This is fair, my main concern though is that once a manager hits a bad spell at United then the knives are out and it's only really a matter of time once the narrative is set and the media get their teeth in. As a club I think we need a coach to be here for a few years, working alongside a proper recruitment structure, to be able to weed out the players who clearly will never bring the club top honours and to install a culture and way of playing that has us pointing in the right direction. My belief is that the likes of Potter, Lopetegui and De Zerbi don't have the standing to be able to get through the rough periods that will be there along the way, similar to the current manager.
Erik ten Hag - Manchester United manager
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
Not really, calling the game against City “small margins” when we were battered for more than 50 minutes is not really building anyone’s confidence. In fact, players will quickly see through these comments and lose more confidence in the manager’s ability to lead.
He kept on harping on being consistent over last 2 months, when anyone watching objectively could tell that this performance base for built on a house of cards.
Lost all faith in him - he needs to go back to the drawing board with his coaching team and come up with a plan that is not as suicidal and one that works in this league.
Why is he so bad at signing players who previously played for him? Antony is terrible, Amrabat was cheaper but might be even worse
Amrabat is a loan. Do you think if he had a proper budget for a central midfielder he lands on Amrabat?
Ultimately, he would just be an utterly pointless appointment imo.
Good questions, I think. I also agree on the main premise.
- Can he work with a new structure delivering on profiles rather than on concrete players EtH knows? We will find out now, but I certainly believe so, because at Ajax, Ten Hag was not heavily involved in identifying and deciding on players, he was forced to trust Overmars plus the Academy line there and did well with it. The feckup at United, wether it is the mistake of Murtaugh as I believe you think (?), or a weakness of changes happening too slow under Glazers leading to recruitment team being in full upheaval and Ten Hag getting full sway over recruitments ‘temporarily’. Problem is it might take another year just to get a new DoF/Recruitment set up to gel with any manager including EtH, so we might not know wether it’s too late anyhow.
- Injuries: cause or effect? Certainly I hope EtH, Murtaugh, O’Driscoll and Ashworth(?) are already on that ball heavily. We know Klopp have consistently tried and failed, tried and succeeded with the level of physical output to demand from players versus injuries and burn-out. Guardiola has troubled with this early on, but has had a full squad of elite players two for every position as long as he’s been there. Remember players we’re bought with Pep’s football in mind for two seasons even before he entered the door. For me it seems likely that we’ve overtaxed certain players last year to get CL, due to how few players we had who were up to EtH’s football. It’s likely the combo of WC-in-december-season and commercially planned US preseason, with EtH’s preseason regime hasn’t worked well and is partly resonsible for making us vulnerable. Stuff like this is difficult to calculate theoretically, so for me the biggest question is not if EtH has overtaxed players in preseason at the wrong points, but wether he is able to evaluate, learn and succesfully adjust to such a mistake. Unfortunately, with both new DoF and new medical supervisor new to the staff, none of them will have first hand experience with what happened in the summer, so hardto evaluate properly. Probably a lot will hinge on the verdict of the experienced players give the new regime, is my guess.
Egos - Last season was extremely uplifting. To me, Sancho also seems correctly and rightly handled, given the thick evidence of cultural issues at United pre Ten Hag. Is Varane and Rashford implications of their issues or Ten Hag’s issues or both? Hard to say. Varane has growing weaknesses, a CL winner/World Champion who is struggling to feel secure with his tasks in a tactical setup can be hard to handle for anyone. He seems like he’s going along with it now, but who knows how it looks behind the scenes. Rashford is Rashford, there’s already been too much fan expertise about his inconsistency IMO. It always leads to huge scapegoating of either him or managers, while probably he’s just a player with very marked strengths and limitations.
