More possession would work with United, not hoofing ball

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

We need more creative center midfielders. Right now our only ones are Pogba and a semi retired Carrick. To make it worse our number 10s are all consistently inconsistent

 

[desmondisback]

According to José, it is better not to have the ball. Having the ball apparently makes you afraid and liable to make mistakes. If this is José's philosophy, why are we surprised?

Except that we are often the team that looks afraid. We looked scared of City and scared of Chelsea and made mistakes without the ball and lost both. In those two games at least we looked shite and it just didn't work. But he won't change even though he must know somewhere that he's slowly becoming outdated.

 

[Bestietom]

According to José, it is better not to have the ball. Having the ball apparently makes you afraid and liable to make mistakes. If this is José's philosophy, why are we surprised?

Bad Bad excuse. Bring in a different trainer and new players, if this is the case.

 

[steffyr2]

I'm disgusted by Jose's tactical in first half that we just conceded more possession to City which means more possession more they take set pieces. When we have a ball, what we do? Hoofed ball to Lukaku with no supports when he receives the ball and not building up attacking play. Why would Lukaku do defensives duties? He wasn't supposed to do it in the first place and he's striker for a reason, it is his job to score a tap-in goal.

Why didn't we start the same thing in first half as we did in the second half? After 43 minutes we have more shot on target than City did in 43minutes to 90m when we started playing



City is killing everyone because of the possession, more possession, easier they can control the games in building up play and limit the opponents chance. PSG, City, Bayern Munich and Barcelona are one of the top sides in Europe due to dominant possession based that made them even stronger.


LVG would stop City right now and destroy them completely. LVG has a better record against top sides than Jose, even against top 10 sides at that time, when he was managers, he had a better record than Jose, Wenger, Pochettino and Klopp for top 10 sides. Can we appoint him as deputy managers that only play against top sides and leave rest of games to Jose against a lesser team and give Jose a budget to spend money on players in the transfer window?

it's fine that we should defend sometime but not set up tactically cowardly to defend and hoof balls to the big striker.

Don't get me wrong, I like Jose but I hate his tactical sometimes, it's not United way to be scared of their opponents. However, it's not player's fault that we lost a game to City because Jose told them to sit back and concede most of the possession to City and hoof balls and ask Lukaku to do his defensive duties in our box has already cost us a game, it made City looking like champions and we were looking like a relegated team fighting for a life. Yeah, I can blame Jose for that.

Yeah, I get it, Arsenal dominated possession and lost games but it is a one-off, we can't repeat every time we face top sides like Barca, PSG or even Bayern Munich.

OMG, I'd rather lose every game with Mourinho as manager than watch any more of the LVG "possession" style. What a snooze-fest that was!

Shorter initial post -- Waah! We lost to City!

 

[Bestietom]

We need more creative center midfielders. Right now our only ones are Pogba and a semi retired Carrick. To make it worse our number 10s are all consistently inconsistent

I agree entirely.

 

[redIndianDevil]

This is why I don't think the big CF up top approach works against them. Otamendi/Kompany is a realtively vulnerable partnership but because Lukaku was always alone (and played poorly) it's not hard for them to marshal him - plus Fernadinho mops up anything on the floor that would go to feet and was never really under pressure. You end up with the 9 men defending and 1 up top scenario that happened on Sun.

At the Etihad I would love to see something a bit funky, like a fake 4-5-1 where the striker is a false 9 (I think Pep actually did this before in the PL?) for example Lingard, whose main job when defending is sitting on the DM.

In defence:

--------------------- Matic-----------------------
Rashford - Herrera - Lingard - Pogba - Martial

In attack:

------------------- Matic ------------
-------------Herrera - Pogba------------
Rashford--------Lingard----------Martial


This doesn't really work with someone like Lukaku or Ibra because you need the agility,speed and stamina of someone like Lingard to pull CBs out of line/occupy the DM (the latter leaving City 1 man down in the middle).

Disclaimer: Lingard is only an example, I'm not saying he's suddenly Messi. Ideally we can snaffle Griezmann who would play this role perfectly.

LOL Mourinho's idea of counter attacking is to have our players hoof it up aimlessly in the general direction of a huge player, that goes straight out the window when you play midgets like Lingard upfront

 

[dichinero]

Bad Bad excuse. Bring in a different trainer and new players, if this is the case.

