Michael Carrick - Head Coach for the remainder of the season

Matt851 said:
There are surely some simple changes we could make to give us a better chance against low blocks. We kept trying to play through the middle of the pitch tonight. Sesko on earlier, using the width of the pitch and more crosses probably would have won us the game
Click to expand...

Probably will help to use Sesko more in these type of games and focus on getting some balls into the box for him I agree.

I'd probably give him a start against Everton after getting another late goal as you'd expect them to set up very similarly to West Ham
 
Last night wasn't a great setup from him, but again, 13 points out of a possible 15 including wins against City and Arsenal, he's still doing a remarkable job.

I think INEOS are smart to be talking to other managers and waiting for the end of the season to see how Carrick drags us over the line, but I wouldn't say the job is his yet by any stretch. If we even get a murmur of interest from the likes of Enrique then you'd think that would be it, regardless of how strongly Carrick finishes.
 
flameinthesun said:
And yet most of the big clubs around Europe get success despite sacking managers fairly often. I don't understand this aversion to sacking managers (maybe I do if its fans desperate to find the next Fergie which aint going to happen). You build success by recruiting good players, then getting a coach in to get the most of those players. If you have a good DoF and sporting model then sacking a head coach shouldn't be something to fear as proved by most big clubs and more recently shown by sacking Amorim. This is a squad who finished bottom half under a poor manager, a squad who we think their limit is top 4. What you are seeing are the reasons why that limit is top 4.
Click to expand...
It amazes me we still have fans who don't get this. They think all managers should get time even if they're not performer, its uttter madness. The most successful sides sack managers when they perform poorly, its that simple
 
Hammondo said:
Most big clubs basically have the best 1 team or are in a 1 horse race. In the PL it's different.
Click to expand...

And yet Chelsea's most successful period in the recent era was with them hiring and firing managers. We romanticise having a long term manager which I understand, but it is by no means a set in stone rule. If anything, its more the exception than the norm. If you have a good sporting structure in place and marry that by being one of the biggest clubs in the world, which we are, the squad (when the club is run properly) should have enough quality for a coach to come in and do their thing (making sure that the coach aligns with how the squad has been built to play).
 
flameinthesun said:
And yet Chelsea's most successful period in the recent era was with them hiring and firing managers. We romanticise having a long term manager which I understand, but it is by no means a set in stone rule. If anything, its more the exception than the norm. If you have a good sporting structure in place and marry that by being one of the biggest clubs in the world, which we are, the squad (when the club is run properly) should have enough quality for a coach to come in and do their thing (making sure that the coach aligns with how the squad has been built to play).
Click to expand...
That's true but they have also been crap most of it. Do you want a little bit of success every decade?
 
Hammondo said:
That's true but they have also been crap most of it. Do you want a little bit of success every decade?
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on how you view their last decade. For their successes with Mourinho, Conte, Tuchel, Di Matteo they had really good squads and married that with the right coaches (minus Di Matteo where the squad carried that success imo). I don't think they've had as good squads in the recent years. Additionally, the landscape has changed, you have this financial behemoth in City (which not to the same degree used to be us as a club). So it is much more competitive. In that environment I expect a top level Chelsea, City, Arsenal, Pool and United to likely be sharing success around.

A bit of a tangent! But to the main point it would be great to have a long term "successful" manager, but we shouldn't be afraid of hiring and firing managers if that brings success.
 
The consensus on here was it would be a difficult game. It was, and we played poorly as well.

A point is not bad, after they got their jammy goal, and we could have won it if certain players had more composure yesterday.

What I‘d like to see from Carrick, is a quicker reaction to the state of the game. Don’t be too academic.

Amad should have been subbed off, and Šeško could have been brought on 10 minutes earlier.

I‘d also keep a wild card like Lacey on the bench.
 
flameinthesun said:
I guess it depends on how you view their last decade. For their successes with Mourinho, Conte, Tuchel, Di Matteo they had really good squads and married that with the right coaches (minus Di Matteo where the squad carried that success imo). I don't think they've had as good squads in the recent years. Additionally, the landscape has changed, you have this financial behemoth in City (which not to the same degree used to be us as a club). So it is much more competitive. In that environment I expect a top level Chelsea, City, Arsenal, Pool and United to likely be sharing success around.

A bit of a tangent! But to the main point it would be great to have a long term "successful" manager, but we shouldn't be afraid of hiring and firing managers if that brings success.
Click to expand...
I just want a bit more consistency, I do not mind only bits of big success if the times in between are not so crap, I think we are all a bit tired of it.
 
Alex99 said:
Guardiola perfecting it was having countless millions to spend on an incredibly gifted side of technical footballers.

Even then, "it doesn't always work", so that's hardly perfecting it.
Click to expand...
I feel like you've focused on the least interesting bit from my post.

We've spent enough money on technical footballers. Enough to be playing that sort of style when needed - moving the ball quickly from side to side to either stretch a defense or expose a full back in space and either beat him 1 on 1 or flood the box from the opposite side and cross.

Since West Ham have some of the hardest fullbacks to beat, it might've been a good idea to play Sesko more and try Cunha on the right and Amad / Mbeumo on the left, as well as having Bruno behind the ball more, so that he can spray passes to the far side, which Mainoo is not going to do.

Yes, it might not work, a deep compact defense is very hard to break. But it's the best way to go about it and we know that from the SAF days as well, if mentioning Guardiola is an affront. It's just a bit concerning to me that we don't have that in our locker nowadays.
 
Last edited:
Scarecrow said:
I feel like you've focused on the least interesting bit from my post.

We've spent enough money on technical footballers. Enough to be playing that sort of style when needed - moving the ball quickly from side to side to either stretch a defense or expose a full back in space and either beat him 1 on 1 or flood the box from the opposite side and cross.

Yes, it might not work, a deep compact defense is very hard to break. But it's the best way to go about it and we know that from the SAF days as well, if mentioning Guardiola is an affront. It's just a bit concerning to me that we don't have that in our locker nowadays.
Click to expand...

We literally scored a goal by getting it wide and finding a cross.

What do you mean "we don't have it in our locker"?

The fact is that as good as our attackers are, they're not "peak Guardiola" levels in that aspect of the game.
 
NLunited said:
The consensus on here was it would be a difficult game. It was, and we played poorly as well.

A point is not bad, after they got their jammy goal, and we could have won it if certain players had more composure yesterday.

What I‘d like to see from Carrick, is a quicker reaction to the state of the game. Don’t be too academic.

Amad should have been subbed off, and Šeško could have been brought on 10 minutes earlier.

I‘d also keep a wild card like Lacey on the bench.
Click to expand...
Yeah my only criticism really is not starting Sesko. I get the logic of don't change a winning team, but I think this game called for it. Sesko surely needs to start the next one.
 
bosnian_red said:
Yeah my only criticism really is not starting Sesko. I get the logic of don't change a winning team, but I think this game called for it. Sesko surely needs to start the next one.
Click to expand...
There is very little actual "logic" in the "don't change a winning team". The team we need depends on the team we are against. Using the same starting 11, that won against teams attacking us, to face West Ham parking a bus is lazy and cowardly, nothing more

Not only Sesko should have started, but so should have Maz, instead of Dalot
 
Decent result in the end vs West Ham, but really hope that wasn't the beginning of us coming back down to earth under Carrick, and just a blip. Time will tell against Everton, how we respond will be telling.
 
Last edited:
Olecurls99 said:
Yeah, City have done nothing with their steady manager. Great example.
Click to expand...

What was that you said about missing the point?

Do teams have poor games (like us last night, or like City vs. Bodö a few weeks back) because:

A) that’s what happens with player power when you don’t stick by a manager.

Or

B) because that’s what happens when a manager has been there nearly a decade

Answers on a postcard?
 
I don't get this idea of playing Mbeumo on the left. Feels almost like he's just promised Cunha he can play a bit more central for a couple of matches and tried to accommodate.
 
