How much are injuries affecting us?

[Bestietom]

Yeah big mistake letting Lukaku go without a replacement. I like martial and think he had the potential to be much better than Lukaku but he's always injured, seems like he's missing tonight through injury again

If he is kept playing as a CF he will be out more than he is in. He picks up injuries too easy and up against the big CB's he is going to get kicked.

 

[Mike lowe]

That was what Jose realized about him then..I am sure he still has one more injury before may

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

We've lost our only creative midfielder, our starting left back and the only player that looks comfortable playing CF for us. Those are our only long term injuries of course, we've had plenty of starting XI players miss games outside of those.

I don't know why you're trying to play that down. It's alright to hold the opinion you don't think he's doing a good enough job while acknowledging the injuries have hit our paper thin squad pretty hard.

Injuries/squad rotation are part & parcel of the squad game; if we’re now clutching at players missing games here or there then I don’t see how this makes us any different to any other team.

I haven’t played down anything. I said he has a point that squad quality hasn’t been optimum whilst pointing out that relying on Shaw & Martial [players with history of injury] was yet another bad managerial decision.

If the plan this season was to play 11 players relentlessly then it’s worse than I feared. I said injuries have lowered the quality of player available.

 

[izec]

Our injury record is atrocious for a good part of the decade now

 

[BlueHaze]

Our injury record is atrocious for a good part of the decade now

I havn't checked statistically but I think it's become at it's worst under Ole. Remember the game against Liverpool at OT last season where we made 3 subs in the first half all of them going off with muscle injuries? It's carried on all the way until now. Players constantly in and out with muscle injuries. It's deeply worrying. Either he has them training like mutants or our medical staff is complete and utter shit which I don't think they are.

 

[ivaldo]

Injuries/squad rotation are part & parcel of the squad game; if we’re now clutching at players missing games here or there then I don’t see how this makes us any different to any other team.

I haven’t played down anything. I said he has a point that squad quality hasn’t been optimum whilst pointing out that relying on Shaw & Martial [players with history of injury] was yet another bad managerial decision.

If the plan this season was to play 11 players relentlessly then it’s worse than I feared. I said injuries have lowered the quality of player available.

Yes, it is part and parcel of the game. So when our squad options are Matic (now injured) Fred or Andreas, as opposed to, say, Rodri or Gundogan, then it becomes a problem. We can't simply omit this part of the equation because we don't like how it effects the outcome.

So what's the alternative? You act as though he can simply splash 50m on a new left back, 80m on a new striker, 100m on another 2 midfielders. Just look at the state of the squad going into this season prior to signings. It was an impossible job for him to replace even the majority of those players on enormous wages contributing buggar all, while adding quality and depth to the squad. Now I'm sure if he wanted to sign and alternative striker to the ones he targeted he could have done, so we certainly can't absolve him of blame, but we also can't pretend he had the means and resources to fix the plethora of problems we have and have had for the past 10 years. He has chosen to spend big on a few as opposed to filling the squad with mediocrity. That's backfired. But for me he's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't when it comes to the market.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

Yes, it is part and parcel of the game. So when our squad options are Matic (now injured) Fred or Andreas, as opposed to, say, Rodri or Gundogan, then it becomes a problem. We can't simply omit this part of the equation because we don't like how it effects the outcome.

So what's the alternative? You act as though he can simply splash 50m on a new left back, 80m on a new striker, 100m on another 2 midfielders. Just look at the state of the squad going into this season prior to signings. It was an impossible job for him to replace even the majority of those players on enormous wages contributing buggar all, while adding quality and depth to the squad. Now I'm sure if he wanted to sign and alternative striker to the ones he targeted he could have done, so we certainly can't absolve him of blame, but we also can't pretend he had the means and resources to fix the plethora of problems we have and have had for the past 10 years. He has chosen to spend big on a few as opposed to filling the squad with mediocrity. That's backfired. But for me he's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't when it comes to the market.

I don’t act as if anything, you’re trying to pose my argument so you can fire off. When did I mention a £50mil left back? or an £80mil striker?

There’s nothing to argue here because you’ve made up my opinions for me.

He most certainly had other options with the resources he was given, he chose to invest the vast majority of his resources in area that we won’t see £80mil worth of improvement.

I’m not quite sure what has riled you, you’re attempting to turn a point I’ve made [squad quality is affected by injuries] into something against me.

Genuinely lost by your first paragraph & not sure what the second is getting at either.

 

[red4ever 79]

I dont take injuries as any form of excuse. It is what it is. Our Sports Science department and physios are poor.

 

[ivaldo]

I don’t act as if anything, you’re trying to pose my argument so you can fire off. When did I mention a £50mil left back? or an £80mil striker?