Except that we are often the team that looks afraid. We looked scared of City and scared of Chelsea and made mistakes without the ball and lost both. In those two games at least we looked shite and it just didn't work. But he won't change even though he must know somewhere that he's slowly becoming outdated.

I just don't see him changing unfortunately.

 

[quiet_united]

I posted this in the composure thread. I don’t think we have the player to play possession football.
This is Barca
This is City
This is Bayern when Pep was still their manager
There aren’t too many clips of us doing it so here are the few I can find

I will leave it to you guys to decide.

 

[Murray3007]

I posted this in the composure thread. I don’t think we have the player to play possession football.
This is Barca
This is City
This is Bayern when Pep was still their manager
There aren’t too many clips of us doing it so here are the few I can find

I will leave it to you guys to decide.

would not have thought that when LVG arrived either but we kept the ball well with him, its just not the tactics Jose will usually apply which is the problem and well also Lukkaku ball control will f**k most of it up anyway if we tried

 

[andycolegangstainnit]

We could have put more technical players in against City - Mata, micky - and kept hold of the ball better or we could have tried passing it round the back four more but what would that have achieved? Often the amount of possession you have depends on the opposition. In the first half - like against Spurs - it was the City pressing that disrupted us and forced us to go long (the last 30 mins was different as we were pressing them). The only answer to the high press is to be more direct. I suspect that's why jose picked the team he did instead of Mata in there. Our problem was the quality of the passing. With Lindelof & Pogba in there it would've been much better. Rashford & Martial would've seen far more of the ball.

Personally, I do not like possession football. It's boring. you do need to build from the back and work your way up the pitch obviously but keeping possession for the sake out it is very dull. For me we need a replacement for Carrick. Someone who can fill in for Pogba and actually get some passes to the forwards. Maybe Pereira can do that.

 

[dichinero]

would not have thought that when LVG arrived either but we kept the ball well with him, its just not the tactics Jose will usually apply which is the problem and well also Lukkaku ball control will f**k most of it up anyway if we tried

It's not rocket science. If the players are not coached to keep the ball and employ tactics that encourages having a lot of ball possession, why are people expecting the players to have that in their locker. We've seen teams with lesser players keep the ball better than United

 

[shield]

We need more creative center midfielders. Right now our only ones are Pogba and a semi retired Carrick. To make it worse our number 10s are all consistently inconsistent

Agree. I think it is as simple as this. We will have to wait till we get the next midfielder who can control things from the midfield. We are good right now. Just not, "blow your opposition out" kind of good. With the players we have at the moment, we can win but the matches, we will by no means be able to dominate.

LVG tried possession, with roughly the same bunch of footballers. His idea was good, but we could all see that it was never going to work. I don't feel Mourinho's methods are as defensive as they turn out to be. I feel that we are just not able to counter effectively, which is because quite a few players are not skilled in moving the ball to beat a player closing them down.

I am quite convinced that, even today, had we tried to play possession football, our players would have just passed the ball aimlessly, hovered around the midway line, and presented something which could be categorized as neither possession nor good defensive football.

The position we are in now is actually a huge improvement on anything we have done in the last few years. Only thing is, City is blowing teams away and that makes the state we are in look worse.

We can do better, but not that much. We will have to wait and see if we manage to find another quality creative midfielder.

 

[Irish Jet]

Other than a brief and painful stint under Van Gaal we’ve never been a possession orientated team. Yes we’d dominate teams as we’d have better players but our style was always about moving the ball quickly in the final third and playing with relentless width.

I have no issue with sitting deep and counter attacking – When you see the goals against Arsenal it’s pretty beautiful football when executed properly.

The issue against City is we weren’t even set up to counter. The team had no cohesion, everyone was doing their own thing and there was panic all over the team – I think they were genuinely intimidated by City in a way previous Mourinho sides never would have been. The hoofing up field while not even looking is genuinely some retro Wimbledon shite – not effective, not even safe, just utterly gutless. We played with an inferiority complex against City – It took them going in front for us to even try and hurt them. Most painful 43 minutes of football I can remember. Humiliating. I love Mourinho but he can’t escape what a disaster that actually was.

