Domination of Football Matches - The next step for Manutd team

[justsomebloke]

I do think it's so much a style of play issue that's holding us back, and probably not as much of a technical issue on the ball as much as people think (there are teams with probably technically less able players that player better/more effective football).

I feel like as a club we've largely overlooked the importance of football intelligence when recruiting. We generally don't seem to have many players who make the right choices in terms of where to run and when, when to play a simple pass vs a difficult pass picking the right time to recycle the ball vs when to take their man on / put in a cross. When to get right vs when to drop off.

I'd say Martinez is an intelligent footballer. Bruno and Casemiro clearly have great vision, but I don't think either are consistent enough in choosing the right option at the right time, hence the often split opinions on them despite their ability to make a difference.

There's very few players at the club that I think stand out in terms of making the best choices in the game more often or not, and that's basically why are performances don't look great from an attacking perspectives. We have players with ability, so when the choices do end up being the right ones, we have a good chance of getting a goal, but mostly we don't make good choice in terms of off the ball movement, weight and speed of pass etc.

In my opinion, that's how you dominate a football match. It doesn't so much matter the set up, and yes you need a fair amount of technical ability, fitness, strength, all these things contribute, but you can have all that and still not 'dominate' if the majority of the team aren't clever enough to make good decisions and execute them most of the time.

I'd throw Mazraoui in there as well, and maybe Amad, plus Sesko is shaping up well in that regard.

And Lammens of course.

 

[Berggy20913]

I think the counter pressing style has now been reduced throughout the league. But that style of play only works with certain profile of players who are amazing at keeping the ball, because if you keep giving it away like we would do because we do not press such press resistant players, it would just result in our players getting knackered and injuries will pile up (I think the same happened with Ole, after his initial burst of great results).

Then we tried to implement a similar style with Ten Haag and tbh we were good at getting the ball higher up the pitch, but we were just terrible at finishing chances, retaining the ball or our press was not coordinated at all, leaving acres of space in behind the midfield.

There's a reason it's really only the teams with top squads that are able to play this way. Midfielders of that profile are at a premium these days and quite expensive. Even putting ability on the ball aside, I don't remember the last time I've seen United show a collective work ethic required to play like this on a consistent basis.

 

[andersj]

A first eleven consisting of Bruno, Mainoo, Sesko (as he looks right now) and two of our centerbacks will never be able to play a high line and really press like all the top teams in Europe do. It is simply not possible. At a minimum we have to:

- Play Cunha or Mbeumo for Sesko (or Sesko need to develop his off the ball capacity and intensity),
- Add a central midfielder in the mould og Tchuameni and Baleba in terms of pace and running power,
- Add a really quick and physically strong CB

Will we be able to play a high line and press if we succeed with this? I think so. But Mainoo and Bruno at 32 together in central midfield will be a challenge.

 

[bosnian_red]

The only thing acceptable for a club the size and resources of Manchester United is to be where City, Liverpool, PSG, Barcelona, Bayern, etc ... have been the past 5 to 10 years. I think we all agree on that. Not a single team on that list at their best was not dominant on the ball and playing on the front foot under a strict tactical and positional regime by a very tactical hands on coach. The styles differ of course from Klopp to Pep but the emphasis is on being the protagonist of the game, and not reactive. If Manchester United reach those highs of being competitive year in year out at the top, we would be the first one to do it in over 10 years without being tactically well drilled in a pro active system that dominates the ball and territory. Even the last great club standing that prioritised man management and minimum tactical obsession is struggling now to keep up and they do boast 2 or 3 Balon d'Or caliber of players in Mbappé, Vinicius and Bellingham.

Personally I've always felt Bayern should be the model of how we need to build our squad. They've always prioritized having top quality on the wings and a similar type of player for the past 15+ years. Pace, creativity, direct dribbling to take on their full backs... They've handled that transition really well, and they've stayed somewhat consistent in how they attack despite different managers & systems. Not all of them dominated play in a Pep way, but they had more transition heavy periods too. There are many ways to play football. Dominating matches comes naturally with just better players, but yes there is a level beyond that which comes with the tactical side. I don't think THAT extent is necessary for success, and generally it relies on finding an all time great system manager as well. Which good luck with that.