- CM setup. It seems EtH has been going for a very ambitious set up in terms of ability to attack with midfielders/defenders. As Guardiola have shown, that demands a whole lot from coherence and discipline - AND some very special player types to tie up the attack/defence balance (Busquets, Fernandinho, Rodri). Pep has always been vulnerable lacking those lynchpins. EtH has had one season with short term makeshifts (Case and Erikson) and square pegs (Fred and McT), and going into this season with Case, Mainoo, Mount and Bruno was a very interesting and debatable ambition, completely ruined by injuries to Mount, Mainoo and Case (plus age). Can it work, even be brilliant, given time and trust? We have very little idea, apart from EtH showing at Ajax that he could very much out of very different midfield constallations in pretty short time. I think he knows what he’s doing, but it might still not work
This is mostly my guesswork. I don’t think any fans can be too sure about these answers, honestly. The new regime will also have to make quite a few intelligent guesses about this, and give Ten Hag another season or not on the back of those impressions and guestimations.
More and more i believe that he is dead man walking.
Maybe new management would forgive 6th place but i doubt that they forgive complete lack of playing style.
Maybe new management would forgive 6th place but i doubt that they forgive complete lack of playing style.
I’m pretty sure even Berrada and Brailsford have no trouble identifying that Ten Hag both has a current playing style with this team, and ideal playing style based on having the right players at hand. It is not so difficult for people with a bit of coaching knowledge watching a few thorough analysis to identify.
The Scandinavian Branch of the Supporters club has access to an interesting collaborator, the football expert of the Norwegian Olympic Centre, Øyvind Eide, who has a high level of coaching competence and is a United fan, and has analysed most United games the last four years. Those are very interesting analysis, and one thing he is not at all worried about is wether Ten Hag has tactical competence or a well thought-through set of playing styles and principles. It is more a question if he can get the players to understand, learn, trust and execute them well enough, get the right players and crack the PL code well enough and fast enough not to lose the players, the fans and/or the club regime.
When was the last time we tactically outclassed the opposition instead of winning because we have the better players who can do brilliant stuff?
Just sack him already and give it to McClaren til the end of the season.
To mods: Why am I not able to put this user on ignore? I can’t access the profile to put on ignore, while I can access seemingly anyone else. The user’s posts reads like a Putin/Trump/Duterte style aggressive bot, and lowers the experience and quality of the forum significantly. Have I misunderstood the ignore function? Thanks in advance for any help you can give shedding light on this issue.
Barcelona in the EL will always stands out for me. Brilliant over the two legs.
I wouldn't worry about it. Looks like he was banned.
Yeah we were fantastic that game, we were first to every second ball and Barcelona couldn’t live with us. That was peak unfortunately
Manchester United fans love their buzzwords. Our fans know the square root of feck all about the role of a structure as always, because our fans are so far out of touch when it comes to modern football.
The role of the structure is not primarily there to support the manager. That's bullshit - clubs with better structures than us, run through more managers than we do. It's such a shockingly terrible take that gets refuted by the fact that the most successful club of the last decade has had more fecking managers than us.
The role of the structure is to manage the single biggest liability that the football club has at any given time - and that liability is actually the managers role. It's a volatile role - with as a big of a downside as its upside - unless you fluke yourself into one of the all time grears. The manager has no tangible asset value, costs millions in salary every year and also costs £10s of millions in disposal fees when you need to move.
The organisational structure is there to manage this liability - so the club doesn't face any long term repercussions from a managers tenure, while he achieves short term success. That's why the role's been broken up into what it is today, where at other clubs the manager is reduced to a head coach that manages the squad that he's given. Recruitment, long term strategy, contracts, youth development and even aspects of player management are taken away from the managers control - because the club needs to live with these decisions long after a managers realistic tenure length.
At their place fantastic, but the first half in the home leg we were shite and lucky to not go out. Often gets overlooked due to our overall performance, probably fairly.
I am playing the devil's advocate here which usually sends me into trouble because I come across as hating the guy when I really don't. As said I am neither ETH in or out. We, as fans, lack the details to build such opinion and for once I trust INEOS structure enough to sit back and let things take their natural cause. However let's start tackling each point from a devil's advocate POV
A- It's a fact that ETH worked well with Overmars. There again Overmars was a Dutch person who was possibly accustomed to the same local pond ETH likes dipping into. Its a known secret that he took United's job with the condition that he'll have a VETO on transfers. Will he be ready to lose that? Would each deal take ages to complete because of needless 'debate'? Cause if yes then I can see the club looking elsewhere.