The Fulham and West Ham games have shown his limitations, he's a counter-attacking manager with no concrete plan on breaking down defensive teams. We're still miles better than whatever the feck we were doing under Amorim but he could do with appointing a possession specialist coach to help him.
 
Think people too often underestimate how hard it actually is to break down an aggressive low block with a team that implements it well. It's not MEANT to be easy or look good. It takes some of the most technical teams in history to make it look good (we aren't one). In general the main keys you need are good finishing and consistent pressure on the opposition. My biggest complaint last night is probably that Carrick didn't start Sesko (you need his aerial threat in games like this where the opposition is funneling everything wide) and that we didn't cycle the ball quick enough at the back.

It was a perfect storm and sort of exposed the main issues in our team: Lack of wide threat on the left and full back threat in general. West Ham refused to let us play anything between the lines and essentially dared Dalot and Shaw to try and create anything on the wings and they weren't able to. We also were playing on 2 days rest with the same lineup and our attackers all had poor games in general. Is what it is, let thump Everton in 2 weeks.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
What was that you said about missing the point?

Do teams have poor games (like us last night, or like City vs. Bodö a few weeks back) because:

A) that’s what happens with player power when you don’t stick by a manager.

Or

B) because that’s what happens when a manager has been there nearly a decade

Answers on a postcard?
Click to expand...
I don't watch City so couldn't say if their player's effort fell off a cliff against Bodo but that's what regularly happens with United. It's been happening since 2013.
 
bosnian_red said:
Yeah my only criticism really is not starting Sesko. I get the logic of don't change a winning team, but I think this game called for it. Sesko surely needs to start the next one.
Click to expand...
I don't even mind not starting Sesko, it was more that he didn't then come on at half time.

But what a start Carrick has had. Excellent first 2 games, good versus Fulham, excellent vs spurs albeit hard to judge 10 men, West Ham I'd say mildly disappointing. We'll take that return over 5 games all season.
 
I think this is the first game where Carrick has made a couple of minor mistakes.

1. Not rotating some of the starting lineup - Sesko and Mazraoui both could have come into team, appreciate though the reasoning behind keeping with a winning team.
2. Subs came on a bit too late.

Realistically though still doing a very good job, really interested to see how we bounce back against Everton.
 
Olecurls99 said:
I don't watch City so couldn't say if their player's effort fell off a cliff against Bodo but that's what regularly happens with United. It's been happening since 2013.
Click to expand...

You watched them against United and saw it fall off a cliff.

It’s just a nonsensical argument, ”getting rid” of managers didn’t help Martial, Pogba, Lindelöf, Rashford, Sancho, AWB, Matic, Nani, Smalling, Chica, Wellbeck, Antony, DvB, Telles, Fred, McTominay etc etc etc. In fact, it’s often the opposite as the new bloke flogs half the squad.
And why would they suddenly stop for Carrick? Bored of him after 5 weeks?

As with City v Bodø, teams can and often do have off days.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
You watched them against United and saw it fall off a cliff.

It’s just a nonsensical argument, ”getting rid” of managers didn’t help Martial, Pogba, Lindelöf, Rashford, Sancho, AWB, Matic, Nani, Smalling, Chica, Wellbeck, Antony, DvB, Telles, Fred, McTominay etc etc etc. In fact, it’s often the opposite as the new bloke flogs half the squad.
And why would they suddenly stop for Carrick? Bored of him after 5 weeks?

As with City v Bodø, teams can and often do have off days.
Click to expand...
You're right. There's nothing to be gained from having a permanent long term manager.
 
Regarding the low blocks, even Mourinho supposedly struggled against them at madrid. I remember valencia, betis and united (i think) among others did this to madrid and they struggled to break them down. If I recall correctly the betis manager even said the way to beat Mourinho's madrid is to give them the ball. I think casillas argued with Mourinho that he didnt provide enough solutions to teams that defend deep.

Ozil, Ronaldo, higuain, di Maria struggled when denied space. I think modric, isco and kroos was signed as they were good in tight matches (isco and kroos were after Mourinhobut perhaps the club felt it was a problemthat needed to be fixed for the new managers). Mourinho used to persist with khedira in mf for security and balance. Perhaps with the benefit of hindsight he would have been better with another mf with high technical skills. He wasn't the best on the ball.
 
