Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion

[Sweet Square]

Still feels very strange watching him in the dug out yesterday and Ronaldo back at Old Trafford

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Tom Cato]

Don't get me wrong. I love stats. And I think they're really really useful. But I think people who don't understand where they come from and the models underneath can often misuse them, with complete confidence bordering on arrogance. And I think footballing journalism is rife with such cases.

Yeah this I agree with, of course. There is a lot of argument in bad faith surrounding things like xG and all other popular data thats been given media space that doesn't always offer a true image of events. Such as chance or chaos events you mentioned.

 

[Tom Cato]

Still feels very strange watching him in the dug out yesterday and Ronaldo back at Old Trafford

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

What a nice, deliberate assist from Ole

 

[Zen86]

Well no. Raw data is raw data. Interpretation is what makes it information that can be used and applied in meaningful ways.

So often what people call "facts" are data that people have already interpreted, often implicitly. Because, well, raw stats don't mean anything - they're just numbers. For example, take the xG stat. If a team has a higher xG - it is a fact that that team has a high xG. Nothing more and nothing less. What exactly that high xG means in relation to the team's performance is something layered with tons of interpretation of things like "what kind of chances are we trying to create?", "how clinical are we expecting our strikers to be", "what is our quality of players" etc. so the same stats may mean completely different things in different contexts. So to use such stats across teams to make predictions and judgements about different teams is fraught with danger and ripe for misuse via lack of understanding. And often the people that use them wrongly come armed with solid confidence in their stance based on their implicit interpretation of the stats.

Well no what?

 

[Ole's screen]

Well no what?

Your idea that stats are factual. Facts is raw stats + proper interpretation.

 

[Zen86]

Your idea that stats are factual. Facts is raw stats + proper interpretation.

So if I pick a statistic out of the air, say that we scored 4 goals against Newcastle, you’re telling me that isn’t factual?

 

[Ole's screen]

So if I pick a statistic out of the air, say that we scored 4 goals against Newcastle, you’re telling me that isn’t factual?

You're taking a fairly simple stat so in such cases the interpretive layer is very thin and often implicit in the stat. But to differentiate crudely, "4" is the stat, and "goals scored" is the interpretive layer. Combined they give us the "fact" that 4 goals were scored. Of course we all understand what "goals scored" means. But if you replace that with a more complicated and nuanced stat like xG or attempted pressures, or key passes, then that interpretive layer becomes thicker and there's more room for incorrect or misguided interpretations to lead to incorrect "facts".

For example, people will sometimes point to possession stats between different teams and say that team dominates the ball more. But that may not be true based on what exactly the two teams are trying to achieve and the way they go about dominating the ball.

 

[Amarsdd]

People just become over critical of our game and just praise other teams without watching them on a regular basis. Like if anyone had watched the Chelsea game yesterday would tell you Villa literally bossed them in the first half and should have been leading them. Mings gifted them a goal and Villa lost 3-0. But people without watching much will say "look how good tuchel is". Why isn't his wins termed "lucky" or called "individual brilliance".

Always felt people troll Ole to look cool. A narrative has always been made that he cannot coach and is just as a PE teacher. I myself have doubts with Ole and have criticized his tactics but I don't think we will be where we are with someone who doesn't know how to coach. It is just impossible. I hope we win a trophy or two as his work definitely deserves one.

I feel these two points are very overlooked. Its very difficult and kinda embarrassing to change your hyperbolic and over-the-top takes when it comes from those origins rather than actual nuanced criticisms.

 

[Pexbo]

You're taking a fairly simple stat so in such cases the interpretive layer is very thin and often implicit in the stat. But to differentiate crudely, "4" is the stat, and "goals scored" is the interpretive layer. Combined they give us the "fact" that 4 goals were scored. Of course we all understand what "goals scored" means. But if you replace that with a more complicated and nuanced stat like xG or attempted pressures, or key passes, then that interpretive layer becomes thicker and there's more room for incorrect or misguided interpretations to lead to incorrect "facts".

For example, people will sometimes point to possession stats between different teams and say that team dominates the ball more. But that may not be true based on what exactly the two teams are trying to achieve and the way they go about dominating the ball.

 

[Ole's screen]

 

[bondsname]

I can’t imagine Varane, Sancho and Ronaldo would come here just for the pay check. Ole has done a great job to make us a team worthy of attracting such talents, convincing thrm we are a team capable of winning silverware.