Also - you missed Madrid from your list. They aren't struggling to keep up now because they've fallen behind tactically. They're struggling to keep up because they don't have a balanced squad and favored a bunch of big names over players who mesh well together. They unbalanced themselves getting Mbappe and created friction in what functioned well with Rodrygo and Vini and a CF for them to play off of. But beyond that also they've had to deal with the loss of an all time great midfield 3, and they ignored actual passing playmakers in trying to replace them. Valverde is brilliant, not a passing playmaker. Tchouameni is one of the best DMs around, not a passing playmaker. Bellingham a really good #10, but best as a second striker more than a passing playmaker.

You don't need a crazy system for you to be successful and compete at the top. Yes when you combine world class players with a world class system (like Pep has done, like Luis Enrique has done), then that brings the highest level. But otherwise you can still be at an elite level by getting a balanced, complete team with the right quality in key positions, like Sir Alex always did.

 

[bosnian_red]

Generally, I don't want United to build toward a high press/possession dominant system. It's not A prioritized right now across football as it was a few years ago, but essentially what it did was flip the script on traditional football mentality and where you took risks.

Traditional/individualism football - cautious off the ball, take risks with the ball. Encourages individualism, creates more star players and more memorable moments & football IMO. Relies more on man management, general football understanding/team balance and having the right player quality, but a wider range of players who can make it work.

High press/possession "system" football - cautious with the ball to reduce your mistakes on it, risks out of possession to force the opposition into mistakes. Discourages freedom and individuality, is the era of football which for me is not as exciting, not as memorable, and more reliant on a very specific type of player and the manager being "one of the special ones" who can actually coach that.

I don't want United to build away from the "individualism". I don't want United to be a system club. United's about the mavericks in the game and having those world class exciting attackers, exciting wingers who have the freedom to leave their stamp on football. Very, very few managers are capable of bringing the best of both worlds. If you hit the jackpot, go for it, but generally safer to build the traditional way. Has a higher floor, you're less likely to flip as a team like we did under Ten Hag and Amorim, you'll be more consistent year to year and allow a steady build.

 

[Marcus]

Nah. Winning matches is much more important.

 

[sullydnl]

Possession is a product of player quality as much as anything else.

Even if you are not a notionally possession-focused side, if you are consistently one of the best sides in the league you will inevitably be a higher possession side. Maybe not relative to other elite sides with more of a possession focus, but relative to almost every other team in the league you have the requisite player quality advantage over.

And that means coaches having to place heavy emphasis on how to exploit that advantage is a non-negotiable. If we aren't keeping high amounts of possession and consistently turning it into positive outcomes, there's a fundamental problem with either the players, the coach, or both. At least relative to where we want to be, which is challenging for leagues consistently.

Pressing is more nuanced, but I certainly want to see high aggression, high workrate and good organisaton out of possession. I definitely wouldn't be happy if the limp midblock we've seen under Carrick so far was the longer term plan rather than just a pragmatic response to player limitations.

 

[golden_blunder]

Generally, I don't want United to build toward a high press/possession dominant system. It's not A prioritized right now across football as it was a few years ago, but essentially what it did was flip the script on traditional football mentality and where you took risks.

Traditional/individualism football - cautious off the ball, take risks with the ball. Encourages individualism, creates more star players and more memorable moments & football IMO. Relies more on man management, general football understanding/team balance and having the right player quality, but a wider range of players who can make it work.

High press/possession "system" football - cautious with the ball to reduce your mistakes on it, risks out of possession to force the opposition into mistakes. Discourages freedom and individuality, is the era of football which for me is not as exciting, not as memorable, and more reliant on a very specific type of player and the manager being "one of the special ones" who can actually coach that.