There’s nothing to argue here because you’ve made up my opinions for me.

He most certainly had other options with the resources he was given, he chose to invest the vast majority of his resources in area that we won’t see £80mil worth of improvement.

I’m not quite sure what has riled you, you’re attempting to turn a point I’ve made [squad quality is affected by injuries] into something against me.

Genuinely lost by your first paragraph & not sure what the second is getting at either.

Did I say you had mentioned those? Your point is pretty evident, I’m pointing out flaws in it. I’m trying to drill down into your argument, because you’re providing no substance to it. You question why Ole is ‘relying’ on Shaw and Martial, but you don’t pose any alternatives. You’re being vague as to sidestep important aspects of what you expect him to do differently. Make a suggestion as to how he could’ve replaced Martial and Shaw with more reliable alternatives, while adding depth to both those positions, buying a RW, a CB, and a RB. Not to mention the gaping hole we have in midfield. So you’ll need to factor in two more additions there. If you can’t make a suggestion, then maybe the complete dearth in ability in our squad and the finite funds he has to spend isn’t his fault, and saying ‘everyone gets injuries,’ or ‘squad rotation is part of the game,’ or some variation on that doesn’t actually hold any weight in the current context of things at our club.

Nothing has riled me. It’s a discussion forum. If you struggle with people disagreeing with your opinions, then you aren’t in the right place. Stop taking it so personally.

I’m not sure how I could make the first paragraph any simpler. Genuinely. Perhaps you need to read what you wrote again to see what I’m responding to?

 

[Chesterlestreet]

But for me he's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't when it comes to the market.

In terms of picking and choosing which areas to address - then yes, he probably was, in terms of fan reactions.

The premise most people seem to be working on is that he should have replaced the players we let go with (one has to assume, since nearly everyone who was let go was very underwhelming in one way or another) significant upgrades.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

We need Pogba back. He is our best player. I think a front 6 of Fred and McTominay behind Pogba and Rashford, Martial and Greenwood in front of Pogba is the best option.

If we can take one positive from the injuries, it's that being forced to play Fred has lifted his confidence and he is now starting to look like a decent player. If we insist on playing a 4-2-3-1 then this should open up the #10 spot for Pogba when (and if) he comes back as McTominay and Fred have looked more than capable of playing in the #6/8...

 

[ivaldo]

In terms of picking and choosing which areas to address - then yes, he probably was, in terms of fan reactions.

The premise most people seem to be working on is that he should have replaced the players we let go with (one has to assume, since nearly everyone who was let go was very underwhelming in one way or another) significant upgrades.

Which is fair enough, to a degree.

Herrera and Sanchez effectively left for free. Ole had no control over the Ander situation so we are only really looking at Lukaku and Sanchez. I think we tried to sign a replacement for Lukaku but the players Ole wanted either didn't want go join or we were priced out of. Again he has no control over that aspect. So really, his only options were to sign 3rd or 4th choice players, who may well have added to the chaff we already have in the squad, or to wait and invest that money on quality when the next window opened. Even if he decided to invest that money in the Summer, I'm skeptical whether the situation would really have been a lot different. We may well have had a few more points on the board, but the main issues we have would still be here.

 

[Hammondo]

I bow to your 'bout' wisdom, no idea what you're on about, but yes I've watched United for decades.

Games missed out of the 21 this season
Pogba 16
Martial 9
Rashford 3
Shaw 20
Matic 11

With the paper thin squad (bar keepers and central defenders) that's a big problem with our best players in their positions missing so many games. I'm not sure what games you watched with all mentioned players fit and playing, but good on ya for being so alert if you have...

Yes and we had out main 11 at the beginning of the season and we were terrible then as well. No idea why you are including Matic in this.

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

The difference when Pereira played in that midfield and when McTominay plays in that midfield. Big difference.

 

[Red_toad]

Yes and we had out main 11 at the beginning of the season and we were terrible then as well. No idea why you are including Matic in this.

So against Chelsea? When we won 4-0? We were terrible?Our early performances weren't great and basically turned to shite at the West Ham game (minus Pogba and Martial), Newcastle (same again), Only real exception was Palace game.
Why wouldn't Matic be included? He's a first team player and one of the 2 holding midfielders we have.
Shaw has missed near the entire season, obviously you failed to acknowledge this.

But you choose to believe teams can miss their best players and replace them with stand ins who are no where near their quality. So good for you.

 

[SteveW]

Killing us. We've won 5 out of 6 win McTominay and Fred and been very solid. When Scott was missing our midfield was completely overrun by Sheffield United and Villa and conceded 5 goals in 2 games. That's how bad the back up players are.

 

[AltiUn]

Yes and we had out main 11 at the beginning of the season and we were terrible then as well. No idea why you are including Matic in this.

