Are we too reliant on Zlatan?

[MadMike]

I understand what you're saying and I agree that Ibra had a terrible game. But I cannot think of a single attacking line up with the players available that would have made the team more likely to score with him off the pitch.

You can't just take him off because he's playing badly if it makes it less likely you will win the game.

If you took him off, who would you have replaced him with?

I really don't understand the argument "you can't take him off if he's playing badly because he's our best striker". So if you have a team with a settled starting XI where every starting player is the best in his position, you would never make changes? However bad they were playing?

Personally? I would have changed the formation given we needed to score and they were down to 10.

I would have taken him and Rooney off for Rashford and Herrera. I would have put Martial and Rashford up top with Mata as a #10. I would have pushed the full backs up to play as LM and RM respectively to provide width, with Pogba as LCM and Herrera a RCM. Herrera links really well with Valencia down that right side and Pogba gets on the end of many chances somehow. I'd leave Carrick to stay back as a deep DM because he has good distribution from there and he can help Jones and Rojo in case Bournemouth break out.

Spoiler: Formation

The above is basically the best & fastest players we have available on the day, minus Ibra who did start but was having a bad game. I would make these changes around 55-60 mins in. Then at 85 mins, I would throw caution to the wind and take Carrick off and throw Fellaini on as a striker to help with headers in the box.

EDIT: Needless to say I don't think this formation is viable outside of this specific scenario where we are 11vs10, at home, to Bournemouth

 

[POF]

I really don't understand the argument "you can't take him off if he's playing badly because he's our best striker". So if you have a team with a settled starting XI where every starting player is the best in his position, you would never make changes? However bad they were playing?

Personally? I would have changed the formation given we needed to score and they were down to 10.

I would have taken him and Rooney off for Rashford and Herrera. I would have put Martial and Rashford up top with Mata as a #10. I would have pushed the full backs up to play as LM and RM respectively to provide width, with Pogba as LCM and Herrera a RCM. Herrera links really well with Valencia down that right side and Pogba gets on the end of many chances somehow. I'd leave Carrick to stay back as a deep DM because he has good distribution from there and he can help Jones and Rojo in case Bournemouth break out.

Spoiler: Formation

The above is basically the best & fastest players we have available on the day, minus Ibra who did start but was having a bad game. I would make these changes around 55-60 mins in. Then at 85 mins, I would throw caution to the wind and take Carrick off and throw Fellaini on as a striker to help with headers in the box.

EDIT: Needless to say I don't think this formation is viable outside of this specific scenario where we are 11vs10, at home, to Bournemouth

That's a pretty good move actually. I do think Martial's penetration on the left was the most likely source of goals but that's a decent line up, well balanced and has plenty of attacking threat. Can't argue with that at all.

I really wish United had another quality striker. Being able to make changes like you suggest to put 2 up front but keeping Martial or Rashford wide would give so many more options.

 

[MadMike]

That's a pretty good move actually. I do think Martial's penetration on the left was the most likely source of goals but that's a decent line up, well balanced and has plenty of attacking threat. Can't argue with that at all.

I really wish United had another quality striker. Being able to make changes like you suggest to put 2 up front but keeping Martial or Rashford wide would give so many more options.

When you play with 2 strikers the advantage is that if one moves outside of the box in a wide position the other is still in the box. When you play with 1 striker, then if he leaves the box, there is no one there.

For example in that formation above, if Rashford moves to the right to help Valencia in the build-up, Martial and Mata are more than likely to be in or around the box. So the two strikers will still be able to provide width if needed, especially when they are as mobile as these two. By comparison, Ibra has to be in the box because he's no threat outside it. He's not fast enough or a good dribbler enough to drift on the wings and if leaves the box, there's no one left in there.

Neither Martial nor Rashford are individually good enough to lead the line alone, like Ibra does. It's a different role anyway. But when both played together they can offer a lot of movement and mobility that Ibra doesn't offer. A bit like Yorke & Cole.

So it frustrates me that we don't even consider it an option, but have to stick with Ibra for 90mins, whether we're 3-0 up or 0-3 down, whether he's playing well or bad. He's never subbed and we never have a plan B. No wonder people say we're over-reliant on him. We have two very good young strikers and all we can think about is playing them on the wing to provide width for Ibra.

 

[ti vu]

I fully agree that the other players need to chip in with more goals. That is indeed the main issue on most days. But today, Ibra was at the receiving end of everything good we did. He got played through twice, he took the free kicks, he took the pen. Pogba was the only other one who also had chances and I think he's also getting a LOT of criticism tonight.

As for the headers, they were probably the only positive contribution he had today. That doesn't justify him staying on for 90 mins. He was lucky to be on the pitch, he should have been sent off and we all know it. If Martial had a game like this, where he spent the whole game fighting with the RB, and arguing with the ref while missing chances.... he'd be dropped for 3 weeks. It doesn't even send the right message to the team when some players are not even subbed, let alone dropped, however badly they play.

While you got some good points I agree, this part is wrong. It's Martial doesn't show fight when the opponent try to go tough on us, that's the problem. Diego Costa, Zlatan, Suarez, Aguero... had games where they get OTT with their personal fitting, losing concentration & misses chance. They don't lose their fighting spirit though. One two few many bad games, they bounce back eventually.

Martial's problem is at time he's too passive leading to us losing hold of the game, even in games he played well for most part. The doubt is on him to produce from the get go in questionably tough games. Martial needs to convince Mourinho that he can bounce back, fight in tough condition or he's stuck with being managed gametime according to opponent. That's for the discussion in his own thread, of course.

 

[POF]

When you play with 2 strikers the advantage is that if one moves outside of the box in a wide position the other is still in the box. When you play with 1 striker, then if he leaves the box, there is no one there.

For example in that formation above, if Rashford moves to the right to help Valencia in the build-up, Martial and Mata are more than likely to be in or around the box. So the two strikers will still be able to provide width if needed, especially when they are as mobile as these two. By comparison, Ibra has to be in the box because he's no threat outside it. He's not fast enough or a good dribbler enough to drift on the wings and if leaves the box, there's no one left in there.

Neither Martial nor Rashford are individually good enough to lead the line alone, like Ibra does. It's a different role anyway. But when both played together they can offer a lot of movement and mobility that Ibra doesn't offer. A bit like Yorke & Cole.

So it frustrates me that we don't even consider it an option, but have to stick with Ibra for 90mins, whether we're 3-0 up or 0-3 down, whether he's playing well or bad. He's never subbed and we never have a plan B. No wonder people say we're over-reliant on him. We have two very good young strikers and all we can think about is playing them on the wing to provide width for Ibra.

I agree they need a plan B. Let's see what they do when Ibra is out. Jose has tried Rashford and Martial in one off games in the Zlatan role and both struggled. I agree that it might need to be a front 2. The biggest worry if you play a front 2 of Rashford and Martial is who will provide the width. I have a feeling that the front 2 will be Rashford and Rooney.

 

[ti vu]

I agree they need a plan B. Let's see what they do when Ibra is out. Jose has tried Rashford and Martial in one off games in the Zlatan role and both struggled. I agree that it might need to be a front 2. The biggest worry if you play a front 2 of Rashford and Martial is who will provide the width. I have a feeling that the front 2 will be Rashford and Rooney.

Hopefully Mkhi can get back by then. Not confident going with Rooney or Fellaini (to provide hold up play with Zlatan's absence). I think Martial is stuck on the wing with his showing vs Blackburn as CF

 

[Mike09]

Yea. If he can't score, pretty much we can't score. Most of our goals came from him this season. It's like Sanchez at Arsenal, if he can't make assists or goals then they can't score. This is why it's very important to at least sign another player especially attacking mid who can score at least 15 league goals in a season in a top level.

 

[ti vu]

Yea. If he can't score, pretty much we can't score. Most of our goals came from him this season. It's like Sanchez at Arsenal, if he can't make assists or goals then they can't score. This is why it's very important to at least sign another player especially attacking mid who can score at least 15 league goals in a season in a top level.

Shame that Mkhi when starting getting into good form keeps getting sidelined due to injury. At least 3 times now. Mkhi can definitely hit double digit & assist more. With Mkhi then Mata was freed up & can find him more in scoring position & potentially chip in more goals.

 

[Leftback99]

We are reliant on whoever plays up front because that's who we create all the chances for. Zlatan has missed twice as many 'big chances' as any other player in the league (17).

https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/players/big_chance_missed

 

[sullydnl]

Cheers for pointing out my mistake. English is my third language so I appreciate every advice so I can better myself.

Figured. Great English generally though!

 

[SachinJ22]

Jose has to be blamed for this over-reliance on Zlatan, he could have rested Zlatan for some games and played Martial or Rashford in his place and they would have got some confidence if they had got some goals but he doesn't trust them. Jose doesn't even sub him when he's playing poorly.