 

[Tom Cato]

So if I pick a statistic out of the air, say that we scored 4 goals against Newcastle, you’re telling me that isn’t factual?

That is a stat that tells you the outcome.

You don't learn anyting from that to use the next game.

"Ok boys. Go and score 5 to improve from last week". I suppose that is a sentence someone would say, but if the opponent is Real Madrid, best of luck.

 

[crossy1686]

I can’t imagine Varane, Sancho and Ronaldo would come here just for the pay check. Ole has done a great job to make us a team worthy of attracting such talents, convincing thrm we are a team capable of winning silverware.

These signings feel very different from the ones under Van Gaal and Mourinho who felt like they were coming here for some big money and some easy wins

 

[afrocentricity]

Yeah fine and you are the hundredth person to say that. At some point, you should realize, that this won't come by telling others that you think, they should do. I am sorry, I do not see the issue to the extent, some of you see it. Over the top criticism has always been there it belongs to football like it does to every sport. If you really want to do something against negativity, talk to the mods, think of ways to keep that in check. This constant appealing is obviously not working - try another approach, try to ignore the bullshit, use the ignore function of this very platform, create threads that are "safe-zones" if you feel that is necessary for your mental "health".

If you want positivity, the internet isn't the right place for you. I don't love that fact as well, but it is what it is. Either accept that and make your peace with it or do yourself a favor and stop visiting certain threads.

Nah it's not that important to me personally I just tend to avoid the place, a lot of posters do. Y'all can carry on... I'm just making an observation. It's tedious, boring and turns people off.

 

[OrcaFat]

You're taking a fairly simple stat so in such cases the interpretive layer is very thin and often implicit in the stat. But to differentiate crudely, "4" is the stat, and "goals scored" is the interpretive layer. Combined they give us the "fact" that 4 goals were scored. Of course we all understand what "goals scored" means. But if you replace that with a more complicated and nuanced stat like xG or attempted pressures, or key passes, then that interpretive layer becomes thicker and there's more room for incorrect or misguided interpretations to lead to incorrect "facts".

For example, people will sometimes point to possession stats between different teams and say that team dominates the ball more. But that may not be true based on what exactly the two teams are trying to achieve and the way they go about dominating the ball.

This is quite an interesting discussion. In my opinion xG is not a statistic it is an interpretation of various statistics. The XG is not a “fact” but there may be various facts behind it, such as how many shots, where they came from etc. The raw data is the factual element. The way the facts are interpreted is pretty much always open to question.

Possession stats do tell you which team “dominated” possession. Big possession advantages such as 80-20 rather imply that one team dominated the other, don’t you think? But of course the quality of possession is important; or should I say the number of goals scored is important. Which leads me back to facts - number of points scored over a long period is the only one that really matters. The ones you can’t argue with are goals for, goals against, wins draws losses. The significance, merit or whatever of all the other facts is an academic debate, I think.

 

[Ole's screen]

This is quite an interesting discussion. In my opinion xG is not a statistic it is an interpretation of various statistics. The XG is not a “fact” but there may be various facts behind it, such as how many shots, where they came from etc. The raw data is the factual element. The way the facts are interpreted is pretty much always open to question.

Possession stats do tell you which team “dominated” possession. Big possession advantages such as 80-20 rather imply that one team dominated the other, don’t you think? But of course the quality of possession is important; or should I say the number of goals scored is important. Which leads me back to facts - number of points scored over a long period is the only one that really matters. The ones you can’t argue with are goals for, goals against, wins draws losses. The significance, merit or whatever of all the other facts is an academic debate, I think.

Not merely academic though as those stats are used in the industry for recruitment and in journalism for judgement. They work well for the most part, but sometimes they also pigeonhole and miss the woods for the trees.

Regarding the bolded bit, you're right. I meant comparing average possession over a long term between two teams. Like 60% average possession vs 65% average possession over a season. In this scenario the other factors you mention become more important.

 

[lex talionis]

How man management has been elite. Martial one of the rare examples of players who have struggled

Fair point. Overall I like the job Ole has done, but the collapse of Martial is a mystery.