I don't want United to build away from the "individualism". I don't want United to be a system club. United's about the mavericks in the game and having those world class exciting attackers, exciting wingers who have the freedom to leave their stamp on football. Very, very few managers are capable of bringing the best of both worlds. If you hit the jackpot, go for it, but generally safer to build the traditional way. Has a higher floor, you're less likely to flip as a team like we did under Ten Hag and Amorim, you'll be more consistent year to year and allow a steady build.

Exactly his I feel. I don’t get this obsession some of our fans have with dominating play. Improving the team with better players will naturally do that anyway. No to recycling the ball endlessly for no reason

 

[Marwood]

The thing is that Manchester United are a transition team not a possession team. Always have been for as long as I can remember. LVG flirted with trying to make us a possession team and we were all bored as feck. Transition teams can be highly exciting and successful if done correctly with players that can take on their opponents at speed. This narrative that we struggle against low blocks is not in context because most teams struggle when the others park the bus. But we can beat those teams

It’s more the mentality that we need to address, a constant will to win your little battles throughout the pitch. Consistency

When we were winning stuff under SAF surely we had more of the ball in the vast majority of games?

 

[Ali Dia]

In the big games we've always been a transition / counter attack side with Scholes and Carrick in the middle. Two of our best midfielders ever. Same with Keane and Scholes. Against teams we're better than we just kept the ball and smashed teams. We just need to find that balance again in midfield.

We've all seen what we have been missing when we signed Casemiro. Now we are going to go out and do with the midfield what we did with the forwards last summer. Then in theory we will have more quality on the ball and be able to control and take the sting out of games much better.

With a proper ball winner in there too that's a whole other kettle of fish. The one thing apart from leadership is we are going to miss Casemiros goals but you would hope Sesko can get an extra 10 next season and the wingers improve too.

A lot of these guys now have serious top potential and they can see the club is pushing hard to raise standards across the board, we could suprise a lot of people if it clicks for them and especially the club get it right again in the market. Exciting times!

 

[Irwin99]

When we were winning stuff under SAF surely we had more of the ball in the vast majority of games?

Yeah, I’m pretty sure when I rewatched the famous win in Turin in 99 we had something like 55% at Juventus. That was not a smash and grab, defend deep performance. We utilised the long ball at times, but we could play.

As others have said, Sir Alex and Klopp had teams that were absolutely lethal on the transition but they bossed most games too. Same with Jose’s Real Madrid side. Most people don’t want to see a Pep style United and I agree but a good balance is key. Another example, that game in the premier league in 2010 where we smashed Arsenal 3-1 with several blistering counter attack goals…possession was 52% in our favour.

Occasionally I don’t mind going into a game like vs Barca in 2008 with an underdog mentality and just setting up to be defensive and break but I would like to see us play with more authority on the ball. I didn’t like that about Ole’s United in games. Yesterday there was a good half an hour where we couldn’t get hold of the ball at all and the technical quality on display wasn’t good. Hopefully Carrick-as quite a cultured midfielder himself- will address that because I don’t want to go through all that Ole/EtH stuff again.

 

[golden_blunder]

When we were winning stuff under SAF surely we had more of the ball in the vast majority of games?

Not by design. I would put that down to having good players who played together for a while. They could knock it about or play fast transition. LVG was the first to go dominate matches completely and it bored the life out of me. So much pointless passing and risk aversion.

 

[Marwood]

Not by design. I would put that down to having good players who played together for a while. They could knock it about or play fast transition. LVG was the first to go dominate matches completely and it bored the life out of me. So much pointless passing and risk aversion.

You can't be called a transition team when you have most of the ball in most of the games.

When you choose to have midfielders like Scholes, Keane and Carrick it's not happening by accident.

The teams that win the big stuff generally have more possession than the opposition in most of their games. It's a straightforward fact of football we shouldn't be trying to rally against.

 

[Ollie Derbyshire]

People talk about United DNA, rapid counterattacking football is our DNA in my opinion.

Yes we need to control possession against the ‘lesser’ clubs like we used to do but we also need to allow them to have possession, soak it up and counter.