 

[r3idy]

The whole possession is better than counter-attacking football argument is pretty moot for me. It's not how much you have the ball, it's what you do with when you have it should be the consideration. It's like people have been brainwashed into the argument that possession football is the best football. It's just another system. I have a load of Bluenoses on my FB and they are literally giving each other hand jobs on the basis that it's a privilege to see some of the best football this Isle has ever seen. For all their intricate little passes, midfielders as false nines, midfielders as fullbacks, Fullbacks as deep lying playmakers, they still couldn't do the fundamentals of defending when we scored. It's Bullshit that possession football is better than counter-attacking football. United don't need to have the ball more. They need to make more clear-cut chances when they have the ball. Get back to the fundamentals of what Jose was and has always said which is the transition from defence to attack. At the moment we are just too slow in doing that. Passing accuracy has to be one of the lowest by any teams in the last 3-4 games

City had demonstrably better players than us in midfield on Sunday and they played their system better than we played ours on Sunday. Matic is not a ballplayer and neither is Herrera. For his hot and cold streaks, Lingard was up against more experienced and technically better players. Then you add in De Gea was off form with his distribution, very little ball found it's way to Lukaku, the result, performance should be no surprise.

Personally, I find Guardiola's brand of football to be boring. Some people say it's beautiful, I think he over complicates it

 

[tomaldinho1]

LOL Mourinho's idea of counter attacking is to have our players hoof it up aimlessly in the general direction of a huge player, that goes straight out the window when you play midgets like Lingard upfront

Exactly - my point is that system would avoid that and hopefully force us to play a little

 

[Home&Away]

Can't wait for my man giggs & nick butt to bring possession back to united.

Waiting for the inevitable Jose explosion post winning something overly defensively

 

[The Respectful Blue]

Can't wait for my man giggs & nick butt to bring possession back to united.

Waiting for the inevitable Jose explosion post winning something overly defensively

Giggs is keen on the job. So keen that he conspired against both Moyes and LVG to ensure the dressing didn’t work for them, so keen that he helped put United through years of avoidable misery and so obvious that Mourinho wouldn’t take the job with Giggs in his ‘support’ role.
OK so Jose has some blind spots but he’s a serial honour winner and you want to see the back of him, a proven world class manager, and then introduce a self-serving chancer?
I mean what other club would want Giggs at the helm? You’d need to go down 3 divisions to find a taker in England and you’d have him manage United???

Wow . . It seems that I’m not the only City fan on this forum - and that certain others are both undercover and looking to ferment dissatisfaction - that call to bring in Giggs was a wind-up wasn’t it?

 

[Home&Away]

Giggs is keen on the job. So keen that he conspired against both Moyes and LVG to ensure the dressing didn’t work for them, so keen that he helped put United through years of avoidable misery and so obvious that Mourinho wouldn’t take the job with Giggs in his ‘support’ role.
OK so Jose has some blind spots but he’s a serial honour winner and you want to see the back of him, a proven world class manager, and then introduce a self-serving chancer?
I mean what other club would want Giggs at the helm? You’d need to go down 3 divisions to find a taker in England and you’d have him manage United???

Wow . . It seems that I’m not the only City fan on this forum - and that certain others are both undercover and looking to ferment dissatisfaction - that call to bring in Giggs was a wind-up wasn’t it?

No I want Giggs to be a manager because I am happy to see the progression of the club even if that happens at a slower rate. If Jose doesn't get us to the top - who else are we going to try? With him being the best at what he does - There isn't anyone apart from a group of 4 managers at max. I'd rather us learn how to climb a tree & learn how to stay up there rather than jumping from the bottom every 2 or 3 seasons trying to grab at an apple & falling more times than we succeed.

My post on another thread about the same subject in reply to why Giggs might work when he couldn't even get a job at Swansea :

'I get that but we did have intentions of giving him the Job just a year & a half ago until we scrapped that idea. Winning for a title & avoiding relegation are both tremendously hard jobs especially for someone with no experience like giggs - I just think if Jose eventually leaves; we would have tried & possibly failed with the best manager able to win us trophies regularly & be right at the top.

There really isn't anyone all that great left. A combination of Giggs being our Plan B after Moyes, someone who will get to know Plan C ie Jose's players & tactics, a reduction of expectations of a manager like giggs from us fans whilst he knows personally about the expectations of what he has to deliver here having being a player before as well as being & assist manager - I believe it could work.
I also don't think the gap between ex players & Managers is as big as it seems; lack of experience is there - but again us as fans are more able to give someone like giggs time to grow rather than Jose & LVG did because they come with huge expectations. There really isn't many managers or styles of football for us to try out anymore'

 

[gavdim2002]

According to José, it is better not to have the ball. Having the ball apparently makes you afraid and liable to make mistakes. If this is José's philosophy, why are we surprised?

Is this our new FEAR FACTOR?

 

[Keeps It tidy]

I posted this in the composure thread. I don’t think we have the player to play possession football.
This is Barca
This is City
This is Bayern when Pep was still their manager
There aren’t too many clips of us doing it so here are the few I can find

I will leave it to you guys to decide.

The big difference is those clubs have dedicated YouTube channels so they record everything and we don't. Every PL club would look impressive in a Rondo drill heck you can't find impressive Rondo videos with u12 squads.

 

[Canagel]

We need more creative center midfielders. Right now our only ones are Pogba and a semi retired Carrick. To make it worse our number 10s are all consistently inconsistent

This. It's very simple. We are crying for a creative midfielder who can keep the ball. The 4-2-3-1 system we usually play requires a top number 10 and we have Mkhi and Mata in this role currently. Neither are good enough. We basically need a creative CM who can link up with the attackers and be a threat from deep. Another Pogba type player.

 

[gavdim2002]

This. It's very simple. We are crying for a creative midfielder who can keep the ball. The 4-2-3-1 system we usually play requires a top number 10 and we have Mkhi and Mata in this role currently. Neither are good enough. We basically need a creative CM who can link up with the attackers and be a threat from deep. Another Pogba type player.

Reminds me of back in the day, when we ”needed another Robson to complement Robson”. A few years back, it was claimed that England had to many quality midfield players with creative Scholes ending up on the bench. To me, it´s about balance – based on what kind of football you want to play – and another Pogba to complement Pogba is hardly the solution.

 

[The Respectful Blue]

No I want Giggs to be a manager because I am happy to see the progression of the club even if that happens at a slower rate. If Jose doesn't get us to the top - who else are we going to try? With him being the best at what he does - There isn't anyone apart from a group of 4 managers at max. I'd rather us learn how to climb a tree & learn how to stay up there rather than jumping from the bottom every 2 or 3 seasons trying to grab at an apple & falling more times than we succeed.

My post on another thread about the same subject in reply to why Giggs might work when he couldn't even get a job at Swansea :

'I get that but we did have intentions of giving him the Job just a year & a half ago until we scrapped that idea. Winning for a title & avoiding relegation are both tremendously hard jobs especially for someone with no experience like giggs - I just think if Jose eventually leaves; we would have tried & possibly failed with the best manager able to win us trophies regularly & be right at the top.

There really isn't anyone all that great left. A combination of Giggs being our Plan B after Moyes, someone who will get to know Plan C ie Jose's players & tactics, a reduction of expectations of a manager like giggs from us fans whilst he knows personally about the expectations of what he has to deliver here having being a player before as well as being & assist manager - I believe it could work.
I also don't think the gap between ex players & Managers is as big as it seems; lack of experience is there - but again us as fans are more able to give someone like giggs time to grow rather than Jose & LVG did because they come with huge expectations. There really isn't many managers or styles of football for us to try out anymore'

United never intended to give Giggs the gig, they kept him onside to keep the dressing room onside with 2 new managers. There could never be serious intent because it would be madness.
If you ignore the dark side of Giggs (that you as a United fan should be well aware of) then I can understand where you're coming from emotionally, we'd all love to have a long-serving ex-player at the helm of our clubs. However, managing United is a massive job, too big a job for a managerial minnow. As example; Gary Neville is widely accepted to be a guy with a good understanding of the game, he talks an excellent job, but look at how he got along at a smallish club like Valencia . . he bombed so badly that he was sacked in less than 4 months. I've always been impressed by his knowledge, the way he demonstrates a deep and critical understanding of how other manager's ply their craft. I honestly thought he'd do alright there, not great at first but definitely alright, and he was shown to be totally unfit to manage.
My thought is that if Giggs is ever to manage a big club he needs to prove himself at a little one first . . not an semi-pro side like that hobby club he plays with in Salford but a real professional little club in Div 1 or the Championship but I don't think he'll do that because he wants one of the very biggest jobs in football gifted to him without earning it and United is too well run to ever allow that to happen.
My hat's off to you on the emotional side though as that I do understand - it's the stuff of fairytales and a nice thought to ponder on :-)

