Yes, but Lingard was a bit unfortunate in the way that when he finally looked to be given his chances, he got injured, and when he came back, Ole was gone.
Erik ten Hag - Manchester United manager
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
I reckon If he wins the FA cup he will stay.
Nah, he was screwed over, Lingard was healthy and unused on the bench for nearly all games. The season where he was maybe unfortunate was the previous one where he had an injury early and was never used until he moved to West Ham on loan.
Why would he leak to them?
Screwed over? He was crap for the first half of 2019 and rightfully dropped. Regained his form at West Ham next year, then came back and Ole was gone.
Seems silly to try and predict this when we have 3 games before then that could easily all go just as badly as the last one. Or worse.
Precident
What do you mean?
I'm talking about 21-22, after his successful loan to West Ham.
He leaks to TUS
Why do these kinds of quotes deserve to be sacked? What exactly do you want him to say? That Mount is shit, all the time injured and he'd happily swap him for Rice?
The stuff about overtraining in particular seems very valid to me. ETH comes across extremely arogant here, pretty much disregarding what professional sports science staff, who know far more about the body than he does, are advising. I do think certain players do need to be treated differently also, like Shaw for example, if their body simply isn't capable of handling such intense sessions. Most players are not like Bruno, who takes the super athlete tag to a whole other level.
In terms of the tactical meetings, I can see some validity to it. I do think top managers need to be tactically strong but it's also important to be able to take really complicated ideas and to explain them in simple terms. The likes of Ancelotti and SAF for example often made the instructions very clear and simple. To give balance to the argument, I suspect Pep goes into huge tactical detail, but the way he explains these concepts might be more effective. For example, maybe he explains 1 key concept for 5 minutes, and then another key concept another day for 5 minutes, which could make it easier for the players to understand than overloading them with many different key concepts all at once in 40 minutes.
The reality is that humans naturally have an extremely short attention span, so spreading out instructions in smaller 5-10 minute chunks throughout the week might be more effective. Removing the specifics of football tactics, this is actually something I've read studies on for teaching new skills in general. Little things like bringing energy, focusing on intonation, using humour, etc. also help when teaching people.
But my question is how do you know this? I am not saying it's wrong just asking where you heard this.
It's just my opinion mate.
Yep. Brighton with their whole team out dominated us at OT. I knew he was not the guy since.
I repeat:
We will not win that final if ETH is in charge.
No chance.
(We probably won't win it if my mother is in charge either - or José Mourinho. But either of those offers a possibility of winning it. ETH offers the certainty of defeat.)
We will not win that final if ETH is in charge.
No chance.
(We probably won't win it if my mother is in charge either - or José Mourinho. But either of those offers a possibility of winning it. ETH offers the certainty of defeat.)
This is a great point - Rio's famous story about SAF meeting with all the experienced players and telling them "pass the ball to RVP or you won't play" comes to mind here.
Obviously the tactical setup was much more complex than that, but SAF was brilliantly able to distill his instructions into a simple, clear message.
His arrogance in addressing questions has recently become exceedingly obnoxious. Common Sense? So, instead of being silent and attempting to demonstrate with results why he should be here, he is making these bold pronouncements. It's funny because this is exactly how LVG was fired. It is a major issue for United. The amount of autonomy and support provided to managers has continually resulted in the majority of them becoming egotistical and arrogant. This, I believe, is why they end up falling out with the players. We create an environment conducive to abuse of power and are startled when employees begin to complain. That is why, in my opinion, the structure discussion should never be used to support any of the managers we have had.
Really well said. I think arrogance has been his biggest downfall. The inability to admit something isn’t working. I couldn’t care less about what he says to the media but you can see it in our approach to games and lack of flexibility (most times)
Yup
In fact, I believe that is the most important aspect of a manager's job. I believe that every manager understands what to do and takes steps to implement their vision on the pitch. However, smart managers can ensure that they communicate and coach players effectively enough to transfer this on the field. That's why it's strange for people to belittle our players by calling them dumb for not being able to apply his methods on the field, when there's a good likelihood that, in addition to poor tactics, his communication skills are also lacking. I don't think a lot of fans appreciate this.