That’s how I fondly remember our greatest nights under the lights.

 

[golden_blunder]

You can't be called a transition team when you have most of the ball in most of the games.

When you choose to have midfielders like Scholes, Keane and Carrick it's not happening by accident.

The teams that win the big stuff generally have more possession than the opposition in most of their games. It's a straightforward fact of football we shouldn't be trying to rally against.

I didn’t call us a transition team, I said our players could play both ways because they were good players. That I’m not against. I am however against the idea of having 70% off the ball and doing little with it

 

[Denis' cuff]

Discipline is the main feature with possession football. But also can be for a counter attacking team, where you need defensive discipline between counters. Brian Clough famously won two European cups and several titles with counter attacking teams with old, cast off players because they were disciplined in a period of Liverpool dominated possession era. I just don’t remember the best United teams being particularly discplined but we managed to soak up pressure at times but we’re famous for attacking in waves, whether Busby, Dicherty, saf and even Atkinson teams. The only times we attempted possession were under Sexton and LVG and it was mind numbingly boring. The United dna is not to sit deep and counter by design but to have the ability and discipline to defend as required and attack in waves with brilliant forwards. It doesn’t have to be one extreme or the other with the right balance of players, albeit with some degree of discipline. We have never been a ststems team or tactically nuanced team apart from some memorable, such performances but they were memorable because they weren’t the norm.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Basically be less ropey defensively. Our attacking output is ok, we struggle a bit but the quality I think is there + will seem much better with better full backs in my opinion (Dorgu might be that but obviously coming back from injury). Our issue is we need to manage games more, simple things like when you are 2 up against Liverpool and they have just scored a goal you stop playing from the back for a while, go long for 5mins and just mitigate some risk. Some of this is coaching, some is young players (mainoo and lammens made the errors) but generally i thikn our teams for years have had an issue with shutting games down.

 

[DJ_21]

We can’t dominate until we have a capable midfield and defence who can keep hold of the ball and are brave with it.

 

[Blood Mage]

Ultimately, we may just need to focus on results for next season. It will take two or three excellent transfer windows for us to build a dominant team, and we can't afford to lose CL revenue again.

 

[Marwood]

Possession is a product of player quality as much as anything else.

Even if you are not a notionally possession-focused side, if you are consistently one of the best sides in the league you will inevitably be a higher possession side. Maybe not relative to other elite sides with more of a possession focus, but relative to almost every other team in the league you have the requisite player quality advantage over.

And that means coaches having to place heavy emphasis on how to exploit that advantage is a non-negotiable. If we aren't keeping high amounts of possession and consistently turning it into positive outcomes, there's a fundamental problem with either the players, the coach, or both. At least relative to where we want to be, which is challenging for leagues consistently.

Pressing is more nuanced, but I certainly want to see high aggression, high workrate and good organisaton out of possession. I definitely wouldn't be happy if the limp midblock we've seen under Carrick so far was the longer term plan rather than just a pragmatic response to player limitations.

Yeah agree.

This doesn't need overthinking. If your team is 2nd best most games in terms of knocking the ball around it's highly likely down to player quality rather than tactics.

If your players are better than the opposition at receiving and passing the ball, you'll be the proactive team in control of the game.

 

[Lj82]

Yeah, I’m pretty sure when I rewatched the famous win in Turin in 99 we had something like 55% at Juventus. That was not a smash and grab, defend deep performance. We utilised the long ball at times, but we could play.

As others have said, Sir Alex and Klopp had teams that were absolutely lethal on the transition but they bossed most games too. Same with Jose’s Real Madrid side. Most people don’t want to see a Pep style United and I agree but a good balance is key. Another example, that game in the premier league in 2010 where we smashed Arsenal 3-1 with several blistering counter attack goals…possession was 52% in our favour.

Occasionally I don’t mind going into a game like vs Barca in 2008 with an underdog mentality and just setting up to be defensive and break but I would like to see us play with more authority on the ball. I didn’t like that about Ole’s United in games. Yesterday there was a good half an hour where we couldn’t get hold of the ball at all and the technical quality on display wasn’t good. Hopefully Carrick-as quite a cultured midfielder himself- will address that because I don’t want to go through all that Ole/EtH stuff again.

