hi.
If anyone thinks Lyon are mediocre they're living in cloud cuckoo land.
But that was a poor performance tonight, yeah. I thought we were better in France.
I thought going forward Lyon were poor, but nonetheless were well organised behind the ball.
I think we were a couple of good decisions away from a 4-0 win, the last 20 minutes there were times when players made the wrong decisions around the area.
I thought their wonder-boys, Benzema and Ben Arfa, both looked like the real deal. It took an exceptional performance from every one of our back four to keep them out. Against a defence any worse than ours (and there aren't many of those
) I would fancy them to score.They were creaky at the back though, yeah, we definitely should have scored more.
Ben Arfa sure can dribble past players, but his finishing was woeful and his overall performane showed little maturity. Benzema looks the real deal, Ben Arfa not so much.
Benzema looks like the real deal alright, but Ben Arfa for me flatters to deceive every time I see him. He would suit Serie A/La Liga far better than the Premiership, his end product is still pretty inconsistent outside the french league.
Mate you are so way off the mark, Lyon are a well organised side with some excellent players, you may think the French league is shite but that does not mean Lyon are mugs. Far from it.
It was a ok performance not a good one. Infact it showed that we needed another presence upfront. We had too many men in the middle, we should have started 442.
End product was poor, agreed. But I don't think he gave the ball away once, all night. In stark contrast to our own twinkle-toed tricksters.
look how we played against lille last year same result at home.
Technically, it did work ...
tbh i'm quite sick and tired of this argument.
quite apart from the fact that players win you games, not formations,it is obvious that in European competition you come up against different styles, requiring different solutions; you simply must have that quality within your squad to vary your playing style.
these are professional players we are talking about. the way the game is micromanaged these days, it is also obvious that they must have the wherewithal to cope with the roles assigned them.
today's performance was average at best in the second half. we lacked composure, failed to keep possession and played too hurriedly. a better side might have punished us, and we need to address that. admittedly this was mitigated by two or three of our most important players having rather poor nights.
well done the back four. i was really proud of them. quick in the tackle, closing the space. Benzema hardly had a sniff. a great performance from them.
i was surprised Scholesy wasn't introduced to calm things down centrally. but we squeaked it.
quite apart from the fact that players win you games, not formations,it is obvious that in European competition you come up against different styles, requiring different solutions; you simply must have that quality within your squad to vary your playing style.
these are professional players we are talking about. the way the game is micromanaged these days, it is also obvious that they must have the wherewithal to cope with the roles assigned them.
today's performance was average at best in the second half. we lacked composure, failed to keep possession and played too hurriedly. a better side might have punished us, and we need to address that. admittedly this was mitigated by two or three of our most important players having rather poor nights.
well done the back four. i was really proud of them. quick in the tackle, closing the space. Benzema hardly had a sniff. a great performance from them.
i was surprised Scholesy wasn't introduced to calm things down centrally. but we squeaked it.
Exactly
I never said they were mugs, but I watch a lot of Ligue 1 and they are not playing great this season and have a lot of very mediocre players. Should have put them to bed a lot easier.
BUT, we're through, and as we saw last season, there's no point in peaking too early.
- We've dropped points in 7 of 24 games against teams outside the top 4 (Everton being fourth when I write this).
- If "battering" means winning by more than two goals, we've battered teams from outside the top four in 8 of 24 games.
- If battering means winning by more than one goal, we've battered teams from outside the top four 12 of 24 times.
- The vast majority of those batterings were against teams from outside the top 11.
- We've only once (in fourteen attempts) beaten a team from the top 11 by more than two goals.
This is of course looking at both home and away games (and only results, not performances), which perhaps makes the whole thing a bit pointless.
I'm stunned by the amount of complaints that I've seen on the net since I came on. Maybe I'm biased because it was the exact team I wanted (except maybe Tevez instead of Nani), but I thought our general play was fantastic. The 4-2-3-1 didn't work spectacularly like it did against Roma and Arsenal, but we still utterly dominated the game, giving them virtually no chance other than when they hit the post (which VDS had covered anyway). At the other end we opened them up regularly, but the final ball just wouldn't work for us. Mostly because Anderson wasn't taking up the correct positions once we got into the final third, but he is still the best option for that position and the more we play it the better he'll get at reading the play.