 

[Revaulx]

Reminds me of back in the day, when we ”needed another Robson to complement Robson”. A few years back, it was claimed that England had to many quality midfield players with creative Scholes ending up on the bench. To me, it´s about balance – based on what kind of football you want to play – and another Pogba to complement Pogba is hardly the solution.

We need another Pogba; not to complement Pogba, but to stand in for him while he’s injured or suspended

 

[desmondisback]

dichinero said: ↑
According to José, it is better not to have the ball. Having the ball apparently makes you afraid and liable to make mistakes. If this is José's philosophy, why are we surprised?

Is this our new FEAR FACTOR?

....apparently so. Funny thing is we look afraid without the ball and make mistakes. If this is Jose's philosophy in big games then after some deep thought and reflection I've decided that it's total pants.

 

[desmondisback]

United never intended to give Giggs the gig, they kept him onside to keep the dressing room onside with 2 new managers. There could never be serious intent because it would be madness.
If you ignore the dark side of Giggs (that you as a United fan should be well aware of) then I can understand where you're coming from emotionally, we'd all love to have a long-serving ex-player at the helm of our clubs. However, managing United is a massive job, too big a job for a managerial minnow. As example; Gary Neville is widely accepted to be a guy with a good understanding of the game, he talks an excellent job, but look at how he got along at a smallish club like Valencia . . he bombed so badly that he was sacked in less than 4 months. I've always been impressed by his knowledge, the way he demonstrates a deep and critical understanding of how other manager's ply their craft. I honestly thought he'd do alright there, not great at first but definitely alright, and he was shown to be totally unfit to manage.
My thought is that if Giggs is ever to manage a big club he needs to prove himself at a little one first . . not an semi-pro side like that hobby club he plays with in Salford but a real professional little club in Div 1 or the Championship but I don't think he'll do that because he wants one of the very biggest jobs in football gifted to him without earning it and United is too well run to ever allow that to happen.
My hat's off to you on the emotional side though as that I do understand - it's the stuff of fairytales and a nice thought to ponder on :-)

and United is too well run to ever allow that to happen.

LOL!! So how come the transition from Fergie to post Fergie has been so badly managed then? How come big money has been wasted on players? How come we have had 3 managers now whose best moments have been in the past? All 3 have looked like they have already peaked and were past their sell by date. I say Giggs would be well worth a punt. He knows exactly how Fergie worked. He's United through and through. The fans would warm to him. He'd be more true to the clubs attacking traditions. Any player who has served under Fergie for that long would have picked up loads.

And one other big advantage. He probably wouldn't worry about ringing Fergie himself from time to time for a bit of advice and I'm sure Fergie would be happy to offer some. That could hardly be a bad thing for us.

 

[Harry190]

Personally, I would appreciate far more crosses into the box. We score 1 out 3 of those. Why not keep doing it?

 

[shamans]

We played 'possession football' under LVG and it was some of the most boring rubbish I've ever seen. I think at one point we drew 0-0 4 or 5 times in a row. Plus we were less successful by most measures.

No thank you.

This. Possession football is nothing but crap. That time under LVG was very frustrating for me. So many people on here commented on how we were at least in control during games and had our defense sorted out.

The truth is, team just don't care if we have possession. They would let us keep it giving the illusion we are in control.

 

[The Respectful Blue]

LOL!! So how come the transition from Fergie to post Fergie has been so badly managed then? How come big money has been wasted on players? How come we have had 3 managers now whose best moments have been in the past? All 3 have looked like they have already peaked and were past their sell by date. I say Giggs would be well worth a punt. He knows exactly how Fergie worked. He's United through and through. The fans would warm to him. He'd be more true to the clubs attacking traditions. Any player who has served under Fergie for that long would have picked up loads.

And one other big advantage. He probably wouldn't worry about ringing Fergie himself from time to time for a bit of advice and I'm sure Fergie would be happy to offer some. That could hardly be a bad thing for us.