Understand what you are saying.
But I was thinking, the context may have changed in the sense that many of the mid-level teams in the EPL are playing more possession football, meaning that they will pass the ball around for quite a while before trying to break our defences. This would naturally eat away some of our possession. I mean talking crap here, but this is just my hunch.
Ultimately, I think control is more important than possession. If we take the City game as an example, we did not have much possession but we were fully in control of the game, and they barely had a sniff at our goal. This is in contrast with the Liverpool game where we totally lost control in the second half.
My hope for the team for next season is to build on that and have more control and balance for the majority of games.

 

[bringbackbebe]

We dominated the Liverpool game despite having just 37% possession. The two goals we let in were individual mistakes that can be cut out. Our transitional play is good against bigger teams. Against weaker teams, it's ineffective by construction.

 

[HanifaPopuslich]

We didn't have patience with LVG, who tried to coach possesion.
Amorim also, whatever that was, coached us to be good at presing.
Never saw club, where players are so lazy and don't want to be coached to anything elase than counter/direct football.

 

[RedStarUnited]

We didn't have patience with LVG, who tried to coach possesion.
Amorim also, whatever that was, coached us to be good at presing.
Never saw club, where players are so lazy and don't want to be coached to anything elase than counter/direct football.

Dont think you can say that without knowing if they are refusing to learn.

Yeah agree.

This doesn't need overthinking. If your team is 2nd best most games in terms of knocking the ball around it's highly likely down to player quality rather than tactics.

If your players are better than the opposition at receiving and passing the ball, you'll be the proactive team in control of the game.

I dont agree with this. Sunderland do not have better players than us. Various other teams also dont have better players but have better setups to counter us.

Control is as much about setup as your players. How that control translates to chances and limiting your opponents chances is where players make a difference.

 

[Big Ron’s Coat]

We didn't have patience with LVG, who tried to coach possesion.
Amorim also, whatever that was, coached us to be good at presing.
Never saw club, where players are so lazy and don't want to be coached to anything elase than counter/direct football.

LVG was horrific for us. The football was the worst I’ve seen at United by a distance. Possession for possession’s sake is pointless. His transfer targets were all awful and he cost us signing Kroos as well.

I genuinely loathe him.

 

[HanifaPopuslich]

LvG was horrific for us. The football was the worst I’ve seen at United by a distance. Possession for possession’s sake is pointless. His transfer targets were all awful and he cost us signing Kroos as well.

I genuinely loathe him.

Yeah we are so much better after LvG. And we won FA cup under him. Behave.

Kroos transfer is myth.

 

[Chairman Steve]

I wouldn’t even say we need possession domination in matches. I’d say we need more control of matches and nullifying the opposition. You can win by one goal which looks like a slender victory on paper, but within the context of the match, the opposition barely had a sniff at goal and they were largely sussed out.

Under Carrick, we have way too many matches that are on a knife edge until the final whistle à la Solskjaer era. Those types of games do happen for even the best teams but for those said best teams, it’s an irregular occurrence.

It feels like we have this type of game almost every week under Carrick and I think thats why so many fans including myself are apprehensive about having him in the permanent role. How many times can you get bailed out by Bruno magic, Casemiro headers and individual brilliance out of nowhere, before the whole thing just crumbles?

 

[tenpoless]

Just preparing for that now mate

 

[ElCuddlos]

The next step for United is to grow the squad and get used to rotating players with as little drop off in performance as possible. We need to get back to playing 50+ games a season and competing on multiple fronts. We are miles off looking to be a team that consistently dominates matches.

 

[gajender]

Yeah we are so much better after LvG. And we won FA cup under him. Behave.

Kroos transfer is myth.

No it's not groundwork for Kroos signing was done under Moyes and he actually waited for United to contact him even after Moyes dismissal but we never did once Van Gaal was appointed it's been confirmed by Kroos himself .

