It's the only one that gets spoken about, disproportionately. He used counter attacking when it was on, but that wasn't even the strongest aspect of his great teams.Fergie did choose counter attack as one of his many weapons. So he was not allergic to it regardless of his forwards quality. What he didnt chose was mindlessly keeping triangles and maintaining 60%+ posession for the sake of philosophy.
Mourinho made united fans allergic to conservative football because he'll relinquish initiative to the opponent even playing against championship teams in cup games.It's the only one that gets spoken about, disproportionately. He used counter attacking when it was on, but that wasn't even the strongest aspect of his great teams.
No one does that. Every manager goes out to try to win the game in the method he thinks will win the game best with the personnel he has.
It has always been and remains BS that we played a style under Ole that was centred around counterattacks, in the sense of being reliant on or scoring most of our goals in that way. At least except for his caretaker period. During the protracted period where the team was good and generally succeeded with what they were trying to do (ie, from Brunos arrival and through the 20/21 season), we generally dominated possession and scored a significant majority of our goals in established play. Against the top opponents, we were no longer playing a low block and ceding the initiative, like we did previously. We were of course very good in the transitional phase of the game, at least offensively (which is in any case not the same thing as counterattacking), but there was not more reliance on that than there is now - if anything the opposite.Because it's associated with the Ole era, but the big difference is our counter-attacks are more structured under ETH whereas under Ole it was just get it to Rashford or Greenwood as quickly as possible and hope they can do something.
We are yet to do that in regular basis though. People loved talking Ole down but i remember the games against Newcastle and Brighton away few seasons ago when we played beautiful transition football with quick passing from deep area that Bruno and Greenwood scored. Now ETH has better set of players, particulary in Onana and Licha i hope we can start seeing that in regular basis.Because it's associated with the Ole era, but the big difference is our counter-attacks are more structured under ETH whereas under Ole it was just get it to Rashford or Greenwood as quickly as possible and hope they can do something.
You don't buy players like Martinez and Onana to play counter-attacking football.We are yet to do that in regular basis though. People loved talking Ole down but i remember the games against Newcastle and Brighton away few seasons ago when we played beautiful transition football with quick passing from deep area that Bruno and Greenwood scored. Now ETH has better set of players, particulary in Onana and Licha i hope we can start seeing that in regular basis.
Is he the bible now? Are we supposed to take it metaphorically?People are still taking his quotes too literally.
Just because we can play long ball & Counter attacking doesn’t mean we can’t hold possession.You don't buy players like Martinez and Onana to play counter-attacking football.
He set up without a midfield and then what was blatantly obviously going to happen, happened, and he sat there and didn't change anything for 70 fecking minutes despite the fact it should have cost us the game 7-8 times over.People are still taking his quotes too literally.
I'm just saying wanting to be the best transition team doesn't automatically equate to being poor/awful in possession.Is he the bible now? Are we supposed to take it metaphorically?
We didn't play well today.He set up without a midfield and then what was blatantly obviously going to happen, happened, and he sat there and didn't change anything for 70 fecking minutes despite the fact it should have cost us the game 7-8 times over.
I wouldn't care about the quotes if they weren't being followed up by insanely dumb tactics.
He doesn't bother even trying to control games so why has he bought them?Just because we can play long ball & Counter attacking doesn’t mean we can’t hold possession.
How do you explain Onana’s long kicks to the opposition half if we just wanted to maintain possession?
We want to be able to attack through possession - but play through counter or quick transition from deep whenever the opposition attack us or we lose the ball.
Transition team is just a hipster euphemism for counter attacking side, Liverpool under Klopp are not a counter attacking side. They play on the front foot and try to outpress the opponent, as well as being really good in possession. Under ETH we are anything but that.I'm just saying wanting to be the best transition team doesn't automatically equate to being poor/awful in possession.
Liverpool under Klopp a few years ago were the best transition team in the world, but they were also very good in possession play too. They were the only side who went toe-to-toe with City in their games.
