsea.
5-0 vs Leipzig was brilliant, PSG at OT was a great performance too. I think we were soaking up pressure in Paris but I don't blame him there. But then again, for each one of those there's a OT Leipzig fixture or an Istanbul nightmare. For me it's more the set-up when the games are very much winnable or at least warrant a more proactive approach than what we showed - so that's Arsenal at Emirates & OT, Chelsea at OT and Liverpool at Anfield. I'm excluding Spurs as an outlier here.
If we consider cup form then the 3-2 win against Liverpool was very good, but it's tough to gauge on straight knock-outs as its treated as a different game plan. I think Ole looks at the league traditional big fixtures, thinking "lets avoid losing 3 points" rather than "lets try and get the 3 points". I think at this stage, given the state some of these teams were in when we played them, we should have really gone for the latter with more belief in what we can do to hurt them. It's all fine saying the front 3 weren't firing on the day, but the chance creation was also pretty poor. I think we set out to play the occasion rather than the team in some of these fixtures and missed an opportunity to stamp our authority on the game more.
Chelsea does play a high line. A very high line, actually. And, we did the exact opposite of sitting back in this game.
I would love to see if we can play more attacking football and also more controlling game even against big team, whatever Ole tried it worked for him last season. This season teams don't attack much against us, one more area where we have to improve.
Yeah - that's all I'm saying really. I think the approach last year worked but the bigger teams this season in the league are smarter to it.
Lampard didn't go at us at OT like he tried last season, Pep didn't try either. Klopp was there for the taking with no center backs too. In all those scenarios because the other manager was tweaking I think we were able to get more possession by default, but the tactic was still quite evidently trying to hit the teams on the break, which relies on ruthlessness in taking the single good chance that appears in the game.
In my opinion we are capable of more than that in year 2.
It's hard to get the diagnosis right if the description of the problem isn't. And I would suggest the problem with this (and many other posts on this topic) is that it conflates a lack of scoring with approaching the game with a cautious attitude. It's not that simple. And in this case, I believe it is wrong.
Last season in these games, we would drop deep, largely concede possession and rely on the counterattack. We have not played in that way this season in these games. What we have done instead is not more cautious (indeed, nothing could be more cautious, other than counterattacking with fewer players). Rather than cede the initiative, we have attempted to win it - to control possession and dominate games against big teams. This is a less cautious and more ambitious way to play football, and also a more demanding one. And it's the route you've got to take if you're going to become a contending team by playing the sort of football United wants to play. Also, the approach of the other team impacts on it - if they're taking a more balanced or defensive approach when they play you, the drop deep/counterattack style is unlikely to be effective.
But, it's a big transition, and it's not easy to make it work. It entails generally outperforming other very good teams, collectively and player by player. And we've struggled to get the results. But as far as I can see, it doesn't fit the facts to ascribe that to a cautious approach.
I don't see Fred and McTominay hanging back and not joining the attack. People are assuming that McFred bring less to the table offensively than Pogba and van de Beek, because that's how it has to be if you're correct in assuming that their presence is a sign of defensive intent. However, that is not how it is:
Player xG/90 - xA/90 - xGoal points/90
Pogba 0.11 - 0.05 0.16
VdBeek 0.09 - 0.04 0.13
McTominay 0.07 - 0.10 0.17
Fred 0.06 - 0.10 0.16
Matic 0.01 - 0.07 0.08
Which seems to suggest that McT and Fred makes at least as much contribution to our offense when they're on the pitch as Pogba or DvdB does, and a good deal more than Matic (to the surprise of no one). Since they also bring more defensive solidity, playing them frequently seems to me more like a smart approach than a cautious approach.
Our full backs are usually involved offensively too. Luke Shaw is tied for first in the PL in assists by left backs.
Several posters have made the point that this is a quality issue, not a structural or tactical issue, and that seems plausible to me.
Last edited: