[Yorkeontop]

Sure, but your post made it sound like he's not quite at the top standard, I disagree, he absolutely is top draw. Hes just surrounded by dross.

I was amending my post as you replied.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I was amending my post as you replied.

I see now, yeh to be honest I agree with you here. He should be an influential player in a functioning system, nothing more.

 

[Scandi Red]

Guys, I think Rooney meant it more literally. You build around Bruno. In other words, you leave Bruno in the starting lineup and replace the players around him (minus some of the young ones, although they must still fight for their spot and keep improving).

 

[Red in STL]

Laugh all you want but as far as I am aware of, it was this position that DVB played in the Ajax side that probably earned ETH the United job. Granted, he might have had a purple patch and it doesn't mean anything, but it is at least a little odd that he hasn't been given a shot at all.


I completely agree with you. If people wanted to replace Fred with Mount then my best guess is that those people didn't have any idea of what the positive thing was that Fred added to the team. It certainly wasn't on the ball stuff - it was is mobility, energy, workrate and willingness to get stuck in. No question that Mount is way better on the ball but apart from that... It has to be said, that it fits the picture of our team composition, not just decision makers, also a part of the fanbase. They are ready for the glass cannon approach - adding as many people to the team for their ability in attack or ability on the ball but failing to get the balance right for the moments where we have to actually win the ball or defend as a whole. McTominay as DM, McTominay as CM, Bruno as CM, Eriksen as CM... Doesn't make no sense. Now you see Mainoo and Amrabat who are at least average in those off the ball aspects and it is obvious how benefitial it is to the team overall. You can have prime Casemiro in there, it still wouldn't be enough to carry all the defensive load to have Mount and Bruno free to attack. Maybe if you have Kante in his prime, maybe. But probably not even that.


I think this Rashford comment was in the context of Bruno celebrating a certain number of appearances or something. So the notion of him leaving doesn't really hold up.

Or maybe Rashford is the one leaving!

 

[GoldanoGraham]

Let me guess you're one of people who think the likes of Hojlund are good enough for the club.

What kind of stupid comment is that?

The point was that while there are plenty of players that need moving on - Bruno isnt one of them.

 

[STYLOISRED]

Let me guess you're one of people who think the likes of Hojlund are good enough for the club.

Wierd post.

 

[Lyng]

Let me guess you're one of people who think the likes of Hojlund are good enough for the club.

Living up to your tagline

 

[Son]

He’s one of the best players in the world but I’m sorry can we stop putting players on 350k a week after they have played at their peaks.

I would almost certainly sell if we get a 90m offer. He’s been Mr consistent the last 5 years but a 5 year deal on twice the salary until he is 34 I just don’t understand why the club wouldn’t sell while he’s hot.

The future of our club is without Bruno and Rashford. We need to rebuild with a different style of football overall. More control in midfield despite his obvious world class ability creatively.

Will be sad to see him go he’s been a great player for us but we can’t be handing out giant contracts to 29 year olds. I just don’t agree with that tactic.

 

[ddg01]

Gives the ball away far too much. Not a captain and we will never compete at the top level with him in the team. He’s played better the last few games but that doesn’t mask the vast majority of the season.

 

[tomaldinho1]

If the rumours re contract are true then Ineos are already doing something right. He’s already paid a feck load and we can’t be giving out big contracts to older players.

 

[lost7]

That was a pre-March/April/May bruno performance

 

[Gabriel Djemba-Bebe]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Cue the caf rage over 'Statman Dave cherry picking stats' and 'chances created isn't a proper stat'.

 

[Dobba]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Cue the caf rage over 'Statman Dave cherry picking stats' and 'chances created isn't a proper stat'.

Wish the bastard would stop holding us back with his obsession with creating more chances than anyone else in the division.

 

[Desert Eagle]

Why is our Xg so crap if this master chance creator has been serving it up for two seasons now?

 

[V.O.]

Why is our Xg so crap if this master chance creator has been serving it up for two seasons now?

Because our wingers would rather twat it at a defenders shins or the side netting from a ridiculous angle than square it to somebody else with an open goal, probably.

 

[Kirk lazarus]

Why is our Xg so crap if this master chance creator has been serving it up for two seasons now?

He's got 8 assists this season and 8 assists last season .

When we see that Bruno created 114 chances , yet the team he created 114 chances in had an xg of 55 and has scored 55 . It begs the question that you asked , what are we missing in translation ? .

It's not really poor finishing because we'd be underscoring xg .

What is the xg of those 114 chances? I suspect the chances may be heavily swayed by his individual corner and free kick taking?

My eyes tell me that we don't create good chances . For a time it seemed we mastered 1 type of consistently creating , put the fast guy through from deep . It's not enough though .

 

[Lyng]

Why is our Xg so crap if this master chance creator has been serving it up for two seasons now?

How can you watch the likes of Antony and Garnacho match after match and still ask that question?

 

[Desert Eagle]

How can you watch the likes of Antony and Garnacho match after match and still ask that question?

Garnacho has probably had a better season than Bruno.

He's got 8 assists this season and 8 assists last season .

When we see that Bruno created 114 chances , yet the team he created 114 chances in had an xg of 55 and has scored 55 . It begs the question that you asked , what are we missing in translation ? .

It's not really poor finishing because we'd be underscoring xg .

What is the xg of those 114 chances? I suspect the chances may be heavily swayed by his individual corner and free kick taking?

My eyes tell me that we don't create good chances . For a time it seemed we mastered 1 type of consistently creating , put the fast guy through from deep . It's not enough though .

Good post and I agree with both of your conclusions.

 

[Marwood]

Garnacho has probably had a better season than Bruno.



Good post and I agree with both of your conclusions.

How would you rate Garnacho's chance creation though?

 

[Yagami]

A lot of people have been suggesting Bruno as a false 9 for a long time now and I've always been against it. Yesterday was a good example as to why. He's terrible at holding the ball up. Whether that's being weak in the air, weak under pressure and in tight spaces, or, if he gets the ball, too sloppy with it when trying to break on the counter.

If we play him there against City, I think we barely get out of our half. We will struggle to get in their half regardless, sure, but at least with Hojlund we have someone who can potentially hold the ball up when the chance arrives. Though I wouldn't be surprised if he's kept as a super sub and we use Bruno and McTominay as our two false 9s again.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Why is our Xg so crap if this master chance creator has been serving it up for two seasons now?

You actually have to ask that question?! Have you watched Manchester United these last two seasons? Did it occur to you that our xG might be a bit better if a couple of other players shared the whole chance creation thing? Because it’s been painfully obvious to me that the other attacking players have been absolutely shite at this important part of their job.

 

[NZT-One]

You actually have to ask that question?! Have you watched Manchester United these last two seasons? Did it occur to you that our xG might be a bit better if a couple of other players shared the whole chance creation thing? Because it’s been painfully obvious to me that the other attacking players have been absolutely shite at this important part of their job.

It might be. It also might be around the same with Bruno having slightly lesser numbers. Difficult to establish which scenario has what likelyhood I guess. Fact of the matter is that the chance creation ability of our team is something that actually prevents us from being higher up the table. xG wise we ended the season as the 12th best team, goals wise as the 9th best team. Maybe it isn't as important to have one player with such freak numbers to be productive. Maybe, those numbers lead to drawing wrong conclusions about what is needed for this team to be functional.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Why is our Xg so crap if this master chance creator has been serving it up for two seasons now?

Because how they calculate chances/assists is inaccurate as feck. Plus we have a very young inconsistent forward line and Rashford out of form.

 

[NZT-One]

Because how they calculate chances/assists is inaccurate as feck. Plus we have a very young inconsistent forward line and Rashford out of form.

Last part would explain the number of goals. Not necessarily xG. There is nothing around our productivity in the final third being not good. This year it might be really really bad but even in the years before, isn't great either. That isn't a stick to beat Bruno with though, but it helps to draw a complete picture - listing all his individual numbers isn't really providing the full picture. Which is mostly the point of criticism towards him.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Last part would explain the number of goals. Not necessarily xG. There is nothing around our productivity in the final third being not good. This year it might be really really bad but even in the years before, isn't great either. That isn't a stick to beat Bruno with though, but it helps to draw a complete picture - listing all his individual numbers isn't really providing the full picture. Which is mostly the point of criticism towards him.

Was thinking more if he passes to Garnacho, for example, who then should shoot but cuts back, that wouldn't register for xG but is a good chance. A lot of the time it's not our finishing but decision making up top that hurts us. Since we tweaked things and around when Hojlund came back goals haven't been as big an issue as people make out but they were early on, first half of the season we were dreadful.

1st half of the season we averaged 1.1 goals a game. That's woeful.
In the second half of the season we average 1.89 which is very good if you have a decent defence.

 

[Teja]

What is the xg of those 114 chances? I suspect the chances may be heavily swayed by his individual corner and free kick taking?

It's pretty easy to look up. Last year he was up there with guys like KdB. This year he still created a boat load but not up there in terms of xAG/90. That correlates quite strongly to the team's performances and honestly I'm surprised that he got the numbers he did this year.

He is absolute class, one of the few players who should be mainstay in the team for the next 3 years at least.

22/23


23/24

 

[Desert Eagle]

How would you rate Garnacho's chance creation though?

Not great

 

[Desert Eagle]

You actually have to ask that question?! Have you watched Manchester United these last two seasons? Did it occur to you that our xG might be a bit better if a couple of other players shared the whole chance creation thing? Because it’s been painfully obvious to me that the other attacking players have been absolutely shite at this important part of their job.

The whole point is about sharing the chance creation thing. The way Bruno plays and the way managers have set him up and how his teammates play with him have contributed to inflated Bruno stats at the detriment of our overall attacking play.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

The whole point is about sharing the chance creation thing. The way Bruno plays and the way managers have set him up and how his teammates play with him have contributed to inflated Bruno stats at the detriment of our overall attacking play.