B- Regarding injuries I think its cause and effect. ETH does run teams to the ground but its also true that we tend to buy players who are injury prone or/are at the end of their career + that preseason tour was a clusferfeck of 'Napoleon invading Russia' proportion. There again, a 'wiser' manager would adapt his training accordingly. Its a known secret that SAF would only train players in the mornings. That might have added mileage particularly to his last team which was a mix of workhorses and ancient WC players. Ultimately I'd rather have a LB whose not 100% fit playing against Foden then Lindelof.
C- Egos - When I started following football as a kid, the top managers/idols were the likes of young SAF, Trap, Sacchi, Capello and Lippi. I don't think the modern player (especially our players) would survive a season under any of those managers. We also seem to have cherry picked an explosive blend who is made up of players in search of their last pay cheque, players who aren't good enough and players who are too fragile to play at the highest level.. Having said that, its a known fact that Rome wasn't built in 1 day and the INEOS project will need time. Thus whoever manages United will have to work with these players for a relatively long period of time. Can ETH do that? Currently he seem to have issues with Rashy, Sancho, Varane, Amad and Casemiro. He previously had issues with Maguire as well and he doesn't seem to trust our structure to buy him players either. Its all speculation of course but if true then those are things to be taken in account
D- I fully understand what ETH has in mind but if you don't have the staff to do it then you simply don't have the staff to do it. Winning sides have balance. When SAF lost Hargreaves he moved Carrick in CM with Scholes in CM, then played Park on the left to compensate for Ronaldo's lack of workrate + he played two workhorses upfront (Tevez and Rooney). When the squad started to age he played Cleverley in CM who looked as awkward as a sore thumb in such star studded side but played a huge role in keeping everything together. Do you believe he was happy doing that? I doubt it. But that's wha top quality managers do at this club. They adapt. Surely ETH must have seen how the midfield is being run over with an ageing Casemiro as the only defensive outlet in CM. I mean we're all seeing that. Why can't he?
Last edited:
I think it's a reflection of our scouting/recruitment team because it's so similar to what happened with LVG.
Antony we supposedly should have signed him early in summer for much less (the initial number was like £40m we were seeing) and basically we left it so late Van der Sar just took us to the cleaners on the fee.
Amrabat I don't really see the issue with, he is a loan and is fine as a temporary back up across a few positions. No way he stays here next year.
If he stays he really needs help in identifying players to sign. I dont think he is a bad manager but his transfer record so far has been underwhelming in relation to what the team needs to move forward. Maybe he had helps in Ajax too?
I agree
Fred is twice the player Amrabat is. I don't question letting Fred go but allowing McT to stay and adding Amrabat was a terrrible judgment.
He had overmars and Edvin at Ajax so he was hardly involved in the recruitment process. But aside from that, you have to ask why he can’t ’out-tactic’ a team like Fulham or Nottingham forest.
Because he has vastly inferior players to any other team in PL.
That's also a problem. He is not a stubborn manager who forces his playstyle into the players. He's changed a lot even in one year... he regressed because of his own bad signings. So this guy is defo not one you want to trust with transfers.
Listening to Howson saying give him another year. I'm really not sure how many people will still be able to stand watching by then.
Ah, that would explain it.
Well he had a proper budget for a right-winger and he landed on Antony, so...
It's good to know there are those out there able to look below the surface of things
The same scouting team that said Antony is worth no more than 25m?
An 8m loan fee is in FFP terms the equivalent over the current accounting period to a 40m transfer amortized over 5 years. So I don't exactly buy that argument.
He can but he chooses not to. He did for most of last season after Brentford taught him a lesson last August.
There is no reason why, so often, our front line press and our defence has been so far apart you could drive a monster truck through the gap. That was shown at Wastelands. He can keep the lines together and make the team compact. He just chooses not to.
Half of our team is not sprinting forward to engage the opposition back line week after week if its not a tactical instruction. They could stay on the half way line, waiting for the opposition to come forward but they don't. They go chasing and, clearly, its cos Ten Hag is telling them to do it that way.