 

[Glorio]

I'd settle for us playing better than most of the opponents we play and having better control (I'm not looking for 70% possession or something wild like that).

These days everyone seems to have us wilting on the ropes apart from the big games where we game raise. Even Chelsea looked the better team against us, Sunderland has lost how many of their last home games now and they were ragdolling us about the place. 10 man teams have beaten us twice this year, under both managers.

 

[gajender]

The next step for United is to grow the squad and get used to rotating players with as little drop off in performance as possible. We need to get back to playing 50+ games a season and competing on multiple fronts. We are miles off looking to be a team that consistently dominates matches.

Next step for United should be to improve the quality of first eleven we are nowhere at the stage where we should be thinking about quality of rotational players when our first eleven is nothing to shout about in terms of talent and performance , most of them should be relegated to bench or sold in next couple of seasons .

 

[AndySmith1990]

Domination is never going to happen until we finally overhaul midfield and bring it up to the standard of the elite teams. We haven't had a good midfield since before 2010. The decline of our midfield led to the initial "zombie football" complaints, and it's been a constant problem ever since.

 

[The Urban Goose]

Domination is never going to happen until we finally overhaul midfield and bring it up to the standard of the elite teams. We haven't had a good midfield since before 2010. The decline of our midfield led to the initial "zombie football" complaints, and it's been a constant problem ever since.

And get rid of defenders like Shaw, Dalot and Maguire, but apparently around here it's heresy to even suggest Maguire isn't good enough.

Domination will also never happen without full backs who can get forward and back and join in attacking play without constantly losing possession, and without quick CBs who don't get a nosebleed if the defensive line strays beyond the 18 yard box.

 

[Bright_Eyes]

Yeah agree.

This doesn't need overthinking. If your team is 2nd best most games in terms of knocking the ball around it's highly likely down to player quality rather than tactics.

If your players are better than the opposition at receiving and passing the ball, you'll be the proactive team in control of the game.

Tactics make a big difference to possession. If your players are asked to stretch the field and play more long balls and vertical passes their team's possession % will naturally be less than if they're asked to stay close together and play short passes to each other, regardless of how good they are.

 

[Marwood]

Tactics make a big difference to possession. If your players are asked to stretch the field and play more long balls and vertical passes their team's possession % will naturally be less than if they're asked to stay close together and play short passes to each other, regardless of how good they are.

But tactics are often based on the skillset of the players a manager has available. If he has a bunch of small, technical players no manager is saying "go long".

Tactics you can pick or choose. Players ability to receive, turn and pass a ball is the fixed, major dictator in controlling a game.

We go a bit longer because a bunch of our guys aren't great in small spaces or can be loose in possession. We've had various different managers with them, different tactics and it's broadly the same outcome in terms of controlling games.

Our best two players, Casemiro and Bruno, their weakness is receiving the ball in tight areas and manipulating their way out.

 

[cpresc]

The best teams which are able to dominate games and win in style throughout my 25 years of watching football has always been structured around having at least 6 to 7 outfield players which are very good technically and are able to keep possession when pressed, plus able to interplay quickly in tight spaces against low blocks and create chances.

In my time the best football Manutd played was between 2006 to 2009, where we dominated the game and had the likes of Scholes, Carrick, Rio, Rooney, Ronaldo, Saha, Giggs, who were all very very good under pressure and could play through teams. Then the likes of Barca team with Xavi, Iniesta, Messi, Busquets, Pedro, Villa, Alves which was littered with technically superior players. Madrid also had a period of sustained success with Modric, Kroos, Marcelo, Ramos, Ronaldo, Benzema, Bale.

City also had a lot of success with technically amazing players such as David Silva, Toure, Gundagon, De Bruyne, Aguero, Kompany etc. The kept up with the same formula when they won treble they had Rodri, Grealish, Stones, De Bruyne, Foden, Gundagon etc. One of the reasons why Arsenal are also doing well is because they have a good blend of technically neat players in Odegaard, Saka, Rice, Zubimendi, Saliba and Timber who are all excellent at keeping the ball, progressing with it and then winning corners of course.