Ten Hag doesn’t have one specialized tactic like Pep - he adapts his tactics to his players and the opposition and the current strengths and weaknesses of a match.He doesn't bother even trying to control games so why has he bought them?
I agree, but it's just 1 game and we're bedding in a new system.Transition team is just a hipster euphemism for counter attacking side, Liverpool under Klopp are not a counter attacking side. They play on the front foot and try to outpress the opponent, as well as being really good in possession. Under ETH we are anything but that.
Why is he doing a LVG and changing everything completely? Why not build off of last season or just get the building blocks of this system set anyway last year?I agree, but it's just 1 game and we're bedding in a new system.
If we look this bad 2-3 months down the road, then I'd worry.
There's no excuses for ETH this season from me. He has to extract a greater level of performances from the team more consistently.
There were games last season where we used a similar system. Fred was basically playing Mount's role today. There's videos of it that were posted on here.Why is he doing a LVG and changing everything completely? Why not build off of last season or just get the building blocks of this system set anyway last year?
Which games? I don't remember that, we only played 4-2-3-1.There were games last season where we used a similar system. Fred was basically playing Mount's role today. There's videos of it that were posted on here.
Trouble is we could be 6/7 points behind City arse Newcastle by then and challenging Liverpool and Chelsea for 4th/5thTen Hag doesn’t have one specialized tactic like Pep - he adapts his tactics to his players and the opposition and the current strengths and weaknesses of a match.
This is our first game - he will look at today and see if players need to be in different or deeper positions to make this more fluid. If Rashford’s on the left today instead of Garanacho- wouldn’t we have been 5% better, more powerful or fluid or deadly?
He won’t get it right straight away - but it will build up like an arm strengthening until we are able to build consistency and power at a tempo our opponents will struggle to play against.
This won’t happen in the first game, nor I doubt the first 5.
No it isn't. And the reason it isn't can be seen in exactly the fact that Klopp's Liverpool are held up as a textbook example of a great transition team despite, as you say, not being what we would consider a counter attacking team.Transition team is just a hipster euphemism for counter attacking side, Liverpool under Klopp are not a counter attacking side. They play on the front foot and try to outpress the opponent, as well as being really good in possession. Under ETH we are anything but that.
Well it doesn’t mean that we lose - we got 3 points today out of an average performance.Trouble is we could be 6/7 points behind City arse Newcastle by then and challenging Liverpool and Chelsea for 4th/5th
Not true.Which games? I don't remember that, we only played 4-2-3-1.
Im hoping we sort it out before 5 games though. Hopefully with Amrabat this week at least.Well it doesn’t mean that we lose - we got 3 points today out of an average performance.
We got to have that ability
You all keep using that phrase and I don't think it means what you think it means.No it isn't. And the reason it isn't can be seen in exactly the fact that Klopp's Liverpool are held up as a textbook example of a great transition team despite, as you say, not being what we would consider a counter attacking team.
Fred didn't play as a roaming 8 near the end. He wasn't even playing at all.Not true.
Towards the end of the season in some games, Fred was playing as a roaming 8.
There were videos literally on this website that depicted his movement and he was anything but a midfielder in a double pivot next to Casemiro.
The issue is that the major problem was tactical. Leaving a big gaping hole in your midfield that the opposition can run into has absolutely bugger all to do with whether the players play well or not, apart from the fact it makes it VERY difficult for them to.We didn't play well today.
If this performance is the norm, then he should be slated to no end.
He can see it, he's going to give it a few games and hope it works. When it won't work he'll try something else. He did this a lot last season, like playing Wout Wegorst at number 10 and pushing Bruno to the wing.The issue is that the major problem was tactical. Leaving a big gaping hole in your midfield that the opposition can run into has absolutely bugger all to do with whether the players play well or not, apart from the fact it makes it VERY difficult for them to.