 

[Varun]

Ofcourse we are. Our other attackers simply don't contribute enough goals. It isn't about him always being the striker either, other teams have their wingers or AMs that score goals so that the scoring burden isn't just on the striker.

 

[Freak]

Our wide forwards need to score more. They are not playing exclusively as wingers so they should be getting goals. Pogba needs to his head out of his arse and starts stepping it up.

 

[Freak]

Martial, Rooney and Rashford are all guilty of not scoring enough.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Yes we are. But it's not merely the quality of players. Mkhitarian and martial for example should be on 5 or more. Even Rashford possibly but he's quite raw. So it's mourinho who needs to get more out of our attack. And he's unable to do it thus far.

 

[Gladiator]

Yes we are. But it's not merely the quality of players. Mkhitarian and martial for example should be on 5 or more. Even Rashford possibly but he's quite raw. So it's mourinho who needs to get more out of our attack. And he's unable to do it thus far.

from a finishing perspective yes. not enough to just point to the chances created. We're far from efficient

 

[MadMike]

We are reliant on whoever plays up front because that's who we create all the chances for. Zlatan has missed twice as many 'big chances' as any other player in the league (17).

https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/players/big_chance_missed

I can't believe nobody else commented on this. Well done mate for finding this. He has missed double the chances the next striker.

For those to lazy to click, here's the info...

Spoiler: Big Chances Missed

People complain that our other players don't score enough and it's true. But also it seems their focus is creating chances for Ibra. He's the sole focus of our entire attack. So when he plays bad we play bad.

I'm not sure if this over-reliance on Ibra is the fault of our others attackers not scoring enough or the result of how Jose has us playing with Ibra in the team (and Ibra is undroppable). I believe it's both

 

[ZAGREB RED]

Yes.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

from a finishing perspective yes. not enough to just point to the chances created. We're far from efficient

From an everything perspective. All big sides get shots away and create chances. We're achieving nothing special by getting 15 shots away vs Bournemouth. Our performance was lacking, not just the finishing.

 

[jackofalltrades]

For the nth time, Rashford and Martial have barely played centrally this year. We re not talking about them taking over from Ibra permanently, we are talking about them playing upftont when Ibra is having a stinker. I've explained how we barely have more goals this season then last when we played Martial upfront, but you won't accept it as argument because "it was last season", when he simply hasn't played up top this season.

This discussion is getting us nowhere, let's drop this.

Which I've agreed to in other posts on other threads. I said Rashford should have been on in the 55th minute either for Rooney or Ibra.

I was the first to respond to this question, look at the first 3 words.

 

[MadMike]

Which I've agreed to in other posts on other threads. I said Rashford should have been on in the 55th minute either for Rooney or Ibra.

Okay, well, I haven't seen those, have I? I can only go off what you type in the threads I'm following

My point was that Mou needs to play Martial and Rashford up front a bit more on occasions and have them as an alternative to Ibra. Currently he's built an over-reliance on him by being the only player we ever play up top, one we never sub.

It's simple as that.

 

[Bobcat]

Without a shadow of a doubt. Putting all your eggs in basket is never a good idea and this is what you get. Right now there is only Mata and Martial i feel can score if it's not Zlatan. Earlier years we had plenty of players who had that matchwinner ability.

Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, Rooney, RvP, Chica, Fecking Ronaldo, Nani etc

 

[Janson]

We are over reliant on him, for sure. In the last thirty min he only stood upfront waiting for the ball or making runs to get behind them. He was not involved in the build up at all and that showed how much we lack creativity without him droping deep to be involved in the build up, creating chances.

He was probably instructed by Mourinho to stay upfront cause we needed goals, which didn't turn out too good. We were competely clueless in the last thirty, how to create anything.

Without Miki, Ibra and Pogba we have zero creativity.

 

[Janson]

Edit: Double post.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

I'm not sure if this over-reliance on Ibra is the fault of our others attackers not scoring enough or the result of how Jose has us playing with Ibra in the team (and Ibra is undroppable). I believe it's both

There’s something generally off about our attack - which goes back to there being something generally off about our midfield - too often.

If we suddenly began burying every chance we create, it would obviously look radically different, but these things do tend to go together. When you’re sitting 6th in the table and constantly fail to close gaps, there’s something wrong.