 

[Bobcat]

Nothing wrong with being flexible. The issue arises, when you are not able to create good chances against Westbrom, Sheffield, Turkish side and for example Newcastle last year, what happened there, why is a team full of players of that quality not able to create anything of note?
I don't think, you will find many people who just want to switch to rigid patterns but rigid patterns might help more of our players than you think. I am not denying that Oles way is bringing out the best of Fernandes, maybe also the best out of Pogba as well, lets see. But we have many players who might benefit big time from having clearer instructions about what to do and how.
It is no coincidence, that we so often are described as being slow, ponderous in passing, take too many touches. This is a result of our players having to assess all options in every situation. With more instructions, players could be relieved of that - "if the LB gets the ball, one of the CMs comes short, the CB will always make sure to be a passing option, LW will make a run, Bruno will make himself available". We are doing this on the fly and it is great to watch, when it comes off but last year it didn't come off in a reliable way. That is the issue many have. You just have to watch how comfortable teams like Brighton or for example Villareal are with the ball, they move it around, move as units. Imagine what might be able with players like ours when this is possible with players of Brightons quality!

You are all are right, other teams are also not having field days every matchweek. Of course the scrutiny is bigger after watching 90min of football than after watching a 3min summary. All is completely correct, but one factor needs to be kept in mind with all that: up to now, we were never able to win the big games, this might change this season, lets hope so, but lets not act, as if last season did not have some very disappointing moments. In the big picture, these moments might not stick out for some of you, but they do for others.
And, last season is great to have a look at one thing: with all the talk of Ole and Klopp, Pep and Tuchel - If you look at the xG (and xGA) for each match, these teams are very good in creating chances and in stopping opponents to create chances. Of course this is only a fraction of the whole picture, but it is an undeniable part of it. This year, we already had one of those matches, against Wolves and we could have easily lost that. That isn't a stick to beat Ole with, but it is an indicator of something, that should be engaged with as it isn't a new issue. It was clear last year, we would need extra coaching for set pieces, we got it in the summer, I hope, we can be a bit more proactive engaging with such things.

But every team struggles at times. Even well drilled "system" sides like City and Liverpool struggle to create from time to time. Liverpool last season had about a 10 game streak where they hardly scored, and even City look pretty toothless in individual games. Cherry picking games means you can draw whatever conclusion you want to. Our big game record was poor last year, but very good the year before that. Wolves and Soton was pretty bad, but they were also sandwiched between two very good performances. Point it that individual games prove very little and if you want to look at a managers influence you have to look at a much bigger sample size

Im sure there are players in our squad who would benefit from a more structured tactical approach. VdB being the obvious one, but Ole simply isnt that kind of manager and its much easier to find players who fit into your philosophy than it is to find a philosophy that fits your squad, in fact thats probably impossible

I agree that there are things we can improve. Our short passing can be pretty sloppy at times and our build up play through the middle is often lacking. That does not mean it cant get better or that the coaches are not working on it

 

[NZT-One]

Nah it's not that important to me personally I just tend to avoid the place, a lot of posters do. Y'all can carry on... I'm just making an observation. It's tedious, boring and turns people off.

Sure, be assure that such statements are tedious, boring and turn a few people off.

I find it mentionworthy how many posters are put off by certain posts but are ready to complain about other posters and/or posts that do complain about certain stuff. But you do you, I guess

 

[NZT-One]

But every team struggles at times. Even well drilled "system" sides like City and Liverpool struggle to create from time to time. Liverpool last season had about a 10 game streak where they hardly scored, and even City look pretty toothless in individual games. Cherry picking games means you can draw whatever conclusion you want to. Our big game record was poor last year, but very good the year before that. Wolves and Soton was pretty bad, but they were also sandwiched between two very good performances. Point it that individual games prove very little and if you want to look at a managers influence you have to look at a much bigger sample size

No debate about the bold part. Taking these 4 games to draw some conclusions is indeed pretty pointless. Taking the whole of last season as a sample size isn't. You mentioned Liverpool and their inability to score, I haven't checked it but what I talked about their xG so their ability to create goal chances. Liverpool, for all their injuries and other troubles, managed to create more chances than we did. In fact, we are forth behind City, Pool and Chelsea (even though Chelsea just a fraction). We outperformed our xG over the whole season and we are continuing this trend at least until now. That means, our issues weren't that we missed a goal scorer, we were pretty good at that, what we are lacking in comparison to our competitors is the ability to create chances. Again, I am not trying to make that look as a stick to beat Ole with, all I am saying is that our closest competitors have been better at that over a whole season.