I mean to me that game panned out exactly as I'd expected to as soon as I saw our line up, because the way we set up made it impossible to control the game or protect ourselves from counter attacks...and if we set up like that again, the same thing will happen again.
I don't think it's particularly complicated or difficult to see at all, and it's very alarming to me that our manager is apparently completely oblivious to it. It's like he's had a brain transplant with Ole.
What was he expecting to happen with the team he picked? What exactly is going to change if he picks the same team next time? Mount isn't going to suddenly become a CM. He's going to run around chasing shadows like he did tonight while the opposition stroll through the big hole in the middle of our team.
What line-up did you want to see out there?The issue is that the major problem was tactical. Leaving a big gaping hole in your midfield that the opposition can run into has absolutely bugger all to do with whether the players play well or not, apart from the fact it makes it VERY difficult for them to.
I mean to me that game panned out exactly as I'd expected to as soon as I saw our line up, because the way we set up made it impossible to control the game or protect ourselves from counter attacks...and if we set up like that again, the same thing will happen again.
I don't think it's particularly complicated or difficult to see at all, and it's very alarming to me that our manager is apparently completely oblivious to it. It's like he's had a brain transplant with Ole. If we'd lost that game like we should have, it would have been entirely on Ten Hag.
What was he expecting to happen with the team he picked? What exactly is going to change if he picks the same team next time? Mount isn't going to suddenly become a CM. He's going to run around chasing shadows like he did tonight while the opposition stroll through the big hole in the middle of our team.
I mean you can keep thinking I'm lying, but there were videos on here depicting his movement and he wasn't playing in a double pivot role.Fred didn't play as a roaming 8 near the end. He wasn't even playing at all.
What does 'being the best transition team in the world' mean then?You all keep using that phrase and I don't think it means what you think it means.
Given Klopp's Liverpool are typically held up as a/the definitive example of what people mean when they talk about transition teams, it seems like you're the one who doesn't understand what this particular "hipster euphemism" actually means.You all keep using that phrase and I don't think it means what you think it means.
Funny but that’s what I was thinking. It’s the sort of thing that happened in Oles reign most weeks. All of us can see a problem but he couldn’t. Rinse repeat every week. We’re the unqualified thickos online, he’s the millionaire and yet we know more than him. Thankfully ten Hag hasn’t hit those heights yet (although that Weghorst business was close) but this is now game three (I think) where it has been exposed heavily. If it’s the same Sunday we have a problem…The issue is that the major problem was tactical. Leaving a big gaping hole in your midfield that the opposition can run into has absolutely bugger all to do with whether the players play well or not, apart from the fact it makes it VERY difficult for them to.
I mean to me that game panned out exactly as I'd expected to as soon as I saw our line up, because the way we set up made it impossible to control the game or protect ourselves from counter attacks...and if we set up like that again, the same thing will happen again.
I don't think it's particularly complicated or difficult to see at all, and it's very alarming to me that our manager is apparently completely oblivious to it. It's like he's had a brain transplant with Ole. If we'd lost that game like we should have, it would have been entirely on Ten Hag.
What was he expecting to happen with the team he picked? What exactly is going to change if he picks the same team next time? Mount isn't going to suddenly become a CM. He's going to run around chasing shadows like he did tonight while the opposition stroll through the big hole in the middle of our team.
I get your point but even then it doesn't look good on him and the team to have a wolves side dominate the ball and be better on it than us that too at our own home. Last 5 minutes was a total car crashTen Hag doesn’t have one specialized tactic like Pep - he adapts his tactics to his players and the opposition and the current strengths and weaknesses of a match.
This is our first game - he will look at today and see if players need to be in different or deeper positions to make this more fluid. If Rashford’s on the left today instead of Garanacho- wouldn’t we have been 5% better, more powerful or fluid or deadly?
He won’t get it right straight away - but it will build up like an arm strengthening until we are able to build consistency and power at a tempo our opponents will struggle to play against.
This won’t happen in the first game, nor I doubt the first 5.
