I meant "Losing 3-0 to Fulham plus defensive crisis" dramatic, rather than just 94th minute game winner dramatic. Things which spark interest for the wrong reasons "dramatic", which is why I put quotation marks on the words.
I don't think reducing rotation automatically brings results, Liverpool have the most settled (make the least changes) and least injury prone side of the top four and look at them. Competition for places, rests from long haul international games and 3 game weeks as well as injuries and suspension are going to play on any side.
I believe injuries have been more unsettling factor than rotation, the only real rotation that seems to be taking place involves Scholes/Giggs/Neville because the squad has been streched enough to make it unnescesary. The Carling Cup games show that the manager can organise a competitive side with any of the players he's got, the problem usually has been rushing players back in and dropping players in at the deep end.
There have been occasions like Liverpool at Anfield, where United feilded perhaps 9-10/11 of their first choice players and there could be no complaints. Other than the Burnley and Besiktas losses perhaps, it's difficult to argue that rotation has been the main factor to the side losing games.
I would say the fitness of Berbatov in particular has hindered the side in recent weeks as an attacking force, he's the most creative striker United have and yet he's been overlooked for the two big games this month. I cannot believe that this was simply for the sake of rotation. With regard to the defence and midfield Fergie's hands are moreorless tied here.
I do think aggression does need to be balanced with composure, Chelsea are not only top of the league but are top of the Fair Play League too. If anything United have aggressive players but the organisation of the side when the team falls behind never seems to be the same, particularly with key players missing.