IMO the transition from SAF to post-SAF hasn’t been particularly badly managed at all. SAF’s tenure was incredibly long and fantastically successful so change was never going to be easy.
Moyes was a good stepping stone and one that SAF promoted but the players wouldn’t play for him and there was an orchestrated campaign in the media to depose him. That campaign was internally led and very damaging to the club but it wasn’t club policy it was politics whereby Giggs was vying for a position as coach. He wanted to depose Moyes. Giggs even had his close friend Paul Scholes (who had never previously uttered hardly a word to the media) briefing against Moyes because he, as Moyes supposed assistant, couldn’t openly campaign himself - though it was blatantly obvious because Scholes, as Giggs close pal, wouldn’t ever speak out against Giggs’s interests.
So, your first transition manager was torpedoed by your man Giggs and that lost you many games and cost United £millions (which is why I find it so incredible that a United supporter would want Giggs to have any position at the club).
The LVG appointment was a good call to steady the ship but the board made the mistake of keeping Giggs involved to hopefully keep the dressing room on side.
History repeated itself. It became obvious where the damage was emanating from, it was recognised that Giggs had to be surgically removed and so United were forced to bring in a very strong manager to crack the whip - if they couldn’t win round the dressing room they required a manager who wasn’t afraid of taking on a squad - that’s Jose’s forte and that’s why you got Jose rather than a manager with a softer more modern approach. Having Jose brings Jose’s style of play and, as this situation is a product of the Giggs effect, any complaints about United’s current negative (though very effective) football should be directed to that man. . Giggs.
Beyond that your football has actually been good - especially in terms of results. Throughout this damaging battle for the manager’s seat you have never finished particularly low in the PL, ok you missed out on Europe a few times but you were never in trouble as a club.
With Giggs out of the equation you’ve gone on to win the Carabou cup, ok not a major honour but definitely a trophy, you’ve won the Europa (see Carabou cup) and, most importantly, you’re back in Europe and through the group stages with panache. You’re also in 2nd spot in the PL with a points tally that would have had you in top spot in any other year. Hardly a disaster eh?
So, in summary and using a poor analogy; I think that your transition was never going to be easy, that it was critically damaged by your man Giggs and that the club has responded accordingly to cut that cancer out. That involved some painful surgery but you’re now out of hospital, back in work and doing a great job. Indeed were it not for your neighbours having a wonder season so far you’d be dancing on tables right now and this whole forum would be a much more cheerful and less introspective place.
I think that you should appreciate how well you’re doing and maybe reconsider your call to give Giggs a job he can’t do at a club he’s already damaged because his negative effect, though already much diminished, will remain as long as there’s a swell of opinion that would support him as manager.

As a final parting comment, I must add that your opinion, however outrageous it seems, could ultimately prove right as it does remain possible that Giggs goes on to become the greatest ever manager of Manchester United. I doubt it but I don’t have a crystal ball and you may give Nostradamus a run for his money.
The odds must be massive, I may put a fiver on it ;-)

 

[desmondisback]

Personally, I would appreciate far more crosses into the box. We score 1 out 3 of those. Why not keep doing it?

An excellent point. We have a big team and two forwards who are good in the air. But to do as you suggest would require a certain type of thinking - eg - look at what works and try to repeat it.

Most managers IMO seemed to be too obsessed with complex systems and their own agenda to actually see the simple truth of what's happening with their own team. It's a story repeated in politics , business and families all over the world. Over complicate and avoid basic realities.

Yes , more crosses into the box then. Simple.

 

[desmondisback]

This. Possession football is nothing but crap. That time under LVG was very frustrating for me. So many people on here commented on how we were at least in control during games and had our defense sorted out.

The truth is, team just don't care if we have possession. They would let us keep it giving the illusion we are in control.

Erh...baby thrown out with the bath water maybe? Possession football is not crap. Possession football without creating any chances is crap. Possession just for the sake of possession is crap. Possession football which leaves you vulnerable at the back is crap. But possession football that gives you control of the game and leads to pressure and chances? Not crap.

The way we did it with LVG was crap. The way Pep does it with City - not crap.