Playing that formation we are incredibly solid. It is the formation to use against the likes of Milan/Barca/Real. So we also have to use it against some of the slightly weaker teams, so that our players are used to that formation and style of play when we need it. Now that means that we may not score quite as many goals against those weaker teams that we would've if we'd gone at them in a 4-4-2, but then again it also makes it less likely that we'd conceed.
And for those of you saying that we ended the French tie in a 4-4-2 which got us the goal - no we didn't. It was still a 4-2-3-1 just with slightly more attacking personel. Exactly like when Tevez came on for Anderson in this game, it was still 4-2-3-1. If we had a proper striker upfront with Rooney dropping into one of the deeper positions, it'd be near perfect (as seen against Roma).
Playing that formation we are incredibly solid. It is the formation to use against the likes of Milan/Barca/Real. So we also have to use it against some of the slightly weaker teams, so that our players are used to that formation and style of play when we need it. Now that means that we may not score quite as many goals against those weaker teams that we would've if we'd gone at them in a 4-4-2, but then again it also makes it less likely that we'd conceed.
And for those of you saying that we ended the French tie in a 4-4-2 which got us the goal - no we didn't. It was still a 4-2-3-1 just with slightly more attacking personel. Exactly like when Tevez came on for Anderson in this game, it was still 4-2-3-1. If we had a proper striker upfront with Rooney dropping into one of the deeper positions, it'd be near perfect (as seen against Roma).
That was not a great performance, it was a great result. That's what matters at this stage in the CL.
Great result, great tactics
I think it was a great performance as well. Disagreement over whether it was a great performance is really down to our failure to finish off two or three of the many chances that came our way. But the fact is that Lyon is a good side, and they were playing defensively with a lone striker. Furthermore their captain Cris looks like an excellent player. He did a good job of breaking up our final passes in the box.
No one can doubt how good our defensive performance was. Personally I like seeing Manchester United pull off Italian-style tactical wins in the Champions League to go with our blowouts in the FA Cup. Variety is the spice of life, and the Lyon game in France was a much more entertaining match IMO than the borefest at Newcastle with all its goals.
I think it was a great performance as well. Disagreement over whether it was a great performance is really down to our failure to finish off two or three of the many chances that came our way. But the fact is that Lyon is a good side, and they were playing defensively with a lone striker. Furthermore their captain Cris looks like an excellent player. He did a good job of breaking up our final passes in the box.
No one can doubt how good our defensive performance was. Personally I like seeing Manchester United pull off Italian-style tactical wins in the Champions League to go with our blowouts in the FA Cup. Variety is the spice of life, and the Lyon game in France was a much more entertaining match IMO than the borefest at Newcastle with all its goals.
I thought first half our midfield was unbelievable and rooney and ronaldo a bit wasteful. Second half don't know what happened, we played a totally different game. So I think the formation was fine, first half al lyon could do was desperately defend. On a better day rooney and ronaldo woul have buried a few
I think a large part of that is that Anderson still tires after 60 minutes or so (it actually seemed to be a bit earlier this time). As good as he is, he still can't play that hectic style of his for an entire 90 minutes.
Hopefully next season we'll see him lasting the entire match.
I agree, good first half but very poor second.
Lyon are a good side but not a great one and I think if we had played 4-4-2 with Rooney and Tevez upfront through the majority of the two legs we would have taken them apart. That's how we got back into the tie in the away leg and it was only incredibly sloppy passing that stopped us running in a few more last night in the final 20 minutes.
He is the reason Fergie is afraid of 4-4-2 against top sides!
Because he would bomb forward cavalier style with giggsy and neville and leave the wings open and Real slapped us around!