I understand some of the criticism but I think some are coming with the same desperation and expectation of the previous 18+ months. There may be some truth to it but you can only tar Carrick with the whole slow subs and same line up brush because you're comparing him to Amorim and Ole, who were in the job for years.

He's been here for 5 games.
 
Amorim did say something interesting last season about the club being too comfortable playing only on transitions, and I guess after EtH and Ole he had a point. The fact that he was mostly a terrible manager for us doesn’t invalidate the point.

As others have said, it’s an issue with the players as much as (or possibly even more than) the manager.

Carrick has done really well so far but I can’t blame people for wondering how it might go for him next season when the games are coming thick and fast and teams might be content to let us have the ball. Hopefully if we get the right players in we can have more options to unlock defences, regardless of who is the manager.
 
Olecurls99 said:
Because when you sack a manager every 3 years, the power rests with the players and you get the type of performance we saw today. They even know a few of them results strung together and you can get the gaffer sacked. Stand by your manager.
Click to expand...
So… stand by your manager even if he is mediocre… makes sense. :rolleyes:
 
Win percentage this PL season in games where teams have 45%+ of the ball.

Arsenal: 71% in 24 games.
City: 65% in 23 games.
Villa: 50% in 20 games.
United: 26% in 19 games.
Chelsea: 50% in 24 games.
Liverpool: 44% of 25 games.

Not only do we hit that possession threshold less than the teams around us, we've been notably worse at converting the games in which we do into wins. Especially as compared to the 100% win rate in the rest of our games, which is largely why we're in the good position we are.

And, anecdotally, our struggles in terms of dominating possession and turning the games in which we do dominate possession into wins have been cited as an issue on here for many years at this point.

So while it's true that teams setting up to frustrate can be an issue for any team, I think it's fair to cite how our results skew in terms of possession as a particular issue for us.

And in turn to place particular scrutiny on how Carrick sets us up in those games when evaluating him as a potential manager. Because whoever the manager we hire is, this is a prime problem that will need to be fixed under them.

But West Ham was still just one result, and we'll have further games against the likes of Everton, Palace, Leeds, Sunderland and Forest to assess this dynamic on too. So there's really no need to be as overcritical as some of the posts have been.
 
Oo0AahCantona said:
Mbuemo looks gassed, not entirely sure how considering we are only playing 1 game a week, but he came into the season not match fit, then went away to afcon and maybe there was a hangover from last season. He’s still been phenomenal overall for us though.
Click to expand...
He does cover a lot of ground each game.
 
All I'm hearing is how Carrick can't break a low block. But actually who can ? All the top teams complain about the same issue.

Football has changed so much over the years. All the players are athletic now and can sustain keeping a shape and being solid easier than ever before. No manager is going to find a magic formula to break low block all of a sudden. The only team who seem to have found some sort of way is Arsenal and they get criticised for it.
 
sullydnl said:
Win percentage this PL season in games where teams have 45%+ of the ball.

Arsenal: 71% in 24 games.
City: 65% in 23 games.
Villa: 50% in 20 games.
United: 26% in 19 games.
Chelsea: 50% in 24 games.
Liverpool: 44% of 25 games.

Not only do we hit that possession threshold less than the teams around us, we've been notably worse at converting the games in which we do into wins. Especially as compared to the 100% win rate in the rest of our games, which is largely why we're in the good position we are.

And, anecdotally, our struggles in terms of dominating possession and turning the games in which we do dominate possession into wins have been cited as an issue on here for many years at this point.

So while it's true that teams setting up to frustrate can be an issue for any team, I think it's fair to cite how our results skew in terms of possession as a particular issue for us.

And in turn to place particular scrutiny on how Carrick sets us up in those games when evaluating him as a potential manager. Because whoever the manager we hire is, this is a prime problem that will need to be fixed under them.