When Spurs beat Liverpool 4-1 not so long ago they conceded 60-70% of possession to them but still murdered them. So I would agree with you in the sense that it's really all about how many good chances you create and NOT about how many minutes you have with the ball.

BUT

........it's not always like this as you know. In fact it's often not like this. I prefer possession with purpose. I've always felt that if my team concedes possession then I'm nervous because it gives the opportunity for the other team to make choices. If you don't have the ball then you always have to respond to what the other team does , because they have the ball. If your team has the ball then you have the option to put crosses into their box or take long shots from the edge of the area. There's a whole lot more you can do with the ball than you can without it.

One thing that is frustrating is seeing the ball passed around aimlessly. Good possession football pushes the opposition around and pulls them out of position , and we all know it's about what you do with the ball once you reach that crucial area roughly mid way inside their half when you engage the first defensive midfielder. Purposeful possession teams choose that moment to pass quickly and dynamically with one touch triangles and 1-2s etc. LVG teams seemed to spend hours passing it around the back 4.

There is a difference and you are throwing out the baby I'm afraid. The reason I prefer possession is because it often means the ball is spending far more time away from your own box and is likely to be in their box more often. That leads to the potential for penalties , hand balls , deflected shots , mistakes , crosses being dropped by keepers etc etc and I'd much sooner all that be happening well away from my own penalty box and in their box.

 

[Home&Away]

The problem is not that we don't play possession football; its that when we need to do that either to control the match to score a goal or even to waste time & steady the ship- this seems nearly impossible for our players to string a couple of passes together.

 

[JohnnyKills]

One of the silver linings of City's form is that we'll have to go for it now. Hopefully that means attacking football.

 

[Fosu-Mens]

Ideally we should be able to play both possession based football and low possession counter based. How we play should be dependent on the opposition. If Man City play against Barcelona in CL now, then one of the them have to give up possession. Then, how will the team without the ball handle this?

Being tactically flexible is as vital a asset as having a world class goalie.

As for the benefits of our team playing possession based football and how well we are suited to this... As some of you on here have pointed out some our players does not suit this kind of play. Especially the following players;

Lukaku; Target man. Not suited to short passing and movement.
Rashford; When he gets the ball, then you know he is either going to shot, dribble or cross. And he is not the best at passing.
Smalling; Cant pass.
Valencia; Cant pass or cross. Only physique.

We have players who suit passing based football;
Mata; Perfect for this, but useless when we don't have the ball.
Mhiki; does not play.

 

[Canagel]

Reminds me of back in the day, when we ”needed another Robson to complement Robson”. A few years back, it was claimed that England had to many quality midfield players with creative Scholes ending up on the bench. To me, it´s about balance – based on what kind of football you want to play – and another Pogba to complement Pogba is hardly the solution.

Why is it not the solution? It's obvious we are lacking the quality in midfield and adding another top quality CM will make us more dangerous. City play KDB and Silva. They aren't lacking balance. Madrid play Modric and Kroos. Barcelona had Xavi and Iniesta running the show. It's hard enough to defend just 1 but when there are 2 players on the same wavelength you will have big problems. It's very important IMO.

 

[cyril C]

I agree entirely.

How many more creative players do we need, apart from Pogba there are Mata, MK, Herrera (and Carrick). We need creative player who can perform on a consistent basis, right now only Pogba is delivering.

 

[Irish Jet]

This is why I don't think the big CF up top approach works against them. Otamendi/Kompany is a realtively vulnerable partnership but because Lukaku was always alone (and played poorly) it's not hard for them to marshal him - plus Fernadinho mops up anything on the floor that would go to feet and was never really under pressure. You end up with the 9 men defending and 1 up top scenario that happened on Sun.

At the Etihad I would love to see something a bit funky, like a fake 4-5-1 where the striker is a false 9 (I think Pep actually did this before in the PL?) for example Lingard, whose main job when defending is sitting on the DM.

In defence:

--------------------- Matic-----------------------
Rashford - Herrera - Lingard - Pogba - Martial

In attack:

------------------- Matic ------------
-------------Herrera - Pogba------------
Rashford--------Lingard----------Martial


This doesn't really work with someone like Lukaku or Ibra because you need the agility,speed and stamina of someone like Lingard to pull CBs out of line/occupy the DM (the latter leaving City 1 man down in the middle).