Now looking at our team, I believe last season we signed good players attackingly in Mbeumo and Cunha, but we missed a trick, instead of going for players who were great technically in tight spaces and help us to dominate football, we went for players who are effective in large spaces and at counter attacking football, this has been our constant Achilles heel and problem with our recruitment for years. We never go for a player who has all these attributes as in technically great but also fast, we seem to find either one or another. I believe we should have gone for the likes of Eze or Pedro or Kudus (not necessarily these players but these types) who are excellent in tight spaces, fast and good interplay, which would have allowed us dominate more and be more effective against these teams sitting deep.

Our team has basically only two at most three players who are excellent at keeping the ball in Mainoo, Amad and Licha, this results in us being very ineffective against teams who give us the ball and ask us to breakdown (Westham, Palace or Everton etc) or even press us relentlessly (Newcastle). I have used recent examples because it gives us good idea because we are at least playing everybody in their best positions and resemble to a footballing side.

I think we can somewhat rectify the same problem by signing two midfielders and one full back which possess the same qualities (press resistant and excellent at keeping the ball and progressing with it), but we will still be flawed because our attackers will be main outliners and regardless of how good the midfield and defense are at keeping the ball and progressing, eventually in the final third the attackers have to connect with short passes in tight spaces where Cunha, Mbeumo and Bruno are very inconsistent and will result in constant turnover of the ball and us getting sucker punched at counter.

Now the dilemma we have for next manager is, shall we continue the counter attacking football type because our most recent signings and our best player is comfortable/effective with it. That may result in us being restricted to top 4 team and very good results against top sides but patchy results against bottom sides (basically Ole like football and top 4 finishes). Or with new possession based manager we shuffle the pack and sign LW who is very good technically and keeping he ball (Grealish clone basically at his best) and get two CMs and LB who are elite in press resistance and technically, carry only Bruno as a player who is likely to give away the ball, only then we can transition slowly from top 4 side to PL winning team.

But that’s clearly not our “game model” is it.

We’re looking at physicality and pace, ie prioritising the PL. Dorgu and Sesko represent that. Lammens as a keeper who’s not g great with his feet is arguably also another example

Tika Tika doesn’t align with Utd’s cultural playing style nor does it align with the style of our best player Bruno

 

[NZT-One]

You don't need a crazy system for you to be successful and compete at the top. Yes when you combine world class players with a world class system (like Pep has done, like Luis Enrique has done), then that brings the highest level. But otherwise you can still be at an elite level by getting a balanced, complete team with the right quality in key positions, like Sir Alex always did.

One way to look at it would be to look for synergies. Great players who play together, at best not only for a little while but for a longer time, will learn more about each other which will help them maximizing their output. For the longest time in football, that was a development, that happened organically here and there, sometimes helped by great coaches who were really good at picking the right fits character and ability wise, sometimes even without great coaches having to interfer at all. With the rise of more systematical approaches, teams tried to accelerate or even manufacture that kind of synergies to a degree. With the result of one phrase popping up more and more "being better than the sum of all parts". Obviously this isn't just a thing since 2009 or 2010 but since then, we haven't seen such developments only in the greatest clubs but also in smaller ones.
We can of course focus on choosing the right players who are very talented and then wait until the synergies emerge organically but I'd say that would restrict our ability to grow - it makes you reliant on adding great players (who are usually expensive) and you rely on them remaining in form. The alternative would be to do that but help that with a degree of nudging towards more systematical approaches. Great players in form will still be important of course but some of the rough edges can be smoothed out by modern methods. Our opponents use them, why wouldn't we?

This doesn't need overthinking. If your team is 2nd best most games in terms of knocking the ball around it's highly likely down to player quality rather than tactics.

