The difference is that we see some clear similarities between current United and EtH's Ajax team. Also some big differences (which basically are the reason why all this doesn't work), but still.
It's a disgrace that he's still here. Poor start from Ineos.
Or he shared the same idea? Keep in mind that United made a defensive leap when Queiroz replaced him.
He surely didn't share the same ideas back then. Queiroz improved United's defence, but even before it never looked as clueless as now. But as I said it's possible that he was convinced by EtH.
What makes you think that he shares the same ideas than himself more 20 years ago? You are essentially assuming three things that his ideas haven't changed, that United training sessions were entirely his and not SAF's and that he has turned into a better defensive coach than United performances showed at the time.
I always said it's a possibility on here, nothing more
Is that accurate? I’m sure we are into 60+ injuries for the season I read somewhere. Might be imagining though.
You actually did more, you tried to argue in favor of a particular stance which is fine but that stance is in my opinion difficult to support.I always said it's a possibility on here, nothing more
I am not defending the manager and believe he needs replacing, our injuries have all been basically in defense if they were more spread around the team it might have been a bit more manageable
I didn't argue for it, I just explored a bit why it's a possible scenario what Scholes/Owen said. Nothing more:
Transfermarkt is fairly accurate and as far as I can remember we have rarely been above 4th in the weekly tables from premierinjuries.
He has been unlucky with injuries but even with a fit squad we haven't pulled up any trees. The Ten Hag in crowd seem to have forgotten that we've been crap since February last season.
Newcastle's injuries have been pretty much concentrated in defence (except Joelinton but that came later). They still whoopped our arse at OT.
It is amazing how Brentford battered us with 6 of their regular starting 11 missing, including 4 of their usual back 5. Whilst we had Shaw unavailable from our strongest XI with Martinez and Casemiro on the bench who both came on .
It can't be.
Worth noting that Brentford had more injuries than we did and played us off the park. Newcastle will probably do the same.
Brighton gave us a lesson at the beginning of the season with a makeshift team.
I don’t think this table is accurate. The Mirror says we’ve had 60 separate injuries(Including
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The Illness part could be the difference.
Source on McClaren delegating coaching duties to Ten Hag? And he was better than him?
No one said that McClaren was an awful coach. Now do me favor since you are in the business of making things up, don't quote me.Source on McClaren delegating coaching duties to Ten Hag? And he was better than him?
Ah, I see. So we should bow at the knowledge of @VP89 over two players who have actually played in the PL and been coached by Steve McClaren???? Nobody is saying those two are the best pundits in the biz or all of their comments are 100% correct. We’re talking about Paul Scholes who has said Steve McClaren is the best COACH for him, ever. Has nothing to do with their opinions on tactics, etc. Just communicating system details. If McClaren is such an awful coach, why would SAF hire him? Why? Is SAF a poor judge of talent? Of coaches? They only won the PL twice for the two seasons McClaren was coaching there. @JPRouve thoughts?
‘feck me, the Ten Hag **** alive and well. Great, let’s take your stance then. McClaren is an absolute shit coach. The worst coach ever. ten Hag is the best coach ever. Why the feck are we 8th with -3 GD, just lost embarrassingly to Crystal Palace 4-0 with two measly shots on goal? Dumped out of the CL as last in our group?
You’re just out to hunt down information to support some sort of delusional idea that Ten Hag is the next Alex Ferguson. It’s just one giant confirmation bias odyssey where you ignore everything you see, statistics and point to random reasons behind our poor performances rather than the most obvious one: Ten Hag is not good enough, never will be good enough. Every single pundit is saying we look like shit. Does that mean all pundits are knobs?
F
I suppose this is what makes the Caf great. If we had all logical, reasonable people here, it would get boring, one massive circle jerk while we agree with each other non-stop. You have to have some crazies in the bunch to make it all work.
You’ve boxed yourself into a corner. You’re a big boy, clean up your own mess.
I literally said that he was a decent coach and you claim that labeled him as awful. The only mess is you being full of it.You’ve boxed yourself into a corner. You’re a big boy, clean up your own mess.
You’re assuming there is zero communication between Scholes and McClaren over the last 20 years. You’re assuming there is decline. You’re discounting an informed opinion, however dated, for your own uninformed opinion.
There's a few pieces that give tidbits at how Ten Hag effectively ran the show on the tactics and drilling the philosophy.
Top players don't make top pundits. Owen and Scholes both say dumb things, and Scholes was coached by Steve McClaren what, 2 decades ago? The game is completely different then. Scholes is a football dinosaur, there's absolutely nothing to insinuate he knows what level of coaching is required to navigate the modern game.
No one said McClaren is an awful coach. What they are insinuating is that Ten Hag does not allow McClaren to coach, which is quite wrong. McClaren himself said Ten Hag delegates duties a lot. If anything that suggests there is a lot of blame elsewhere if not just on the manager. If they did just 20% of research they could educate themselves as 'analysts' of the game, but they don't because they ride on the fact they used to be players.
You know you've lost a debate when you're blindly calling another poster a "Ten Hag ****"
good one, your gullible agreement Michael fecking Owen and Paul Scholes checks out with your mental age.It's actually hilarious that you've posted this very statement. It's not me calling Ten Hag as some kind of Ferguson, the "better coach" according to your god pundits had made the comparison above
I feel like you don't even know what is being debated at this stage.
Yep, you've lost the plot on what we actually discussed. Good work.I suppose this is what makes the Caf great. If we had all logical, reasonable people here, it would get boring, one massive circle jerk while we agree with each other non-stop. You have to have some crazies in the bunch to make it all work.