My main question is what role Zlatan plays in a long-term perspective. The season is transitional, most would agree (Mourinho too, I think): We’re re-building, the manager is putting a team together piece by piece, etc. I don’t quite get Zlatan in that context. Our attacking game revolves around him, that’s pretty much undeniable - it’s a deliberate tactic. Do we continue in that vein? With a 36 year old as the focal point of our attack? Perhaps that could work if we upgrade a few positions elsewhere significantly - but again, I don’t quite get it.

The way Zlatan is deployed at the moment, you wouldn’t think he was part of re-building “project” but rather a ringer hired in to provide the goods in a push for trophies. Similar to Fergie bringing in RVP, if you will - except RVP was considerably younger. Is the idea to implement a system which is versatile enough to accommodate a different type of focal point - or to try and replace Zlatan like for like? It’s not 100% clear to me what Mourinho has in mind.

 

[MadMike]

There’s something generally off about our attack - which goes back to there being something generally off about our midfield - too often.

If we suddenly began burying every chance we create, it would obviously look radically different, but these things do tend to go together. When you’re sitting 6th in the table and constantly fail to close gaps, there’s something wrong.

My main question is what role Zlatan plays in a long-term perspective. The season is transitional, most would agree (Mourinho too, I think): We’re re-building, the manager is putting a team together piece by piece, etc. I don’t quite get Zlatan in that context. Our attacking game revolves around him, that’s pretty much undeniable - it’s a deliberate tactic. Do we continue in that vein? With a 36 year old as the focal point of our attack? Perhaps that could work if we upgrade a few positions elsewhere significantly - but again, I don’t quite get it.

The way Zlatan is deployed at the moment, you wouldn’t think he was part of re-building “project” but rather a ringer hired in to provide the goods in a push for trophies. Similar to Fergie bringing in RVP, if you will - except RVP was considerably younger. Is the idea to implement a system which is versatile enough to accommodate a different type of focal point - or to try and replace Zlatan like for like? It’s not 100% clear to me what Mourinho has in mind.

I believe he's just postponing the problem (of having a reliable striker) for later. Rebuildling the defence, midfield and wide positions while not having to worry about the striker for now.

But yeah, rebuilding the team with a 35yo as the undroppable focal point of the attack is a bit bizarre. I was hoping to see Martial and Rashford upfront, in tandem, a bit more this season. At least in cup games and in the last 30 mins of some games. It has not happened at all and we find ourselves too dependent on Ibra.

 

[Janson]

There’s something generally off about our attack - which goes back to there being something generally off about our midfield - too often.

If we suddenly began burying every chance we create, it would obviously look radically different, but these things do tend to go together. When you’re sitting 6th in the table and constantly fail to close gaps, there’s something wrong.

My main question is what role Zlatan plays in a long-term perspective. The season is transitional, most would agree (Mourinho too, I think): We’re re-building, the manager is putting a team together piece by piece, etc. I don’t quite get Zlatan in that context. Our attacking game revolves around him, that’s pretty much undeniable - it’s a deliberate tactic. Do we continue in that vein? With a 36 year old as the focal point of our attack? Perhaps that could work if we upgrade a few positions elsewhere significantly - but again, I don’t quite get it.

The way Zlatan is deployed at the moment, you wouldn’t think he was part of re-building “project” but rather a ringer hired in to provide the goods in a push for trophies. Similar to Fergie bringing in RVP, if you will - except RVP was considerably younger. Is the idea to implement a system which is versatile enough to accommodate a different type of focal point - or to try and replace Zlatan like for like? It’s not 100% clear to me what Mourinho has in mind.

He is probably looking to replace Ibra with someone in the same mold, so I don't see anything wrong to build the team around him. I think Zlatan has more than a year left to give. I wouldn't be surprised if he is here for more then next season.

 

[red4ever 79]

Presuming he gets a minimum 3 game ban. Who is going to deputize? I personally would like to see Rashford start all 3 give him a run. He has pace to burn and get in behind the defences. I think I will give up if I see Rooney starting as the top striker

 

[Cheesy]

To an extent, yeah. It's not so much that we can't score goals without him (although we are lacking in that department slightly) but more so in that we don't have anyone else who looks like hitting 10+ league goals this season. Which is problematic, because most other major sides have someone other than their main striker who they can sort of depend upon.

Chelsea have Hazard, for example, while Spurs have Alli. Liverpool have had goals from various sources and Arsenal have Giroud who's there to score if Sanchez doesn't.