Im sure there are players in our squad who would benefit from a more structured tactical approach. VdB being the obvious one, but Ole simply isnt that kind of manager and its much easier to find players who fit into your philosophy than it is to find a philosophy that fits your squad, in fact thats probably impossible

I don't understand what you mean with philosophy. If you mean, Ole has to look for players who thrive in a more freedom based system, then yes of course. And he made had one hit by getting Bruno. The rest of the acquisitions are pretty difficult to evaluate in that context, wouldn't you agree?
If you meant, it is next to impossible to create a system or "philosophy" that fits our squad, then I wouldn't agree. Of course, such an approach benefits you more the longer it is applied but it is certainly not impossible. This is something Klopp for example has been really good at.

All in all, I personally am pretty skeptical, that a pure freedom based approach, which is what I am expecting us to do based on last seasons, will be able to reach the highest hights. But looking at our squad, I certainly wouldn't bet against us which is credit to Ole. This season, none of our competitors will take the games against us lightly. And looking at the matches against Wolves and Newcastle, I think, some indicators for a blueprint are already in place. Lets see, how this pans out once we have our usual midfield back.

I agree that there are things we can improve. Our short passing can be pretty sloppy at times and our build up play through the middle is often lacking. That does not mean it cant get better or that the coaches are not working on it.

Well unfortunately, we can't really know that. I'd love to agree with you but to often, I am puzzled how out of sync we look during games. Obviously, this can be caused by an infinite number of reasons but still.

 

[OrcaFat]

Not merely academic though as those stats are used in the industry for recruitment and in journalism for judgement. They work well for the most part, but sometimes they also pigeonhole and miss the woods for the trees.

Regarding the bolded bit, you're right. I meant comparing average possession over a long term between two teams. Like 60% average possession vs 65% average possession over a season. In this scenario the other factors you mention become more important.

I’m sure they are used but mostly it is a matter of debate how much they can be relied upon to form meaningful judgments. For example a journalist may back up a point with a “fact” but we can easily argue that the facts have been misinterpreted or even misrepresented. But no-one can argue about how many points were won or goals were scored. On this forum (and elsewhere of course) the number of points we won under Ole is often pushed aside and replaced with arguments about how many we should have won but the latter is pure fancy.

 

[NZT-One]

This is quite an interesting discussion. In my opinion xG is not a statistic it is an interpretation of various statistics. The XG is not a “fact” but there may be various facts behind it, such as how many shots, where they came from etc. The raw data is the factual element. The way the facts are interpreted is pretty much always open to question.

Possession stats do tell you which team “dominated” possession. Big possession advantages such as 80-20 rather imply that one team dominated the other, don’t you think? But of course the quality of possession is important; or should I say the number of goals scored is important. Which leads me back to facts - number of points scored over a long period is the only one that really matters. The ones you can’t argue with are goals for, goals against, wins draws losses. The significance, merit or whatever of all the other facts is an academic debate, I think.

I don't think, it is just an academic debate. You are right, points, goals for and against have more substance but all stats can help you to identify strength and weaknesses of your own team or the opponent, or on a player level. Surely it is needed to fully understand what a stat means and what it doesn't mean and you also have to factor in other stats, sometimes stuff you can see on the pitch but where no stats exist yet.

All stats are flawed somehow, you can have a lucky period, winning dodgy by VAR and ref decisions which effects the points stats, there are own goals, penalties whatsoever to effect goals scored for and against. This makes dealing with stats way more challenging than it appears on first sight but I think, with more and more people sharing their knowledge about it, the base level of supporters goes up more and more which at least makes for interesting discussions.

I’m sure they are used but mostly it is a matter of debate how much they can be relied upon to form meaningful judgments. For example a journalist may back up a point with a “fact” but we can easily argue that the facts have been misinterpreted or even misrepresented. But no-one can argue about how many points were won or goals were scored. On this forum (and elsewhere of course) the number of points we won under Ole is often pushed aside and replaced with arguments about how many we should have won but the latter is pure fancy.

I don't think it is pushed aside at all. I'd argue that 95% of critics aren't about results but performances.

 

[Wumminator]

Nah it's not that important to me personally I just tend to avoid the place, a lot of posters do. Y'all can carry on... I'm just making an observation. It's tedious, boring and turns people off.

Honestly, you just have to either

a) ignore it and make higher quality posts
B) point out how absurd and stupid they’re being.

It does drain you though. It’s just not a fun place to be is it.