Frankly, it’s amazing you’ve even said he’s a decent coach. You have no idea more than I do. My original post was pointing out that two players, one an OT legend, sung very high praises of McClaren as a coach. You said you were dubious of such a claim despite having no first hand knowledge.
Well they both referred to 20 years ago. So yes I assume that the reference they mentioned is what they are using. In reality you are the only one claiming that something is 100% true, I simply stated that it is totally correct to question their take.
This should be pinned at the top of the whole forum!
I question everything, when someone says something I don't just shut my brain and don't wonder about the context of that claim. They both set the context and that context opens obvious questions which is what I clearly said multiple times. There is nothing special about but for some reason you took that as some sort of insult or disrespect.
This was actually the exact match I became Ten Hag out.
Awesome. So now you’re quoting McClaren saying that ETH was focused on process more than results. How he taught him that winning is important and that results matter, winning matters. It seems Ten Hag has decided that process is more important than results because we aren’t getting results and the tactics are abominable.There's a few pieces that give tidbits at how Ten Hag effectively ran the show on the tactics and drilling the philosophy.
"I followed PSV Eindhoven for some time when he was the assistant manager there, just as he was Steve McClaren's assistant at FC Twente. He was instrumental at those clubs. He never tried to push in but the managers were so reliant on him because he was tactically so strong. It was a joy for them to have him and that says a lot about him" - Marcel Van der Kraan
"My first assistant was Eric Ten Hag. The dutch taught me a whole new football identity, way of playing and philosophy. I had to embrace that - they were delighted when we drew because we had 70% possession, but I was able to bring a winning mentality. They taught me about the football, the sessions I gave was down to them. What I gave them was emphasizing the style and possession is not enough, and that we have to win" - Steve McClaren
“[Working with Ten Hag] allowed me time to have a look the full extent of the job at Twente, it get me that time to focus, watch, listen, take in the job, and eventually find a little niche where as the manager of the team, I could make my impact. I suppose the last seven days have epitomised that again, the attention to detail, all the planning, which he wants to get right. That’s from the day after he won the championship with Ajax, he’s on to the next, a little like Sir Alex Ferguson used to do. - Steve McClaren
^ If not complete delegation, McClaren effectively relied massively on his assistant coach. Also, he mentions that Ten Hag in his role at the club would delegate responsibility himself, and expect it to be done. Here's what he said to MUTV:
"“That’s how he works with the staff on and off the field: he delegates a lot. He tells you what your job is and he expects you to do it,” McClaren told us, as part of an exclusive interview.
“If you’re not doing it, then he’ll tell you that you’re not doing it. That’s staff and players.
“We’ve had a load of discussions and Erik is in charge. We are – the rest of the staff – learning as much as the players are learning. This is a new style, these are new principles, a new way of playing."
So, from there we can say two things. 1) McClaren was massively reliant on Ten Hag as coach at Twente, for tactics and philosophy and how to orchestrate a style of playing. Mcclaren then focused on his niche of management. and 2) Currently, Ten Hag also delegates, and he expects his coaches and staff to be able to execute the instructions and style all the same.
Top players don't make top pundits. Owen and Scholes both say dumb things, and Scholes was coached by Steve McClaren what, 2 decades ago? The game is completely different then. Scholes is a football dinosaur, there's absolutely nothing to insinuate he knows what level of coaching is required to navigate the modern game.
This is such a stupid comment, sorry to just frame it in those words but its the only way of putting it. It's like me saying no one should question Danny Murphy or Graham Souness because they are two players who have actually played in the PL.
Steve McClaren himself has come out endorsing the work of Ten Hag at Twente and at United, but no you don't want to go to the horses mouth, you want to go by two ex players who frankly, have atrocious opinions in general football (let alone this topic), and go back 20 years? Yeah. OK kid.
No one said McClaren is an awful coach. What they are insinuating is that Ten Hag does not allow McClaren to coach, which is quite wrong. McClaren himself said Ten Hag delegates duties a lot. If anything that suggests there is a lot of blame elsewhere if not just on the manager. If they did just 20% of research they could educate themselves as 'analysts' of the game, but they don't because they ride on the fact they used to be players.
And no one is asking them to be the best pundits, we just want them to be competent pundits. That's asking for too much for these two though.
You know you've lost a debate when you're blindly calling another poster a "Ten Hag ****"
It's actually hilarious that you've posted this very statement. It's not me calling Ten Hag as some kind of Ferguson, the "better coach" according to your god pundits had made the comparison above
I feel like you don't even know what is being debated at this stage.
Yep, you've lost the plot on what we actually discussed. Good work.
Sorry, the **** comment wasn’t meant for you. I know you aren’t.
Watch Steve McClaren's interview - he is citing the dutch philosophy to be focused on the right style even in isolated games where it's a stalemate. It's astounding thats the conclusion you drew from it and literally moved goalposts in what we're actually debating.
Right, so if it's normal then why are we suggesting he's suddenly a bad coach and everything is on him? Would you then agree that Owen and Scholes are low IQ pundits who lazily assumed that Ten Hag must be doing all the coachin
It doesn't matter what we've debated in the past, the point I've made is Owens and Scholes are ill informed pundits who have next to no knowledge on *modern day* tactics, coaching, or the european footballing landscape. If they did they'd be doing more than making cameos on BT Sport for 10 minutes here and there.
Funnily enough I've been really fortunate to meet both Scholes and Ole, and I've been extremely frank in their underperformance for their relative roles (not to them, admittedly
too star struck)