Granted, Rashford and Martial would probably score more often that they do currently if played as our main striker, but I don't think either would be good enough right now to anywhere near match Zlatan's tally this season.

 

[Dobbs]

Presuming he gets a minimum 3 game ban. Who is going to deputize? I personally would like to see Rashford start all 3 give him a run. He has pace to burn and get in behind the defences. I think I will give up if I see Rooney starting as the top striker

I think there's a bigger danger of Fellaini starting to compensate for Ibra's height. That'd be horrible.

It has to be Rashford up front but it needs to be with Mkhi or Mata behind him. Personally I'd have Mata central. He's up there as our best finisher so get him into as many goalscoring positions as possible. On the right he just doesn't get enough sights of goal.

 

[MadMike]

To an extent, yeah. It's not so much that we can't score goals without him (although we are lacking in that department slightly) but more so in that we don't have anyone else who looks like hitting 10+ league goals this season. Which is problematic, because most other major sides have someone other than their main striker who they can sort of depend upon.

Chelsea have Hazard, for example, while Spurs have Alli. Liverpool have had goals from various sources and Arsenal have Giroud who's there to score if Sanchez doesn't.

Granted, Rashford and Martial would probably score more often that they do currently if played as our main striker, but I don't think either would be good enough right now to anywhere near match Zlatan's tally this season.

Zlatan's better than Rashford and Martial currently, that goes without saying. However if they played upfront they wouldn't play the role Ibra does. We would be playing probably with both of them up front in tandem in a different approach to the game. And my argument is that this alternative approach is needed when Ibra upfront on his own is not working out.

The other reason why our other players have not scored as many goals is because they have been rotated too heavily or have been out of the side all together. Both Martial and Mkhi were out of favour with Mou for periods. They have played in 15 league games each out of 26 and have been substituted for quite a few of them. Mata is perhaps the only exception with 21 league apps, but a lot of substitutions too. Hazard has played in 25 and Dele Ali in 26 by comparison. With many more minutes for each.

Their conversion rate is actually quite tidy, though they could do better. Especially Mkhi who has quite a high ceiling.

 

[red4ever 79]

I think there's a bigger danger of Fellaini starting to compensate for Ibra's height. That'd be horrible.

It has to be Rashford up front but it needs to be with Mkhi or Mata behind him. Personally I'd have Mata central. He's up there as our best finisher so get him into as many goalscoring positions as possible. On the right he just doesn't get enough sights of goal.

Completely agree. Should be this

Miki Mata Martial
Rashford

 

[Dobbs]

Completely agree. Should be this

Miki Mata Martial
Rashford

I think lots of fans would like this and i think under SAF we'd see it. However as well know Mourinho is quite conservative. He might give it a go for 20mins but if it doesn't click right from the get go he'll revert to type.

Who am I to question José but I think we're more likely to see Rooney and Fellaini. He knows what he'll get from those guys. Even if it is bang average.

 

[MadMike]

I think there's a bigger danger of Fellaini starting to compensate for Ibra's height. That'd be horrible.

It has to be Rashford up front but it needs to be with Mkhi or Mata behind him. Personally I'd have Mata central. He's up there as our best finisher so get him into as many goalscoring positions as possible. On the right he just doesn't get enough sights of goal.

Completely agree. Should be this

Miki Mata Martial
Rashford

Guys, Mata does not play on the right. He defends on the right, but when we attack he has all the freedom to roam wherever he pleases. Here's his heatmap from the Bournemouth match:

The bright blot at the bottom right is from the corner-kicks. Otherwise he is drifting everywhere. You can have Mata on the right and Mkhi in the middle for your line-ups, but it doesn't make one bit of difference.

 

[Janson]

Zlatan's better than Rashford and Martial currently, that goes without saying. However if they played upfront they wouldn't play the role Ibra does. We would be playing probably with both of them up front in tandem in a different approach to the game. And my argument is that this alternative approach is needed when Ibra upfront on his own is not working out.

The other reason why our other players have not scored as many goals is because they have been rotated too heavily or have been out of the side all together. Both Martial and Mkhi were out of favour with Mou for periods. They have played in 15 league games each out of 26 and have been substituted for quite a few of them. Mata is perhaps the only exception with 21 league apps, but a lot of substitutions too. Hazard has played in 25 and Dele Ali in 26 by comparison. With many more minutes for each.

Their conversion rate is actually quite tidy, though they could do better. Especially Mkhi who has quite a high ceiling.