 

[OrcaFat]

I don't think, it is just an academic debate. You are right, points, goals for and against have more substance but all stats can help you to identify strength and weaknesses of your own team or the opponent, or on a player level. Surely it is needed to fully understand what a stat means and what it doesn't mean and you also have to factor in other stats, sometimes stuff you can see on the pitch but where no stats exist yet.

All stats are flawed somehow, you can have a lucky period, winning dodgy by VAR and ref decisions which effects the points stats, there are own goals, penalties whatsoever to effect goals scored for and against. This makes dealing with stats way more challenging than it appears on first sight but I think, with more and more people sharing their knowledge about it, the base level of supporters goes up more and more which at least makes for interesting discussions.


I don't think it is pushed aside at all. I'd argue that 95% of critics aren't about results but performances.

It is pushed aside. We finished second last year because we got more points than everyone but City but people want to dispute the value of that and, instead, fixate on arguing that we should have won more games.

And, yes, they are saying we should have played better and by playing better we should get more points. All manner of stats and facts are put up, together with interpretation of these, in other words, opinions.

The relevance of these stats, facts, interpretations and opinions are disputable whereas the actual points and league position are not.

 

[NZT-One]

Honestly, you just have to either

a) ignore it and make higher quality posts
B) point out how absurd and stupid they’re being.

It does drain you though. It’s just not a fun place to be is it.

If reading opinions on an internet forum makes you feel like that, I would heavily advise you to seek help. Professionals are there to support. Or maybe take a walk. Or go off the internet for a few days.

Isn't there a way to create an "Ole Performance thread" where only people can post, you have approved of? Seriously though, I feel some kind of guilty conscience...I'd bet, most critics do not put as much effort into their criticism as you do feeling bad because of it.

*edited

 

[Wumminator]

If reading opinions on an internet forum makes you feel like that, I would heavily advise you to seek help. Professionals are there to support. Or maybe take a walk. Or go off the internet for a few days.

Isn't there a way to create an "Ole Performance thread" where only people can post, you have approved of? Seriously though, I feel some kind of guilty conscience...I'd bet, most critics do not put enough effort into their criticism as you do feeling bad because of it.

I don’t understand why you would ever read my post and reply back to it like that. What a strange person.

 

[NZT-One]

It is pushed aside. We finished second last year because we got more points than everyone but City but people want to dispute the value of that and, instead, fixate on arguing that we should have won more games.

And, yes, they are saying we should have played better and by playing better we should get more points. All manner of stats and facts are put up, together with interpretation of these, in other words, opinions.

The relevance of these stats, facts, interpretations and opinions are disputable whereas the actual points and league position are not.

Of course they are not disputable. I think, most people are very happy with the results of last season (and current season as well). To be second after City is a great achievement but this stance and thinking that we should have won a few additional matches don't have to be exclusive. Plus: maybe a few of the more enthusiastic supporters maybe over-value the value of that second place because that is mostly what we did when Liverpool came 2nd a few years ago.

Winning one game in the EL final would have changed a lot. Losing against Chelsea or Liverpool instead of drawing would of course be looked at differently than losing to Sheffield or drawing against Westbrom without creating any notable chances.

These things are part of last season just as the great 2nd league place is. This isn't a dig at the manager or the players. It is just an observation.

 

[NZT-One]

I don’t understand why you would ever read my post and reply back to it like that. What a strange person.

Just add me to your list of poster you consider yourself a better poster than


As a wise man once said

What I do, in a very comical way, is point out how idiotic these posts are.

Give me some time, maybe at some point in the future, I might be just as comical as you.

 

[Giggsyking]

Honestly, you just have to either

a) ignore it and make higher quality posts
B) point out how absurd and stupid they’re being.

It does drain you though. It’s just not a fun place to be is it.

What an absolute garbage of a post. This is a performance thread of the manager, people will not write only the things you accept, if you dont understand the meaning of an internet forum, then you should close your account.

 

[Giggsyking]

Opinion based on facts

Perhaps I've missed something but which facts have you presented in this thread?

I will not go on about the facts again, been discussed hundreds of times, but I will make it short. He has won zero trophies, nil, nothing despite spending a fortune and he is in his 4th season now, you cant hide forever behind the "process".

 

[Womp]

As has been mentioned - my doubts with him purely lie with his ability to improve the collective level of the squad through coaching. He's done very well at other aspects, improving the level of the squad, the mentality etc. That being said, given the start to the season - even though the football hasn't been great, he has had a very good start to the season, at the very least matching our title contenders. I don't think the results are sustainable due to the football we play, especially given the coaching detail managers like Pep, Tuchel, Klopp etc. go into with their sides.

