Michael Carrick - set to be recommended for permanent role

[saik]

Maybe Carrick can still get the team there? Why the past tense? Is 4 months in mid-season enough to make final assessments on the ceiling of the manager? Would you also give the next manager only 4 months to show he can dominate games, before proclaiming they can't make it? Because by that measure Klopp, Pep, Arteta even Alex Ferguson himself should have been declared failures and replaced.

Yeah. 4 months is more than enough to show if there's something there that's worth persisting. What Carrick has shown so far doesn't make me think that this is going to win us titles.

And let's not bring SAF back into the discussion again. That was a completely different era.

 

[Shark]

We are in course for an 88 point season with Carrick in charge (extrapolating from 15 matches). Sure, there were seasons when you needed close to 100 points to win the league, but for most part, we would have been in a title race if we had been averaging as many points as we did under him. And probably win the league this season.

Of course, it is quite likely that we could not have maintained this form for a full season. But I think that the arguments that the league is weak do not properly stand, cause it is not only that we are getting more points than other teams, but also, compared to historical averages, we are doing ok to be in a title race in most seasons.

Indeed. We'll be competing on all fronts next season so it'll be a completely different predicament/challenge. Club in my opinion needs to bring in a good few players for him to have any chance, if he's up for the job.

 

[Ole's screen]

Yeah. 4 months is more than enough to show if there's something there that's worth persisting. What Carrick has shown so far doesn't make me think that this is going to win us titles.

And let's not bring SAF back into the discussion again. That was a completely different era.

Ok so if we get any other manager - say Enrique. And in 4 months we’re not better than 9/13 wins with a xPTS of >30 he should be sacked?

 

[Revan]

Indeed. We'll be competing on all fronts next season so it'll be a completely different predicament/challenge. Club in my opinion needs to bring in a good few players for him to have any chance, if he's up for the job.

I think that the club needs to bring a few players if they want to compete for the big trophies, regardless of who is the manager.

 

[sp_cgb]

I don't understand the "burned by OGS" bit and this is not just specific reaction to your post, because I see this posted often.

OGS had couple of very decent seasons (finishing 3rd, then 2nd) and a 3rd season where things went off the rails and he rightly got sacked. He has been better than a couple of post Fergie managers (Moyes and Amorim) and not too different from how we did under Ten Hag and LVG. They all had couple of decent seasons, maybe a minor trophy, not really challenging for the title, then they get sacked after that. His biggest failure was playing for penalties on the EL final against Villareal, if he had won that his reign would have been as good as Mourinho's reign, which was the best in the post Fergie era. But without any of the exhausting hysterics and dram of the special one.

At some point we have to accept that he did OK and the problem was largely bad recruitment and leadership from the board, while also acknowledging that he was obviously not of the calibre of Pep or Klopp which were pretty exceptional managers. I think for being just a "good vibes" or "caretaker" manager without any serious pedigree and for operating under the ignoramous Woodward and the Glazers, he even exceeded expectations. We even played some good football during his reign. It was no disaster by any means. I wouldn't say he is a cautionary tale, Amorim is much more of a cautionary tale. The man nearly put us in a relegation battle and broke historic negative records.

Ole's setup was very limited. In a league with City and Liverpool we were never going to achieve much with that. Which is partially his fault for his tactical limitations/favoritism, but also to the largest degree the fault of Woodward and our negligent, nonsensical approach to transfers and building/maintaining the squad.

For a while he probably got the best out of the team and results wise he did good work. The problem was, that at a club like United you can not be satisfied with being perennial also-rans and eventually fan/media pressure will force you to evolve. And Ole never made it past that hurdle and should in fact have been sacked after the Europa League final.
If Carrick's tenure has a similar trajectory, I just hope that our current executives will first of all deliver him the right players to improve the squad and secondly I hope we move on quickly, when a better managerial candidate becomes available. You wouldn't want to miss out on a really transformational coach, just because we're too sentimental to let go of a club legend again. That's my biggest concern actually.

 

[VP89]

Yeah. 4 months is more than enough to show if there's something there that's worth persisting. What Carrick has shown so far doesn't make me think that this is going to win us titles.