Nah... this is just Dutch being Dutch.
I generally agree with that but I think that it's one of the difference between great manager and the rest. And also managers that have the ability to stay in a single place for a long time.
Suppose it depends on what the question was. It could have been specifically about Ineos coming in.
I’ve believed this for a long time as well, and I do believe that this is what sets the greatest managers apart from the rest. I have no doubt in my mind that Moyes or Ole have a clear vision in their mind of how they want their team to play, and how they think in game tweaks should be carried out, but being able to translate that in a way that the players understand it clearly so they can execute it is where I think the best managers stand out.
The irony of asking Ineos to have common sense isn't lost on me when ETH has shown precisely the opposite as far as the players and the tactics they are asked to implement.
"I have a full head of hair" - Eric ten Hag
"It's very obvious"
I had to check if my memory had totally failed me, and you are right that he wasn't injured. Still, Lingard was involved in 9 out of the 17 games Ole was in charge before he got sacked, so not completely overlooked. But surely Rashford and Greenwood were the preferred wingers (rightly so), and also hard to argue that Fernandes should have been dropped. Not sure if that qualifies for being screwed over, though.
Would be pretty funny if he came out and said "yeah, last game against Palace I'd have started Declan Rice at LB, both CB spots, a diamond with 4 Declan Rices and then Dalot, Hojlund, Garnacho and Onana keep their spots but that's where we'll look to upgrade over the summer along with a replacement for Declan Rice at LB and Bruno will come back in when healthy for the most advanced Declan Rice. So yeah, 7 Rices, but normally only 6, and even as low as 3 or 4 with everyone healthy."
Look at the minutes and take into account that it was the last year of his contract. If you don't count on a player then don't convince him that you do especially when he has the opportunity to sign a long term contract and have significantly more game time.
Just put yourself in similar shoes and think about the consequences that it has on your future earnings and career. I have never been a fan of Lingard but I would be extremely upset if I was in a similar situation.
0% chance this bloke is our manager next season.
If he wins against Arsenal he may have a chance, otherwise he can enjoy his summer with his family.
Any of the ETH in crowd answer me this: when ETH isn’t at United next season, what will you miss about United’s style of play, patterns of play, or which regular outstanding team goals will you miss the most?
I liked the article up until the bits about Ronaldo and Sancho. Players were upset that Ronaldo and Sancho got punted? Tough shit, they were acting like cnuts. It shows that Ten Hag doesn't know how to deal with big talents? Er, no. It shows that big talents don't know how to act like people who aren't cnuts. Talk about trying to rewrite history.
But this is probably the end for him and I don't see a problem with that.
If I'm not mistaken at the time it was said that the squad was divided with some being pro Ronaldo, so I'm not surprised that they didn't like the fact that he was slowly sidelined. Now the moment he gave that interview should be when no one can defend the idea that he should stay, especially when he stated that he didn't respect the manager.
You're probably right. I can't think of a reason other than loyalty why any of the players would have had a problem with Ronaldo being sidelined, though. He was absolutely abysmal.
In the end you have to deserve a spot in the team, though. But yeah, they should have let him go, no argue about that, and if he had insisted, I'm sure they would have. A bit naive of him to think he would be anything else that a squad player in competition with Sancho, Greenwood, Rashford and Fernandes. Anyway, this is the The Hag thread, so we should probably stay on topic
The club has no obligation to play him regardless of how much time he has left on his contract. Regardless of what he says, the fact that Elanga was preferred to him that season and he ended up doing nothing at Forest the year after certainly doesn't do him any favours when complaining about being game time here.
This is the first time i've heard of this take, and from a supposedly non-lingard fan as well. I remember Van de Beek also generated this type of weird sympathy while he was here, like the club and coaching staff were withholding a gem of a player and ruining his career on purpose. It's not the club's fault he turned to shit, however we should have let him go for whatever peanuts WH were offering that summer.
You're saying Fergie is a cvnt with that logic