A long time before we got into double digit league losses this season, Ten Hag could've changed things. He chose to persist with a system that, even when our best XI players are available, still doesn't work against the very best teams.
Stubborness has shot our season to pieces.
Not sure what your point is? ETH doesn't decide fees, salaries or negotiate. Ignoring the £25m valuation is from a different season (so not hard to imagine a player's price can increase with good performances) the breakdown is clearly in providing alternative players and in negotiating. ETH is at fault for thinking he was the type of player who could do well in the system we play, it seems extremely at odds with his traits, he's not at fault for the circus that has been our recruitment team for the last decade.
I don’t disagree with any of the ‘if’s of that Devil. I’m assuming these are among the things that probably all of Ratcliffe, Blanc, Brailsford, Murtaugh, Berrada, Ashworth and Wilcox have been discussing for a while, formal obstructions notwithstanding. I too have a measure of hopeful trust that they will make reasonable assesments of it. At least better than the Glazer+structure has up until now.
A few thoughts
A I am guessing (based on stories from Utrecht, Bayern II and Ajax) that Ten Hag is much more adaptive to club hierarchy than the likes of Conte and Mourinho, and that the rumoured(?) veto was based on seeing that United was a very disorganized hierarchy at that point, as Van Gaal, Mourinho and Rangnick all painstakingly pointed out, and well, was pretty much common knowledge. So I’ll be surprized if he doesn’t lean in enthsiastically to the set up INEOS is proposing. I might be all wrong of course.
B Agreed, and I’ll just add that Fergie struggled hugely with injuries, player mentalities, training regimes and egoes his first four or five years at the club. He made mistakes and learned from them, which Ten Hag will have to do, and much more quickly, if he’s allowed the chance.
C Same as the above. It also seems possible that Ten Hag has managed to square up with Maguire, Casemiro (if there ever was a problem) and Varane, based on rumours and recent performances. The two latter both have very tangible challenges with regard to their bodies and Ten Hag’s ideal playing strategies, however. If they actually are not fully on board with EtH, it will certainly show in INEOS’ internal review, even if we are never clued up on it.
D My guess is what we are seeing now is exactly that: Ten Hag adapting to the players he has and can aquire in a few windows. Casemiro playes so much because the alternatives lack basic skill sets needed to consistently achieve top four, never mind do it in an injury ravaged season, never mind challenging an on song City or Liverpool. Mainoo has good chances of getting there in a few years, Eriksen was not terribly far off until Carroll, Casemiro was for most of last season. Amrabat demonstrates to me the limitations Ten Hag has in terms of changing playing staff quickly enough to the right level and profile, it takes time. In the mean time Ten Hag is compromizing with level of control of games, with level of high press, with exposure of certain players, in order to achieve temporary goals to be able to continue the build which this season has been completely halted by the injuries/etc situation, whoever that fault is.
I think it’s rather that I’m not able to look beyond the surface of things, so I try to be a bit careful with claiming to know what is down there
Heh. I feel youI think it’s rather that I’m not able to look beyond the surface of things, so I try to be a bit careful with claiming to know what is down there
Which I've addressed.
My argument is that he had to go into a loan market because we couldn't afford permanent deals. And that midfielders half decent on loan who are available is quite rare. Unless you got a couple in mind.
I genuinely don't know whether we're keeping him or not. On one hand SJR had clearly stated that the issue is down to the football structure and highlighting how successive managers had failed in such setup. On the other hand he had never came out in the open to defend ETH. In my opinion he hasn't made his mind yet and for good reason. There are still many games to be played, Berrada, Ashworth and Wilcox had not joined the club and I don't think Brailsford had finished his assessment yet
I believe that this can go either way and it will be down to a mix of things including results and ETH's flexibility in changing things and be adaptable. The likes of Murtough provides the ideal shield for any manager to hide behind, however the manager should be aware that new owners love to surround with their own people as well. United need to hit the ground running so if I was ETH I'll think hard on that. If he doesn't want to lose his present status then he can jump the ship now while still retaining some of his reputation or else he 'suck it up' and adapt to the new environment and the new sheriff in town.