And let's not bring SAF back into the discussion again. That was a completely different era.

I suppose there's two potential faults in the logic here, one is assuming Carrick would play on the same way after we get a better summer of recruitment. The second is assuming that style that was coined from the poster mentioning SAF can't work today. Ancelotti is prob a better recent example for you where a manager isn't necessarily focused on controlling the game on the ball, but wants to control the major events of a game and get strong results over a long horizon.

 

[saik]

What did Kompany do to deserve the Bayern job?

I've said it another post but they admittedly took a chance with Kompany. They identified someone with a playstyle which they hoped will translate better with better players and it worked out. We've already seen how we are playing under Carrick. Didn't Boro fans also say that this is pretty much how he has his teams play?

 

[Ole's screen]

I've said it another post but they admittedly took a chance with Kompany. They identified someone with a playstyle which they hoped will translate better with better players and it worked out. We've already seen how we are playing under Carrick. Didn't Boro fans also say that this is pretty much how he has his teams play?

No Boronfans had the opposite problem. Their team was very much like what you want from Carrick’s team - very good at keeping possession, but can be stale at times, and vulnerable to getting countered on.

 

[Lynty]

Yeah. 4 months is more than enough to show if there's something there that's worth persisting. What Carrick has shown so far doesn't make me think that this is going to win us titles.

And let's not bring SAF back into the discussion again. That was a completely different era.

Not sure how much more he could prove otherwise based on the resources we have. Yes we'll be competing in more competitions, but its on the club to improve squad depth to allow us to challenge.

 

[saik]

I suppose there's two potential faults in the logic here, one is assuming Carrick would play on the same way after we get a better summer of recruitment. The second is assuming that style that was coined from the poster mentioning SAF can't work today. Ancelotti is prob a better recent example for you where a manager isn't necessarily focused on controlling the game on the ball, but wants to control the major events of a game and get strong results over a long horizon.

Didn't Boro fans say this is pretty much exactly how he was at Boro as well? Why are we expecting him to suddenly do something different despite all the evidence we have?

 

[saik]

This isn't a sentimental hire though.

If this was any other manager, like let's say some random dude from the Championship or from Spain, if they had gotten the results that Carrick has, and gotten all of the players onside the way he has, would you not say that this manager has done as much as they could have done in these circumstances, and deserve a full season at the job?

Why is it any different because it's someone who played for us in the past?

If that someone else has us putting in the same kind of performances like we did in some of our games I'd say they don't deserve the job either.

At this point it's more or less nailed on that Carrick is getting the permanent job seeing how little we are being linked to other managers. So we will see how it goes I guess.

 

[saik]

Not sure how much more he could prove otherwise based on the resources we have. Yes we'll be competing in more competitions, but its on the club to improve squad depth to allow us to challenge.

Yes I've repeatedly acknowledged that the results have been good but my concern is the performances. I don't see us continuing to pick up results playing the way we did in some of our games. Guess we will find out next season. I've accepted that he's going to be our permanent manager next season so there's no point debating it much right now.

 

[Ali Dia]

I saw Howson of all people make a good point. Ole actually had some very good targets, but Woodward and co failed to get them (Haaland, Bellingham, Rice, etc). If Ineos think they are better and the football operation set up is as good as they think, then hiring Carrick should be an obvious move. I can definitely see where he's coming from on that, not sure I fully agree, but it's a very good point.

We could have bought all of the above players for peanuts when Ole was here and we'd probably be the best team in the country for the last few years. I do think ineos are going back to basics. If they want someone they go for it, they don't "monitor the situation" while ambitious clubs actually got the business done. We loved a good situation monitor

 

[devilish]

There are similarities between Ole and Carrick. They are both club legends with little EPL management experience who got the job after being interim here.