As long as we are getting the results though, I can't complain. Whether or not we can maintain the results enough to win some major silverware - we will have to wait and see. There are no more excuses now for him though. Come the end of the season, if we haven't had a competitive season with major silverware to show for it, given the quality of this squad, it's a failure imo. He's now had the two things every manager would desperately need, money and time. Now needs to deliver.

 

[The United]

As has been mentioned - my doubts with him purely lie with his ability to improve the collective level of the squad through coaching. He's done very well at other aspects, improving the level of the squad, the mentality etc. That being said, given the start to the season - even though the football hasn't been great, he has had a very good start to the season, at the very least matching our title contenders. I don't think the results are sustainable due to the football we play, especially given the coaching detail managers like Pep, Tuchel, Klopp etc. go into with their sides.

As long as we are getting the results though, I can't complain. Whether or not we can maintain the results enough to win some major silverware - we will have to wait and see. There are no more excuses now for him though. Come the end of the season, if we haven't had a competitive season with some major silverware given the quality of this squad, it's a failure imo. He's now had the two things every manager would desperately need, money and time. Now needs to deliver.

I don't disagree with you entirely. But, how do you know about the fact that we don't do the same like those managers?

We are hiring coaches for the areas that we need to improve such as set piece coach this season.

We have to understand though that despite buying good players for this window, essentially, they are still new players and the coach staff will need a bit of time to tweak the system(s) with/for them. That's part of the process of building a squad.

 

[crossy1686]

I will not go on about the facts again, been discussed hundreds of times, but I will make it short. He has won zero trophies, nil, nothing despite spending a fortune and he is in his 4th season now, you cant hide forever behind the "process".

This is only true until he does. What happens then? It’s a strange argument to make to be honest.

 

[Giggsyking]

This is only true until he does. What happens then? It’s a strange argument to make to be honest.

But he didnt, It is not like he has been here for a short time , he is entering his 4th season. He did not take a small team from the 2nd division and try to rebuild it. He took over a squad finished with 82 points 6 months before his arrival. This "process" or "project" or whatever you want to call it must have a time limit.

 

[OrcaFat]

Of course they are not disputable. I think, most people are very happy with the results of last season (and current season as well). To be second after City is a great achievement but this stance and thinking that we should have won a few additional matches don't have to be exclusive. Plus: maybe a few of the more enthusiastic supporters maybe over-value the value of that second place because that is mostly what we did when Liverpool came 2nd a few years ago.

Winning one game in the EL final would have changed a lot. Losing against Chelsea or Liverpool instead of drawing would of course be looked at differently than losing to Sheffield or drawing against Westbrom without creating any notable chances.

These things are part of last season just as the great 2nd league place is. This isn't a dig at the manager or the players. It is just an observation.

Yeah, I don’t disagree with the gist of that.

I’m just really saying (as I often do) that long term trend is the key. There is a lot of micro-criticism of specific games or decisions or aspects within games and stats and facts are often chucked about in support but really there is an absence of consensus.

Person A and Person B both think we played shit (even though we won) but Person A thinks Bruno was useless and Person B thinks Bruno was good but Pogba was useless. Persons A and B turn out to be two whingers who are rarely, if ever, happy.

I get frustrated and annoyed when we don’t play well, particularly if we lose. But I realised that the only way to judge the team is to look at points won over a long period. This seemed the obvious approach to me when I looked at the number of desperate tumescent narrow wins that Liverpool and City have had over the last couple of years; games where they didn’t play well and probably deserved to lose. Every team has those days because the games are hard the opponents are fierce competitors, fighting, often with a lot of quality as well; winning or playing well against these teams is not always possible.

A stat or fact that “shows” Ole got his selection or tactics wrong is often magnified or a matter for fixation. They all make mistakes these pro coaches but it’s a fool’s errand to argue that better interpretation of the stats would have helped them because, after all, you have to allow the possibility that all other selections or tactics would have led to worse outcomes.

Where it gets relevant is when the results over a long period are poor - then (and without needing to be specific) you can say that whatever the coach(es) are doing isn’t working.

 

[Womp]

I don't disagree with you entirely. But, how do you know about the fact that we don't do the same like those managers?

We are hiring coaches for the areas that we need to improve such as set piece coach this season.