Our current CL system stresses on ball possession and having players capable of covering multiple roles so that it can swiftly change in 4 - 3 - 3 when attacking to 4 - 5 - 1 when defending. To be able to play such system you have to have
a) a goal poacher who can play as a lone striker and turn chances into goal
b) an attacking midfielder who has the stamina AND the Killer instinct to move up and down the pitch and prove lethal at every occasion
Do we have that?
a) a goal poacher who can play as a lone striker and turn chances into goal
b) an attacking midfielder who has the stamina AND the Killer instinct to move up and down the pitch and prove lethal at every occasion
Do we have that?
The performance wasn't great, but that isn't due to the formation. It was down to sloppy passing and poor movement from a nervous bunch of players.
What the formation ensured is that Lyon never had a sniff at goal and we controlled most of the game. No goal conceded = no chance that we'll be eliminated. Professional performance that probably bored the tits off of any neutral, but also the sort that win you CL's.
We could play the exact same eleven next week and look superb.
What the formation ensured is that Lyon never had a sniff at goal and we controlled most of the game. No goal conceded = no chance that we'll be eliminated. Professional performance that probably bored the tits off of any neutral, but also the sort that win you CL's.
We could play the exact same eleven next week and look superb.
This formations doesn't win you games match is a bit of an ignorant and easy answer to be honest. Of course they don't alone, but they certainly help. Games our won by a number of factors, and formations are a big one of those factors. Every man and his dog can tell you Rooney plays better with a strike partner, are you telling me we have just as good a chance as winning if we play one up front as we do with two? Especially when that one is Rooney. Because I don't think we do. Infact our dire perfromances year after year in Europe are a stark and disappointing contrast to our dominance in the League and serve as a clear suggestion that the formation does infact affect our game.
Nothing to do with the quality of the opposition then?
There are atleast 6 games a season against top notch opponents in the Premiership, we do quite well, we never manage more then 2 in the Champions league.
When the opposition is a good team, Fergie & CQ tends to match the opposition's formations or at least, numbers, in central midfield. Unless we have Keano of old or a Gerrard, we won't be able to match a good team playing 3 CMs with 2 CMs or our own.
Of course it is in a lot of instances. But since 99 off the top of my head we have had embarassing draws or defeats against the likes of Porto, Leverkusen, Stuttgart, Basel, Zagreb, Kiev, Lille, PSV, Anderlecht, Panithinaikos, Nantes Maccabi feckin Haifa for gods sakes.
We've also had embarrasing draws and defeats to Sunderland, Wolves, Bolton, Middesbro and West feckin Ham. That's football.
And none of those teams have came anywhere near winning their domestic league in the last few decades. Unlike all the teams you list above.
I'm constantly amazed at how dismissive we are of teams that qualify for the CL. If the shite record of England in international football has taught us anything it's that the standard of football outside blighty is significantly higher than most English folk would like to believe.
nah.
how players interpret their roles in the side determines games. if you put out a 4-2-3-1 and the 3 don't really try to move up to help the lone striker, you end up with an isolated and ineffective attacker. on the other hand, if they do, you end up with 4-0 versus Arse and 7-1 vs Roma.
so you see that 4-3-3 as played by Barca is quite a bit more attractive than, say, the 4-3-3 played by Chelski, while that played by Chelski is more defensively sound than that played by Barca. on paper, it is the same formation, but how the players understand their roles is very different.
and we have started improving in Europe. we've won all but two of our games this season. reached the semis last. and we are still a very young team, coming into its own after a protracted period of transition. this pointing to our past failures is a bit misleading.
and, of course, European competition poses very different challenges to league competition, not least of which are different styles you come up against.
You;re on a roll, mate. That's the second top-class post I've read from you this morning. Nice work
We are good enough to impose our style on the opposition, we did in the first half, I can't figure out why Fergie thought it a smart idea to sit back in the second.
There will likely be games to come when we need to score a lot of goals to progress. Then you'll see a different set-up entirely. Until then, our European future is better served by playing this way. We control matches, concede few chances and, whilst not being completely free-flowing in attack, are always likely to score a goal or two.
I doubt he asked the players to sit back. Perhaps the full-backs were reigned in a little. Sometimes matches just go that way. The players know if we don't concede we go through, and this affects things.
Agree. Good post