So you don't think there's maybe a reason why they've been rotated so much? Maybe because none of them have been good enough to claim a position. This imo is our biggest problem, not having anyone reliable to support the striker.

Are you seriously comparing Hazard and Alli with our attackers? Any of them would walk into our eleven easily.

 

[Dobbs]

Guys, Mata does not play on the right. He defends on the right, but when we attack he has all the freedom to roam wherever he pleases. Here's his heatmap from the Bournemouth match:

The bright blot at the bottom right is from the corner-kicks. Otherwise he is drifting everywhere. You can have Mata on the right and Mkhi in the middle for your line-ups, but it doesn't make one bit of difference.

I know what you're saying but it does make a difference. Even with the license to roam he still spends more time out on the right. Even more so if it's a difficult game where we have less of the ball than the Bournemouth game.

Look at the heatmap though. Maybe our best finisher and he's rarely central in and around the box. This in a game we completely dominated thus allowing him to go all over.

 

[MadMike]

So you don't think there's maybe a reason why they've been rotated so much? Maybe because none of them have been good enough to claim a position. This imo is our biggest problem, not having anyone reliable to support the striker.

Are you seriously comparing Hazard and Alli with our attackers? Any of them would walk into our eleven easily.

The reason why player don't get picked is not often evident to us. It might have to do with stuff they do (or don't do) in training, it might have to do with non-football related reason (like Shaw's mental strength etc). Mkhi was playing well before he was dropped and he was playing well after he got picked again. It's been debated 100 times in his thread.

I'm not fully deflecting criticism from them, they definitely need to do better. Also Hazard in particular is simply a better player, so there's that. I'm merely mentioning that their goal conversion (goals per shot and goals per minute) are actually comparable. Dele Alli has been outstanding but looking at the rest....

Player Goals-per-Minute
-------------------------------
Dele 192
Hazard 225
Martial 249
Mata 251
Mkhi 241

Someone had the shot's per goal as well. Where it's something like 2 shots per goal for our forwards because they simply don't shoot too much (except Pogba, but he's not a forward). Ibra's got over 4 shots per goal because he takes all the chances.

I don't see why you keep quoting me. You seem to think everything Ibra does is great and he's carrying us and he should never be subbed and it's everyone else's fault that we are not scoring more. While I think it's a multitude of reasons which include:

- Other forwards not consistently being played
- Other forwards not consistently performing
- Everything we create goes through Ibra and his league form has been patchy
- We don't seem to have a plan B for when Ibra is not playing well

Our opinion's are wildly different.

 

[MadMike]

I know what you're saying but it does make a difference. Even with the license to roam he still spends more time out on the right. Even more so if it's a difficult game where we have less of the ball than the Bournemouth game.

Look at the heatmap though. Maybe our best finisher and he's rarely central in and around the box. This in a game we completely dominated thus allowing him to go all over.

First bold statement: Well no, he doesn't. That's exactly what the heatmap proves. Just repeating it does not make it true.

Second bold statement: Ofc most of his time will be outside the box. That's for every player. we're not camping their 6-yard box are we? Also he won't be in the box for the set pieces because he's not tall enough or good header of the ball enough. Look at Ibra's heat map, also most time outside the box.

Mata's not a striker he moves about more. He's got a free role where he'll go wherever he thinks he can impact the game from the most. His most usual position is in fact central. Stop looking for stuff where isn't anything there.

 

[Dobbs]

First bold statement: Well no, he doesn't. That's exactly what the heatmap proves. Just repeating it does not make it true.

Second bold statement: Ofc most of his time will be outside the box. That's for every player. we're not camping their 6-yard box are we? Also he won't be in the box for the set pieces because he's not tall enough or good header of the ball enough. Look at Ibra's heat map, also most time outside the box.

Mata's not a striker he moves about more. He's got a free role where he'll go wherever he thinks he can impact the game from the most. His most usual position is in fact central. Stop looking for stuff where isn't anything there.

You've provided the heat map for one game and used that to dictate to me exactly where Mata plays. What about all the other games? Use your eyes. Don't tell me you can't tell who is playing where when Mata and Mkhi are on the pitch together.

Also I said in and around the box. In a game like Bournemouth we're just not getting him into central goalscoring positions. As your heatmap shows.

 

[RedMaestro]

Would Defoe be a good back-up for Ibra? Or is it bad to have two "oldies" and better to use Rashford? I was thinking that Defoe would maybe be willing to be a sub but every now and then when he gets a chance he would do a good job.