But West Ham was still just one result, and we'll have further games against the likes of Everton, Palace, Leeds, Sunderland and Forest to assess this dynamic on too. So there's really no need to be as overcritical as some of the posts have been.
Click to expand...
Yep, totally agree with this. The percentage doesn't mean much at this stage because we all know that we had plenty of the ball under Amorim but did very little with it most of the time.

Yesterday didn't look that different aside from we stayed in control for the whole match until the couple of counters when we gambled near the end.

I think we lack a couple of players who excel in beating players that could really help in these type of games, but at the same time there are ways of being more proactive despite this, more crosses into the box (which was clearly where we were getting some joy when we did that last night), more aggressive pressing higher up the pitch to try and force errors etc.

It was all far too safe until about ten minutes from the end, so will be interesting to see if he can improve it in those types of games until the end of the season.
 
Time will tell whether he’s learnt his lesson or not. Mbeumo can not start upfront against low block teams. Sesko is perfect for that. Yoro stopped West Ham from scoring 3 goals and should partner Martinez. Let’s prepare for next season early. Cunha should have stayed on as he’s effective against low block teams with his long shot ability and ball carrying.
 
Josh 76 said:
All I'm hearing is how Carrick can't break a low block. But actually who can ? All the top teams complain about the same issue.

Football has changed so much over the years. All the players are athletic now and can sustain keeping a shape and being solid easier than ever before. No manager is going to find a magic formula to break low block all of a sudden. The only team who seem to have found some sort of way is Arsenal and they get criticised for it.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t take a genius to know that Mbeumo won’t be effective upfront against a low block team. Playing Sesko suddenly gives us more threat against a low block team as he’d unsettle them in the air.
 
DJ_21 said:
It doesn’t take a genius to know that Mbeumo won’t be effective upfront against a low block team. Playing Sesko suddenly gives us more threat against a low block team as he’d unsettle them in the air.
Click to expand...
That's the point im making. The long ball and set pieces seems to be the only way to beat the low block, and when teams do play that way, they get criticised. You can't win either way.
 
DJ_21 said:
Time will tell whether he’s learnt his lesson or not. Mbeumo can not start upfront against low block teams. Sesko is perfect for that. Yoro stopped West Ham from scoring 3 goals and should partner Martinez. Let’s prepare for next season early. Cunha should have stayed on as he’s effective against low block teams with his long shot ability and ball carrying.
Click to expand...
If he hasn't learned that lesson, we can say goodbye to top 5/UCL. We likely dropped 2 points yesterday because of that.

Sesko, or even Zirkzee should play striker against low block teams that cede possession and look to play on the counter. We desperately need in that situation a physical target in the box which will occupy CBs. Yoro should probably play in these matches as well - being a pacier CB that can defend in a higher line. Cunha on the left wing(even though he's not a winger, but we have no better solution), and Mbeumo/Amad on the right.
 
So far, for me, it has been Amorim's team +10%, which is great.

You can't really ask for more. The Fulham and West Ham games were a little frustrating to watch, but everyone is trying and a standard has been set.

Big break coming up, so it will be interesting to watch the team post-break to see if the coaches have been able to add anything new to the tactics.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
But again they rarely do when they're not losing.

Fergie never made changes at half time unless things had really gone tits up. Neither did Klopp.
Click to expand...
I didn't overly mind him not making changes at half time, but in a first half where I don't think we even had a shot on target, surely a manager has to be thinking and saying to his players at HT "you've got 10 minutes to show me something or I'm making changes". Light a fire up their f**king arses.

Instead, we concede 5 minutes into 2nd half, and not only does he not make a change there and then, he waits a further TWENTY MINUTES, again without looking like scoring, before making his first change.

Twenty wasted minutes at 1-0 down when it was obvious what we were doing wasn't working.

Used to drive me nuts when Amorim did it so I was really disappointed to see Carrick doing the same. I'm hoping he's more proactive in the remaining games.
 
Is it just me or are we playing 3 at the back?

Dalot Maguire Martinez
Amad Kobbie Case Shaw
Bruno
Cunha Mbuemo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.