Nothing to do with wide players and attackers playing badly then? Because to me it’s fairly fecking obvious they have been. Which is all Bruno’s fault, or something?

The mad thing to me is that the most vocal Bruno critics have all been ripping into how bad the likes of Rashford, Martial, Sancho and Antony have been for most of these last two seasons. Surely it’s obvious why his individual creative stats have been good, while the team’s ability to convert those chances and/or create their own has been poor?

 

[Roane]

I will probably get slated here but Bruno kind of reminds me of Stevie G at Liverpool.

Now no one can say SG was a bad player. He was Mr Liverpool. Similarly you can't say Bruno is a bad player, albeit he isn't at the status level SG held at Liverpool.

Where I think they were the same/similar was in game play.

What I mean was that they had good numbers. Could change the game. Yet it was often in my opinion to the detriment of the team. As in they didn't really keep structure and discipline. The team had to compensate for them doing what they wanted.

This can give you magical moments but likes of SAF and Pep would have reigned this in.

 

[Insanity]

I will probably get slated here but Bruno kind of reminds me of Stevie G at Liverpool.

Now no one can say SG was a bad player. He was Mr Liverpool. Similarly you can't say Bruno is a bad player, albeit he isn't at the status level SG held at Liverpool.

Where I think they were the same/similar was in game play.

What I mean was that they had good numbers. Could change the game. Yet it was often in my opinion to the detriment of the team. As in they didn't really keep structure and discipline. The team had to compensate for them doing what they wanted.

This can give you magical moments but likes of SAF and Pep would have reigned this in.

You are not wrong. And yes, there is every chance you may get hounded for this.

The only thing I'd differ with, Gerrard was a better player.

 

[Roane]

You are not wrong. And yes, there is every chance you may get hounded for this.

The only thing I'd differ with, Gerrard was a better player.

Oh no doubt. SG was a powerhouse of a player. And maybe he felt he had to do what he did as those around him were not of a similar level. It's interesting how he played when Alonso was with him. Also Torres to a degree. He seemed to change slightly.

Maybe Bruno has the same issues? I can see his frustrations sometimes when he is on the ball and nobody is making the runs or quite up to his level.

 

[Marwood]

I will probably get slated here but Bruno kind of reminds me of Stevie G at Liverpool.

Now no one can say SG was a bad player. He was Mr Liverpool. Similarly you can't say Bruno is a bad player, albeit he isn't at the status level SG held at Liverpool.

Where I think they were the same/similar was in game play.

What I mean was that they had good numbers. Could change the game. Yet it was often in my opinion to the detriment of the team. As in they didn't really keep structure and discipline. The team had to compensate for them doing what they wanted.

This can give you magical moments but likes of SAF and Pep would have reigned this in.

Giggs gave the ball away loads trying to create. In fact the older he got the more he gave it away. There was no reigning him in.

 

[DJ_21]

Although he’s apparently had a bad season he’s still created the most chances for like the 4th season in a row apparently. His numbers are insane.

 

[#07]

https://x.com/OptaJoe/status/1793276879560200208

 

[SAF is the GOAT]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[FerociousCorgis]

I will probably get slated here but Bruno kind of reminds me of Stevie G at Liverpool.

Now no one can say SG was a bad player. He was Mr Liverpool. Similarly you can't say Bruno is a bad player, albeit he isn't at the status level SG held at Liverpool.

Where I think they were the same/similar was in game play.

What I mean was that they had good numbers. Could change the game. Yet it was often in my opinion to the detriment of the team. As in they didn't really keep structure and discipline. The team had to compensate for them doing what they wanted.

This can give you magical moments but likes of SAF and Pep would have reigned this in.

think the perfect comparison from us over here in america would be that hes like russell westbrook of the nba. Dude would put up absolutely insane numbers. Averaged a triple double for the year, which was just absolutely insane at the time. One of the only people to do that for several seasons as well. But he is just a chaotic force out there and never really helped his team with overall success. Im just not sure you can have success anymore with someone like bruno, even if his stats can be looked on favorably.

 

[Based Adnan]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Dalot been robbed

 

[#07]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

No qualms.

Dalot been robbed

There's a degree of rose tinted glasses with this. He's played better than most. However, he does have the tendency to get caught out. Especially when the ball is in the air. To be fair to him its not always his fault because Ten Hag's system expects him to cover acres of space. But there have been more than a few goals we've conceded where Dalot's radar had just seem to malfunction outta nowhere.

 

[AngeloHenriquez]

Dalot been robbed

I voted for Dalot too, constantly available and played out of position - Scored/ assisted a few timely goals but overall if you look for evidence to support yourself he's not in the top 10 attacking fullbacks for creating chances/ scoring goals/ cross etc and he's not in the top 10 for defensive metrics either oddly so perhaps its just that he stands out because everybody else in defense was always injured