No. It all depends on the game plan. 2007/2008 semi final against Barcelona, the Barcelona players weren't so much better than our players as the possession or pass statistics would make you believe. It was a decision of our manager to keep it tight at the back and put focus on attacking with the fast forwards we had. Gameplan is king. Obviously some gameplans work better than others depending on the set of players at your disposal but at the highest level, the players aren't just out there figuring stuff out on the go.

If your players are better than the opposition at receiving and passing the ball, you'll be the proactive team in control of the game.

Well yes and no. The often forgotten factor in such equations is the opponent, a living thinking entity that goes into games against us with the exact objective we do - maximize the chances to get a positive result. Once opposition teams figured out that Oles team ran really hot once there was space in behind to exploit, they started to take that space away. And the struggle began. It had nothing to do with our players suddenly struggling with their counter ability or us struggling with adapting to a more possession heavy style - those games were the result of our opposition knowing our tendencies and trying to exploit it.

Which is why the whole debate about dominating is a bit odd - it isn't a question that is about personal preferences. The successful teams in the last years were always able to attack quickly and to hurt teams on the counter. Who thinks, that 2008 Barcelona or City or PSG wouldn't be able to do that, is plain wrong. They have/had that ability but they added more abilities on top. This is the issue of United - while United under Ole got the ability to attack quick to a very high degree, it failed to make the next step. And thats what is needed to become a really good team - being able to deal multiple plans opposition will throw at you. If your opponents wants to press you very high - great, keep it tight at the back and exploit the space at the back. If your opponents tries to park the bus, increase the speed of your passing to move him until he makes a mistake and there are gaps to exploit. If the opponent wants to use possession to control you, press them high.

The question isn't whether we prefer this kind or that kind of football. It is about the ability to deal with different game plans.

But tactics are often based on the skillset of the players a manager has available. If he has a bunch of small, technical players no manager is saying "go long".

Thats true, but it is a bit of a non starter. Because the skillsets you have available in a team should be decided by "how do we want to play".

We go a bit longer because a bunch of our guys aren't great in small spaces or can be loose in possession. We've had various different managers with them, different tactics and it's broadly the same outcome in terms of controlling games.

The issue isn't just ability of players. It is player profiles. Other teams don't have so much better players and still look more comfortable on the ball than we do. It isn't about "quality" of players it is about the organisation. If you have always two or three options to pass towards, it is easier to play a passing game, you don't need to be Xavi to do it. Uniteds issue was that the only way to a) look somewhat decent attackingwise is when going long and b) look defensively apt when keeping it tight at the back. As long as we don't change those abilities, we will always fall back.

Our best two players, Casemiro and Bruno, their weakness is receiving the ball in tight areas and manipulating their way out.

Thats oversimplifying the issue to almost an extreme. While that observation is correct, it is only part of the issue - way bigger issue is the lack of athleticism. When your defenders are scared to leave space in behind, they will naturally play deeper. Which means, the midfielders will play deeper because you don't want the distances between the lines to be too big - that obviously also effects the forwards. With Casemiro, Maguire, Martinez and Shaw - potentially also with Mainoo (could change), we are always bound to struggle with that issue. And the technical level of players won't change that - they could be twice as good as they are now and it would still be an issue.

 

[Bastian]

What is the likelihood Aaron Danks will be recruited? And what is the inside scoop on him? Completely passed me by that he'd been a caretaker at Villa between Gerrard's sacking and Emery being appointed. He was classified as "attacking coach" in some of the reports from last week. Is he the guy who will help change a counter attacking outfit into a team that presses from the front as a collective and maintains a healthy tempo against the low blocks?

Whilst I continue to doubt there is a clear footballing vision at the club (i.e. Berrada/Wilcox) if I could create one filter for our recruitment I'd sign players who could play for an Enrique. He's got loads of quality, high technical level, high physical level, but most impressively they all work hard.

 

[golden_blunder]

LVG was horrific for us. The football was the worst I’ve seen at United by a distance. Possession for possession’s sake is pointless. His transfer targets were all awful and he cost us signing Kroos as well.

I genuinely loathe him.

I feel the same. Lvg genuinely almost put me right off football. I don’t know how anyone remembers his time with any fondness