We had an out of form Fred and Pogba was playing in a much deeper role compared to the one he'll play when he returns which makes a big impact, Fred and McTominay have continued to improve game by game, not to mention Rashford is currently on fire which he wasn't at the beginning of the season.

 

[edcunited1878]

Killing us. We've won 5 out of 6 win McTominay and Fred and been very solid. When Scott was missing our midfield was completely overrun by Sheffield United and Villa and conceded 5 goals in 2 games. That's how bad the back up players are.

Back up the bus a little bit...the midfield duo of McTominay and Fred have come on leaps and bounds individually and as a working pair (finally). They function and give the team bite, energy/verve and bursts forward. Injuries are part of the problem because United are paper thin in central mid and center forward to begin with. Pereria is better as a 10 than a central midfielder in functioning deeper as a direct replacement for McTominay/Fred. Not enough physicality, drive forward and his internal clock isn't fast enough. Garner isn't ready to for those heavy minutes especially away to Sheffield United.

But the conceded goals had more to do with poor overall play and individual mistakes than getting completely overrun: Phil Jones (SU's 1st goal), scrappy last minute effort in the box (SU's 3rd goal) / From a quick goal kick, Villa go up United's right flank in about 4 seconds with Williams completely missing a tackle which exposes the backline (Maguire in too much space to defend) and the cross isn't dealt with, which falls to Grealish and he has a fantastic finish (Villa's 1st goal), Mings's goal came from a short corner and lack of pushing up, keeping him onside did Williams (Villa's 2nd goal).

So it's not that United's midfield is completely overrun, it's a little open to begin with because it's 2 usually against 3 central mids, but it's not as composed and not enough drive and strength without Fred and McTominay in there together.

 

[SteveW]

Back up the bus a little bit...the midfield duo of McTominay and Fred have come on leaps and bounds individually and as a working pair (finally). They function and give the team bite, energy/verve and bursts forward. Injuries are part of the problem because United are paper thin in central mid and center forward to begin with. Pereria is better as a 10 than a central midfielder in functioning deeper as a direct replacement for McTominay/Fred. Not enough physicality, drive forward and his internal clock isn't fast enough. Garner isn't ready to for those heavy minutes especially away to Sheffield United.

But the conceded goals had more to do with poor overall play and individual mistakes than getting completely overrun: Phil Jones (SU's 1st goal), scrappy last minute effort in the box (SU's 3rd goal) / From a quick goal kick, Villa go up United's right flank in about 4 seconds with Williams completely missing a tackle which exposes the backline (Maguire in too much space to defend) and the cross isn't dealt with, which falls to Grealish and he has a fantastic finish (Villa's 1st goal), Mings's goal came from a short corner and lack of pushing up, keeping him onside did Williams (Villa's 2nd goal).

So it's not that United's midfield is completely overrun, it's a little open to begin with because it's 2 usually against 3 central mids, but it's not as composed and not enough drive and strength without Fred and McTominay in there together.

I appreciate the level of detail in your post.

But Sheffield united played us off the pitch and Villa did at times too. Most goals come from some sort of defensive issue. But if we have our best midfield on the pitch we are controlling those games and under nowhere near the same amount pressure.

 

[OneUnited24]

I havn't checked statistically but I think it's become at it's worst under Ole. Remember the game against Liverpool at OT last season where we made 3 subs in the first half all of them going off with muscle injuries? It's carried on all the way until now. Players constantly in and out with muscle injuries. It's deeply worrying. Either he has them training like mutants or our medical staff is complete and utter shit which I don't think they are.

I believe this is part and parcel of changing our style of play and training regime. I recall something similar occurring when LvG took over where injuries only started to clear up after March.

 

[Hammondo]

We had an out of form Fred and Pogba was playing in a much deeper role compared to the one he'll play when he returns which makes a big impact, Fred and McTominay have continued to improve game by game, not to mention Rashford is currently on fire which he wasn't at the beginning of the season.

Wow the excuses.

 

[Hammondo]

So against Chelsea? When we won 4-0? We were terrible?Our early performances weren't great and basically turned to shite at the West Ham game (minus Pogba and Martial), Newcastle (same again), Only real exception was Palace game.
Why wouldn't Matic be included? He's a first team player and one of the 2 holding midfielders we have.
Shaw has missed near the entire season, obviously you failed to acknowledge this.

But you choose to believe teams can miss their best players and replace them with stand ins who are no where near their quality. So good for you.

We played 1 good game vs Chelsea, who themselves played poorly. The rest of our games were poor.