There are differences as well. Ole was a typical 90s goal poacher. These people are hardwired to put the ball in the net. Carrick on the other hand was a playmaker who had to adapt to a more defensive role. He's not the kind of manager to come out with a different tactic for every game but he had shown a will to adapt his tactics when they aren't working. That's something Ole had never done, at least successfully. Another key difference is that Carrick is no crowd pleaser. That was evident from day 1 ie with Carrick's choice of coaches. While Ole surrounded himself with the mentor's pet (Phelan), the ex player (Carrick) and United's staff (Dempsey and Mckenna), Carrick was ballsy enough to bring people out of the club. He went for experience in Holland and he brought his former no 2 with Woodgate. This had ruffled feathers especially among our ex players who probably expected a call up. Carrick couldn't give a toss about that or about how it would look having a former Leeds player + Southgate's no 2 at his side. Ole's obsession of pleasing everyone was, in my opinion, one of the reasons why he had failed at United. We ended up with a bloating squad were each player was promised by the manager ample game time.

However the biggest difference of it all lie in the role. Ole was brought in as a SAF's type of manager. That meant having a huge say in everything from tactics to recruitment right to which kid should be promoted, whether he should be loaned and to whom. Carrick is a head coach. That restricts him to tactics and man management with some say on transfers.

Football had changed since SAF's time. Football is data driven which mean that every second of every game is analysed, each weakness is revealed and that data is fed back to the manager who would then have to find creative ways to exploit that. A manager can be unstoppable on year 1 and then end up sacked on year 2 as he failed to find a plan B to his once successful tactic. We must adapt to a fast paced world were managers are just a replaceable cog within a system that can easily be changed or upgraded at a moment notice.

 

[saik]

Ok so if we get any other manager - say Enrique. And in 4 months we’re not better than 9/13 wins with a xPTS of >30 he should be sacked?

No, read my posts again. My concerns are about the performances. If we are struggling and still are being 50/50 against mid table and relegation threatened teams then I would be concerned about Enrique as well. Maybe a little less as he's a lot more proven in his managerial career than Carrick is currently.

 

[Ish]

The “smart” play is probably giving it to Carrick and setting the ground work in place for Enrique to arrive once he’s done at PSG. Get the signings and squad in a better shape etc.

Of course that’s a massively complicated plan (if Carrick does well, what do you then do?) but city somehow pulled it off with Pep (though they had Txiki there etc). Albeit, lots of moving parts and a year or two in football is almost a lifetime - things change quickly.

Our timing for elite managers since SAF’s retirement has been terrible. Maybe we can try and rectify that. Alright, back to the real world I go.

 

[devilish]

I saw Howson of all people make a good point. Ole actually had some very good targets, but Woodward and co failed to get them (Haaland, Bellingham, Rice, etc). If Ineos think they are better and the football operation set up is as good as they think, then hiring Carrick should be an obvious move. I can definitely see where he's coming from on that, not sure I fully agree, but it's a very good point.

Howson is Rio's lackey and Rio is mate of Ole. I'll take everything he says with a heavy pinch of salt. Sure there will be targets that we might have failed to sign but that happened to everyone else including City or SAF's United (Gazza, Shearer, Batistuta and the amazing Celio Silva). INEOS failed to sign Semenyo, Olise and they'll probably miss out on Anderson. Good managers tend to have a plan B and they'll be able to adapt their tactics to the team they have. Ole failed on both

 

[devilish]

The “smart” play is probably giving it to Carrick and setting the ground work in place for Enrique to arrive once he’s done at PSG. Get the signings and squad in a better shape etc.

Of course that’s a massively complicated plan (if Carrick does well, what do you then do?) but city somehow pulled it off with Pep (though they had Txiki there etc). Albeit, lots of moving parts and a year or two in football is almost a lifetime - things change quickly.

Our timing for elite managers since SAF’s retirement has been terrible. Maybe we can try and rectify that. Alright, back to the real world I go.

The smart thing is to

a- acknowledge that Carrick has earned his bacon. Sacking him now will put the next manager under ridiculous pressure to perform ASAP which is both unfair and counterproductive. Thus let's give him a contract and lets get on with it. We've got more pressing matters to work upon.

b- acknowledge that Carrick lack experience. Thus we need to surround him with more experience (coaches etc).

c- United need a huge transfer summer to succeed The manager will want to butt in on the matter. While its important to listen to the manager we also need to take his lack of experience in terms of transfers as well.We can't replicate the same mistakes we did with ETH.

d- come out with a plan B if Carrick fails. That should be done irrespective of the manager.