We have to understand though that despite buying good players for this window, essentially, they are still new players and the coach staff will need a bit of time to tweak the system(s) with/for them. That's part of the process of building a squad.

Obviously there is no sure fire way to know since of course we aren't involved in any of the training sessions etc. - but I think it comes down to what we are seeing. I'd say a lot of our improvements are purely down to simply just having better players but we still leave a lot to desire in the aspects of the game that are collective - eg. the pressing, passing, movement off the ball, ability to isolate our forwards against defenders etc.

You just need to see how much quicker teams like Liverpool/City etc. move the ball, how much more organised their press is compared to ours.

The young player argument doesn't hold up as much when the young players in and around the squad are some of the best in their position already, as well as already being established players. I also do understand it takes time to implement a system, but this is what, his 4th year now? If we can't start seeing the signs of progressive, sustainable football, when exactly will we?

I also understand that Ole may not be a coach as is usually the argument around here, but as the manager it's still his responsibility to ensure the club is at a place where it can win silverware. If he can't identify/remedy the issues with the coaching staff etc. then he has still failed in my books. I'm not comfortable with the idea of removing all responsibility from the manager of arguably the biggest club on the planet. He needs to start winning silverware now, this team is more than good enough to be winning CL/PL levels of competitions.

I hope he does well and proves us all wrong, but I simply think given how good the squads of our competitors are, that the difference will come down to the minor details - an aspect of management I just think Klopp, Pep and Tuchel are superior to Ole than. He has earnt the ability to have this season to prove me and the others wrong though, so hopefully he does.

 

[VivaRonaldo85]

I have been critical of Ole at times but you have to say under his managerial watch, the transformation from his first starting XI (Cardiff away I think) to our team vs Newcastle yesterday is remarkable in addition to the strength of the squad. That side that started vs Newcastle is a top class ball playing defensive midfielder (replacing Matic) away from contending for big honours yesterday IMO.

 

[Raven]

I will not go on about the facts again, been discussed hundreds of times, but I will make it short. He has won zero trophies, nil, nothing despite spending a fortune and he is in his 4th season now, you cant hide forever behind the "process".

Ah, so just the one fact then...

 

[rotherham_red]

In fairness, we played CL football every year so would be interesting to work this out when we’re not factoring in hammering teams like Granada or Sociedad and extra EL games.

We've been out of the CL more often than we've been it since SAF left - that's a good 7 year period. If it was as simple as having lower quality opponents then what was LvG and Jose's records to the same extent. And this is before I bring out my favourite stat of Ole's: we've scored 5 or more goals in a game 10 times since Ole got here. The previous three managers combined only did it twice.

It's not a fluke.

 

[rotherham_red]

I strongly disagree. Stats are absolutely spot on for long term observations. Stats are not intended to predict single games or in match events. But they do show a very accurate picture of underlying trends and tendencies.

Another great benefit of data compared to "the eye test" is the elimination of bias, not being able to observe every single player at all times and just not understanding every single action on the field.

Regarding your first paragraph: that is fair and I don't think my post denies that either.

My issue is with your second paragraph, as the likes of Kees on Twitter do seemingly have an agenda against the manager of the club. They're condescending, bordering on insulting to anyone who disagrees and when they are challenged they obfuscate and go down tangents as well as hide behind technical jargon to try and make it seem like their position and view of how football is to be played is the objectively correct one when in actuality, it's a subjective opinion, just like mine or yours would be. All of which are telltale signs of a bad faith argument.

Let's face it, the only stat that should matter is points on the table. In that regard Ole is comfortably ahead of every manager not named Pep or Jürgen in the league since he first arrived as caretaker, and since Bruno has come in, we're ahead of Jürgen on that count too. Now, with a close to perfect squad the pressure is now on Ole to accelerate the improvement and properly challenge/win. The pressure is increased, but with that pressure, so too have the tools at his disposal been improved at an exponential rate.

It's up to you how you feel he can do on that front, but personally I think he'll be fine considering what he was able to do in 19/20 after having Lingard and Pereira starting week in and week out for half the season, or in 20/21 after having the transfer window from hell and Chelsea having the transfer window of their dreams, Liverpool adding "the best midfielder in the world™" to their all-conquering team, and City splashing £150m+ fleshing out their squad even further. This is the first window of Ole's which is somewhat comparable to Klopp's 2018 summer, literally any of Pep's, or Lampard's 2020, so with it expectations are naturally heightened. Let's see what happens...