 

[kkj25]

I believe they have affected us massively, but it should be said OGS has made some mistakes, but some people act like he should make the perfect decision each time All managers at sometime or other do think something else for the team and it works out different in actual matches. To use a military example, it is famously said "no plan of operations extends with any certainty beyond the first contact with the main hostile force". As if none of us ever make a miscalculation or poor decision...

People also keep going on about OGS should have bought for this position or that position. How does someone know that he didn't ask for more? Just because he does not come out and moan like Jose does not mean he did not feel the same way, Now whether it's due to financial constraints or time or something else the players were not provided. I would rather we just make the the best of it like I assume OGS is, we can never really know what goes on inside the club beyond media interviews

 

[matt10000]

Yes, it is part and parcel of the game. So when our squad options are Matic (now injured) Fred or Andreas, as opposed to, say, Rodri or Gundogan, then it becomes a problem. We can't simply omit this part of the equation because we don't like how it effects the outcome.

So what's the alternative? You act as though he can simply splash 50m on a new left back, 80m on a new striker, 100m on another 2 midfielders. Just look at the state of the squad going into this season prior to signings. It was an impossible job for him to replace even the majority of those players on enormous wages contributing buggar all, while adding quality and depth to the squad. Now I'm sure if he wanted to sign and alternative striker to the ones he targeted he could have done, so we certainly can't absolve him of blame, but we also can't pretend he had the means and resources to fix the plethora of problems we have and have had for the past 10 years. He has chosen to spend big on a few as opposed to filling the squad with mediocrity. That's backfired. But for me he's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't when it comes to the market.

Exactly and that is why I think we have to be patient and buy the right players when they become available and promote youth as well. Ole is doing this and it takes time. Too many on here think that we can buy a new squad in one transfer window and that as soon as you promote youth to the first team they are ready made end product.

Ole may not ultimately win turn us into champions but then again I do t think anyone else in the world would in the next two years but at least Ole is improving the squad with the right players for the future rather than quick fixes in the short term. Longer term is the management we need right now at this moment. He wont get every signing right but then again no manager does.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

We may well have had a few more points on the board, but the main issues we have would still be here.

I suspect that would have been the case too.

That is, if what he'd opted for was to replace what those who left actually brought to the table. "Replacing" Lukaku in terms of what he was likely to contribute in this system, this season, would have been easy enough - but also pointless enough, I'd say.

 

[Johan07]

I suspect that would have been the case too.

That is, if what he'd opted for was to replace what those who left actually brought to the table. "Replacing" Lukaku in terms of what he was likely to contribute in this system, this season, would have been easy enough - but also pointless enough, I'd say.

If we had chosen to replace Lukaku, Greenwood would have to go on loan somewhere.
He needs and deserves to get at least the minutes he has been getting so far. That would not be happening if we had "replaced" Lukaku. Not replacing him was not a financial decision, it was a footballing one. One might argue that it was wrong, but then you are also - IMO - arguing for lesser gametime for Greenwood.
Who in my mind at least performed pretty darn good against Spurs at #9.
I am not concerned about not replacing Lukaku for that reason.
Sanchez was nothing but shite during his whole career her and did not need to be replaced to begin with. Just getting rid of. And even if one think he should have been, James has done that and some.
The midfield is another thing; something should have been done this summer already and must be done in January. As much as I appreciate the transfer strategy; focusing on primary targets and if they are not available: put faith in youth:
This went overkill last summer when it came to midfield.
Midfield is going to be a shitshow nxt summer, when Matic leaves and if Pogba leaves. We should not have put ourselves in a position where there is a fair chance that we have to rebuild the midfield squad and get maybe 3 midfielders in one window. Its too much in one window. Bad planning.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

@Johan07 Yes, midfield is the big one. That's where we suffer most when an ideal selection is not available - and the "ideal" selection itself has huge question marks over it.

As for Lukaku, I completely agree with what I take as your stance: prioritizing minutes for Mason over keeping Lukaku (on big money) as a bench player (that is what he would have been - Ole clearly intended for Martial to slot into the central role) was the right decision. Not least when factoring in that Lukaku himself was keen on leaving.

Might add something which tends to be ignored on here: Lukaku's own comments with regard to the move.

What he's said indicates that Ole was up front with him about his intentions, the setup he was going for, etc. Ole wasn't going to make him a default starter, in short - and Lukaku felt it was better for him to move on. Adding - significantly, one could say - that he has nothing but respect for Ole as such. No bad feelings, not a case of Lukaku being frozen out, just business (so to speak). Similar to the Smalling deal, one could say (nothing indicates that there's any bad blood between Mike and Ole either).

 

[croadyman]

There is no doubt that injuries have affected us this season but at the same time we shouldn't use it as an excuse.

We could have played Greenwood in Martial's position whilst he was out. Yes I know there were a couple of games he was injured but could have played him in the others.