 

[Ish]

The smart thing is to

a- acknowledge that Carrick has earned his bacon. Sacking him now will put the next manager under ridiculous pressure to perform ASAP which is both unfair and counterproductive. Thus let's give him a contract and lets get on with it. We've got more pressing matters to work upon.

b- acknowledge that Carrick lack experience. Thus we need to surround him with more experience (coaches etc).

c- United need a huge transfer summer to succeed The manager will want to butt in on the matter. While its important to listen to the manager we also need to take his lack of experience in terms of transfers as well.We can't replicate the same mistakes we did with ETH.

d- come out with a plan B if Carrick fails. That should be done irrespective of the manager.

Yeah, can't really argue too much with the above. I'll admit....I'm in two minds due to performances and set up (we've just not had enough intensity etc.) but you can't argue with the results.

Promising for me is that someone linked a story last week saying this isn't how Carrick wants to play. He wants to play a more dominant brand but is compromising due to personnel/squad (that's a good trait IMO)- that's somewhat refreshing.

So...hoping we sort out our midfield and add 1 or 2 key other acquisitions, we can follow through and Carrick can show us a better level of performance(s), whilst trying to maintain his exceptional results.

 

[Zen86]

Yeah. 4 months is more than enough to show if there's something there that's worth persisting. What Carrick has shown so far doesn't make me think that this is going to win us titles.

And let's not bring SAF back into the discussion again. That was a completely different era.

We’ve been in title winning form since he took over. It’s a pretty high bar if the expectancy is to also dominate all opposition after taking over mid season, considering the state of us beforehand.

 

[groovyalbert]

The smart thing is to

a- acknowledge that Carrick has earned his bacon. Sacking him now will put the next manager under ridiculous pressure to perform ASAP which is both unfair and counterproductive. Thus let's give him a contract and lets get on with it. We've got more pressing matters to work upon.

b- acknowledge that Carrick lack experience. Thus we need to surround him with more experience (coaches etc).

c- United need a huge transfer summer to succeed The manager will want to butt in on the matter. While its important to listen to the manager we also need to take his lack of experience in terms of transfers as well.We can't replicate the same mistakes we did with ETH.

d- come out with a plan B if Carrick fails. That should be done irrespective of the manager.

I think this is a key point. We need to add a lot to this squad in order to be able to compete across European and domestic cup competitions as well as the league. Our depth is our biggest issue and we are losing a key component of our spine in Casemiro. As well as we have done since Carrick has come in, we have been able to achieve what looks like a 3rd place finish largely due to us having a less impactful schedule and teams around us falling off because they're stretched. We could very easily fall into that category next season and a successful 26/27 season would be us maintaining the same league position whilst going deep into other competitions.

For that to happen we need to maintain as much consistency as possible whilst understanding we will have to add a lot to the side in terms of new personnel. This is exactly why Carrick should keep his role - as well as having more than shown enough quality since joining.

When Carrick first joined there was probably a list of 5/6 realistic managers who most would have preferred. That list has shrunk massively given Carrick's performance. If Enrique was obtainable then it would be a no brainer, but none of the other options are guaranteed upgrades.

 

[Lash]

Howson is Rio's lackey and Rio is mate of Ole. I'll take everything he says with a heavy pinch of salt. Sure there will be targets that we might have failed to sign but that happened to everyone else including City or SAF's United (Gazza, Shearer, Batistuta and the amazing Celio Silva). INEOS failed to sign Semenyo, Olise and they'll probably miss out on Anderson. Good managers tend to have a plan B and they'll be able to adapt their tactics to the team they have. Ole failed on both

Yeah, but that's not really Ole's forte. We seem to have a better team of people who can source adequate replacements. Basically, I think if Carrick wanted an Antony, we wouldn't just pay through the nose for him, we'd had have a suitable alternative.

 

[Robbie Boy]

Not sure how much more he could prove otherwise based on the resources we have. Yes we'll be competing in more competitions, but its on the club to improve squad depth to allow us to challenge.

It's funny, apparently we've been terrible and lucked our way to 32 points since he took charge. Have we been great? Absolutely not. But anyone who has watched the top two over the last few months, will have seen that both have played fairly poor and inconsistent, too. So, it's hardly as if anyone in the league has been playing swashbuckling football during that period.