What I often find strange is how like clock work our fans in droves turn on a manager every 2 years and label them incompetent, stless frauds, completely certain "the next" manager will miraculously improve the results and consistency of the players on the books. It's never remembered that each change of footballing directiin has NEVER been accompanied with a proper player clesd out to suit the new direction to install a new identity.
Instead each manager going in a new direction merely inherits a majority of players from a different footballing ethos, incredible expected to shoe horn them into their preffered identity. That coupled with a brief of "improving the form of previous regimes" often leads to a first season or two of papering over the cracks. Then once the boss settled in the job tries to fully bed in his true ideals. He finds himself hampered in recruitment and replacement of unsuitable personnel and trying to fully implent a footballig identity to a group ill suited.
Going one of two ways:
either the squad gets caught out unable go implement a new style and performances plummet
or
the new boss attempts to compromise his ideals, resulting in Frankenstein system the manager isn't an expert at implementing, with a schism developed between the players and the coach as both sides become disillusioned with a job neither can fully master.
Meanwhile for the fans, they are killed by the false dawn of old again. They see player they imagine better than then truly failing to do the basics in a system that doesnt quite suit most of them. But lo & behold they are beguiled by hope again and start baying for a new messiah to take them to the orknjsed land of better football.
its completly baffling the vast majority CAN'T accept the simple truth. All the managers recruited since SAF can't ALL be incompetent. With the one common factor running through each failed manager era being a failed recruitment and football direction department.
Some times folks straight up forget footballing success begins and falls with your recruitment and football direction department. If you consistently can't buy or sell without waste and needless loss. If you can't coherrently structure a playing squad over time headed in singular footballing direction, in a scientific fashion. 9/10 times you will fail. You will be lost in thr proverbial wilderness making do with an oasis or two of unsustainable success. Even if you throw billions at your fate. That is why I simply can't undertand all the ire directed at the current manager.
Honestly till our footballing equivalent of "the front office" is fixed. We should not be fooled into believing recruiting a new manager will make an iota of a difference. We should all be tired of managerial false dawns by now.
Instead each manager going in a new direction merely inherits a majority of players from a different footballing ethos, incredible expected to shoe horn them into their preffered identity. That coupled with a brief of "improving the form of previous regimes" often leads to a first season or two of papering over the cracks. Then once the boss settled in the job tries to fully bed in his true ideals. He finds himself hampered in recruitment and replacement of unsuitable personnel and trying to fully implent a footballig identity to a group ill suited.
Going one of two ways:
either the squad gets caught out unable go implement a new style and performances plummet
or
the new boss attempts to compromise his ideals, resulting in Frankenstein system the manager isn't an expert at implementing, with a schism developed between the players and the coach as both sides become disillusioned with a job neither can fully master.
Meanwhile for the fans, they are killed by the false dawn of old again. They see player they imagine better than then truly failing to do the basics in a system that doesnt quite suit most of them. But lo & behold they are beguiled by hope again and start baying for a new messiah to take them to the orknjsed land of better football.
its completly baffling the vast majority CAN'T accept the simple truth. All the managers recruited since SAF can't ALL be incompetent. With the one common factor running through each failed manager era being a failed recruitment and football direction department.
Some times folks straight up forget footballing success begins and falls with your recruitment and football direction department. If you consistently can't buy or sell without waste and needless loss. If you can't coherrently structure a playing squad over time headed in singular footballing direction, in a scientific fashion. 9/10 times you will fail. You will be lost in thr proverbial wilderness making do with an oasis or two of unsustainable success. Even if you throw billions at your fate. That is why I simply can't undertand all the ire directed at the current manager.
Honestly till our footballing equivalent of "the front office" is fixed. We should not be fooled into believing recruiting a new manager will make an iota of a difference. We should all be tired of managerial false dawns by now.
The thing I can't understand. Why did the manager change things this season instead of building upon the tactics which saw us beat Arsenal, Spurs, City, Barcelona and win the League Cup. The only issue I had with ten Hag last season was his squad management which lead to a dip in form later in the season.
This season, he's just been a disaster all round with poor squad management once again combined with laughable tactics.