Disclaimer: Lingard is only an example, I'm not saying he's suddenly Messi. Ideally we can snaffle Griezmann who would play this role perfectly.

This is a good post although I do think a more complete CF could cause them problems - Will be very interesting to see how Kane gets on today.

Lukaku has the physical attributes but doesn't hold the ball or link the play nearly well enough to drop 20 yards deeper. He allowed Kompany and Otamendi to isolate him by staying in the same areas - I don't know if this was a direct instruction by Mourinho but it seemed to disjoint the team and left too much space between him and the supporting forwards. There is zero chance that last year's Zlatan (regardless of instruction) would have tolerated that - he would have been imposing his game on the CB's rather than the other way around. It's where I feel Lukaku limits us - He's a goal threat for sure but I'm not sure we'll ever have an efficient cohesive attack with him as the focal point.

Lukaku has plenty of chances to prove his worth this season but I already feel like he's under pressure to produce a performance in a big game. If he doesn't we may seriously have to look at reducing his role in the team for next season - Especially if a top forward becomes available.

 

[shamans]

Erh...baby thrown out with the bath water maybe? Possession football is not crap. Possession football without creating any chances is crap. Possession just for the sake of possession is crap. Possession football which leaves you vulnerable at the back is crap. But possession football that gives you control of the game and leads to pressure and chances? Not crap.

The way we did it with LVG was crap. The way Pep does it with City - not crap.

When Spurs beat Liverpool 4-1 not so long ago they conceded 60-70% of possession to them but still murdered them. So I would agree with you in the sense that it's really all about how many good chances you create and NOT about how many minutes you have with the ball.

BUT

........it's not always like this as you know. In fact it's often not like this. I prefer possession with purpose. I've always felt that if my team concedes possession then I'm nervous because it gives the opportunity for the other team to make choices. If you don't have the ball then you always have to respond to what the other team does , because they have the ball. If your team has the ball then you have the option to put crosses into their box or take long shots from the edge of the area. There's a whole lot more you can do with the ball than you can without it.

One thing that is frustrating is seeing the ball passed around aimlessly. Good possession football pushes the opposition around and pulls them out of position , and we all know it's about what you do with the ball once you reach that crucial area roughly mid way inside their half when you engage the first defensive midfielder. Purposeful possession teams choose that moment to pass quickly and dynamically with one touch triangles and 1-2s etc. LVG teams seemed to spend hours passing it around the back 4.

There is a difference and you are throwing out the baby I'm afraid. The reason I prefer possession is because it often means the ball is spending far more time away from your own box and is likely to be in their box more often. That leads to the potential for penalties , hand balls , deflected shots , mistakes , crosses being dropped by keepers etc etc and I'd much sooner all that be happening well away from my own penalty box and in their box.

It's a preference but I've always found possession football to be crap and unattractive. Barca at their peak was a very boring team for me.

 

[JPRouve]

Ideally we should be able to play both possession based football and low possession counter based. How we play should be dependent on the opposition. If Man City play against Barcelona in CL now, then one of the them have to give up possession. Then, how will the team without the ball handle this?

Being tactically flexible is as vital a asset as having a world class goalie.

As for the benefits of our team playing possession based football and how well we are suited to this... As some of you on here have pointed out some our players does not suit this kind of play. Especially the following players;

Lukaku; Target man. Not suited to short passing and movement.
Rashford; When he gets the ball, then you know he is either going to shot, dribble or cross. And he is not the best at passing.
Smalling; Cant pass.
Valencia; Cant pass or cross. Only physique.

We have players who suit passing based football;
Mata; Perfect for this, but useless when we don't have the ball.
Mhiki; does not play.

Lukaku isn't a target man and has never been one.

 

[gavdim2002]

Why is it not the solution? It's obvious we are lacking the quality in midfield and adding another top quality CM will make us more dangerous. City play KDB and Silva. They aren't lacking balance. Madrid play Modric and Kroos. Barcelona had Xavi and Iniesta running the show. It's hard enough to defend just 1 but when there are 2 players on the same wavelength you will have big problems. It's very important IMO.

Similar players do not play well together. KDB & de Silva and Modric & Kroos are precisely not similar players and that’s one of the very reasons that it works so well for them. Xavi and Iniesta played in the best ever football team so that will be hard to compare.