He's also achieved this without signing a single player, and walking into an unbalanced squad, that was in a very bad place. He's managed the likes of Mainoo and Sesko really well, and overall, he's done a fine job. I get the reservations about him, but some seem convinced that he's nowhere near good enough, which seems premature.

 

[devilish]

Yeah, can't really argue too much with the above. I'll admit....I'm in two minds due to performances and set up (we've just not had enough intensity etc.) but you can't argue with the results.

Promising for me is that someone linked a story last week saying this isn't how Carrick wants to play. He wants to play a more dominant brand but is compromising due to personnel/squad (that's a good trait IMO)- that's somewhat refreshing.

So...hoping we sort out our midfield and add 1 or 2 key other acquisitions, we can follow through and Carrick can show us a better level of performance(s), whilst trying to maintain his exceptional results.

That's down to personnel. Casemiro-Mainoo aren't the most mobile players out there while Maguire, Martinez and De Ligt aren't among the quickest either. In few words, the core of our squad likes to be close to our box and would struggle in a high press.

ETH created a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde style of tactic. The defense would play a low block while the forward line would engage in a high press. That created the famous donut issue in CM. Amorim on the other hand stuck to his high press 3-5-2 system with no care in the world of anything else. He would probably go on Casemiro, hit him with a wand or something and tell him "you are now prime Roy Keane, act like one" Therefore United would play high intensity football for 40 minute and still end up losing or drawing. Carrick on the other hand did the unthinkable. He started playing LBs and LBs, CB as CBs, no 10s as no 10s and wingers as wingers. He also came out with a tactics that takes the best out of his players. It has its limits because this squad is limited, it has it weaknesses because this squad is weak as well but its the best we could do given the circumstances. Luckily we've got an administration that understand that a high intensity system that is spearheaded by powerful/hardworking athletes is the way to go. Hence why we went for the likes of Mbuemo, Cunha and Sesko.

 

[Gavinb33]

Yeah. 4 months is more than enough to show if there's something there that's worth persisting. What Carrick has shown so far doesn't make me think that this is going to win us titles.

And let's not bring SAF back into the discussion again. That was a completely different era.

Did you think getting shit results with Amorim was better than good results with Carrick?

Because what are we talking about here is prior to Carrick the squad wasn't good enough we need new players in all these positions etc etc, the players haven't changed if you thought they werent good before they are still who they were then, the only thing that's changed is a manager has come in and gone ok this isn't a perfect squad but I know how to get results from them, I imagine and actually I'm pretty convinced Carrick would like to play differently but not having the players to do so is more concentrated on getting reaults rather than dying on some ideological hill whilst getting 1.38 point per game

 

[Ish]

That's down to personnel. Casemiro-Mainoo aren't the most mobile players out there while Maguire, Martinez and De Ligt aren't among the quickest either. In few words, the core of our squad likes to be close to our box and would struggle in a high press.

ETH created a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde style of tactic. The defense would play a low block while the forward line would engage in a high press. That created the famous donut issue in CM. Amorim on the other hand stuck to his high press 3-5-2 system with no care in the world of anything else. He would probably go on Casemiro, hit him with a wand or something and tell him "you are now prime Roy Keane, act like one" Therefore United would play high intensity football for 40 minute and still end up losing or drawing. Carrick on the other hand did the unthinkable. He started playing LBs and LBs, CB as CBs, no 10s as no 10s and wingers as wingers. He also came out with a tactics that takes the best out of his players. It has its limits because this squad is limited, it has it weaknesses because this squad is weak as well but its the best we could do given the circumstances. Luckily we've got an administration that understand that a high intensity system that is spearheaded by powerful/hardworking athletes is the way to go. Hence why we went for the likes of Mbuemo, Cunha and Sesko.

Yeah, agree with all of that. Like I said, I view his 'diplomacy' as a strength, not a stubborn ass weakness like Wuben!

Anyhow, I'm 95% convinced the job will be Carricks and I hope we continue getting our signings spot on over the summer to give Carrick a top-quality midfield (and then some).

 

[VP89]

Didn't Boro fans say this is pretty much exactly how he was at Boro as well? Why are we expecting him to suddenly do something different despite all the evidence we have?

No, I believe it's the complete opposite here. Where have you read otherwise? I'm curious to see what you've heard.

 

[Alemar]

Not sure how much more he could prove otherwise based on the resources we have.

Games vs Newcastle and Leeds were truly abysmal, though. That said, if he were here from the start of the season we would likely be top of the league or nearabouts

 

[Lynty]

Agreed

Though I can’t actually point to anything Carrick did tactically wrong.

I think we need significant recruitment to address zero squad depth in midfield and attack.

 

[MadMike]

Yeah. 4 months is more than enough to show if there's something there that's worth persisting. What Carrick has shown so far doesn't make me think that this is going to win us titles.

And let's not bring SAF back into the discussion again. That was a completely different era.

SAF is not the only name that I mentioned, don't cherry pick. On your grounds Arteta was not worth persisting with, for Arsenal. He's from the current era last I checked.

You're fully entitled to your opinion of course, but I don't find it a reasonable take, personally. I don't think 4 months are near enough to draw negative conclusions, especially when the results have been good. The expectation that in 4 months, without any transfers, you will see a big uptick in both results and performances does not happen in competitive league environments (i.e. outside of managing Bayern or PSG in the "one-horse race" leagues with huge budget and quality differentials).

 

[André Dominguez]

Agreed

Though I can’t actually point to anything Carrick did tactically wrong.

I think we need significant recruitment to address zero squad depth in midfield and attack.

We need urgently to get rid of the dead wood first, though.

 

[MadMike]

We’ve been in title winning form since he took over. It’s a pretty high bar if the expectancy is to also dominate all opposition after taking over mid season, considering the state of us beforehand.

It's not a high bar, it's an impossible bar. I have never seen a team sack their manager mid-season due to under-achievement and then the new manager is both putting up title-winning PPG and completely transforms the way the team plays in that time frame, without making any transfers.

I'm happy for people to point example where this has happened if they think it's realistic. The only time I remember an interim having an incredible impact was Di Matteo and even then he was mostly playing counter-attacking football to win the FA Cup and UCL finals. Not playing some expansive, controlling type of football.

 

[MadMike]

Ole's setup was very limited. In a league with City and Liverpool we were never going to achieve much with that. Which is partially his fault for his tactical limitations/favoritism, but also to the largest degree the fault of Woodward and our negligent, nonsensical approach to transfers and building/maintaining the squad.

For a while he probably got the best out of the team and results wise he did good work. The problem was, that at a club like United you can not be satisfied with being perennial also-rans and eventually fan/media pressure will force you to evolve. And Ole never made it past that hurdle and should in fact have been sacked after the Europa League final.

If Carrick's tenure has a similar trajectory, I just hope that our current executives will first of all deliver him the right players to improve the squad and secondly I hope we move on quickly, when a better managerial candidate becomes available. You wouldn't want to miss out on a really transformational coach, just because we're too sentimental to let go of a club legend again. That's my biggest concern actually.

Nothing you say is wrong. But also, nothing you say applies to Ole only. Van Gaal, Mourinho, ETH... much more established manager, never looked liked winning the league either. They never put up a league title or UCL challenge, despite significant funds being made available to them.

For me it is inevitable that if after 2-3 years you don't look you can build a title-challening squad or go deep in the UCL, the pressure will start building for a change of direction. And if you suddenly have a season where things look like they're falling apart, you can't complain if owners quickly pull the trigger and fire the manager. That's all normal IMO. At least for a club of this size, history, financial muscle and ambition.

 

[afrocentricity]

Why is it any different because it's someone who played for us in the past?

Trauma, a lot of posters are struggling with this one.

I'm just hoping they give him a short contract so we can see if he has the minerals. If it goes bad then we can diligently look for a manager (post world cup), and course correct mid season. If we are going by past experiences, that worked okay this session, so why not next?

I think that the club needs to bring a few players if they want to compete for the big trophies, regardless of who is the manager.

Exactly. We all want the board to support the next manager, hopefully all of the fans will do that too. Even the miserable ones....

 

[Zumbi]

Liverpool - decent first half, not so decent 2nd half. We started off very well but dropped off noticably after we scored our 2nd goal. Even before accounting for our gifts they were the better team in the 2nd half.

Brentford - started off well for about 20mins then it was Brentford who were better.

Chelsea - They were easily the better team.

Leeds - We were dominated by a relegation threatened team.

Bournemouth - Even game with Bournemouth edging it out.

Aston Villa - We were better team. Villa were awful.

Newcastle - We were awful. Lost to a team with 10 men.

Crystal Palace - Started off lethargic but we deserved the win.

Everton - another even game with them being the better team in 2nd half.

West Ham - We were awful.

Spurs - We were better.

Fulham - Another even game.

Arsenal - Even game.

City - We fully deserved our win.

So there's like 4 games where we were outright the better team. Remaining all range from not good enough to terrible. Especially the games against Leeds, Chelsea, West Ham and Newcastle stick out like a sore thumb. 50/50 games against traditionally big teams like Arsenal, Liverpool is acceptable. But against teams like Fulham, Everton, and Bournemouth its not fine. We really should be doing better against those lot if we are serious about winning PL.

Liverpool - decent first half, not so decent 2nd half. We started off very well but dropped off noticably after we scored our 2nd goal. Even before accounting for our gifts they were the better team in the 2nd half.

Brentford - started off well for about 20mins then it was Brentford who were better.

Chelsea - They were easily the better team.

Leeds - We were dominated by a relegation threatened team.

Bournemouth - Even game with Bournemouth edging it out.

Aston Villa - We were better team. Villa were awful.

Newcastle - We were awful. Lost to a team with 10 men.

Crystal Palace - Started off lethargic but we deserved the win.

Everton - another even game with them being the better team in 2nd half.

West Ham - We were awful.

Spurs - We were better.

Fulham - Another even game.

Arsenal - Even game.

City - We fully deserved our win.

So there's like 4 games where we were outright the better team. Remaining all range from not good enough to terrible. Especially the games against Leeds, Chelsea, West Ham and Newcastle stick out like a sore thumb. 50/50 games against traditionally big teams like Arsenal, Liverpool is acceptable. But against teams like Fulham, Everton, and Bournemouth its not fine. We really should be doing better against those lot if we are serious about winning PL.

I’m not going to bother going through all the games - it’s a waste of time because clearly you won’t change your mind. You have your narrative of us being “terrible” despite title winning form. That just doesn’t stand up to logic of course, but that matters little when someone’s mind is set on something.

But we looked much the better team than Liverpool over the totality of that game. We battered them first half and were unlucky not to put them to bed. They then had a period of ascendancy after we gifted them two goals. But then we steadied ourselves, still created much better chances in the second half, and could have won by even more. Trying to deny we were the better team in that game is not a serious take.

You seem to be someone that mistakes stale possession for control. In most of our games under Carrick we’ve looked less likely to concede and more likely to score than the opposition (aside from that small number of poor performances), even if our mid block has ceded possession in some areas of the pitch. But in and around the two penalty boxes we’ve defended much more comfortably than we had been and typically look more likely to get a goal than our opponents in most games. It’s a deliberate tactical choice which has mitigated our weaknesses and played into our strengths. And it’s worked far more often than it hasn’t.

 

[dinostar77]

Rumours on social media that he's been given the job and it will be announced soon. Unfortunately no journalist worth quoting at the moment.

 

[AFIABM]

His best players were sold without any proper replacement.

How did they do after Carrick left?

 

[KStandBarmyArmy1993]

Rumours on social media that he's been given the job and it will be announced soon. Unfortunately no journalist worth quoting at the moment.

Will be announced before kick off at the Forest game. Heard it here first.

 

[tenpoless]

At the moment I would only take: Enrique, Zidane or Ancelotti ahead of him. But theyre obviously hard and even impossible to get.

If the only available options are Iraola, Southgate, Pochettino, Nagelsmann, Adolf Hutter, etc then I'd rather give it to Carrick.

 

[SirFergie]

I think that the club needs to bring a few players if they want to compete for the big trophies, regardless of who is the manager.

Spot on.