Ole's regression in instilling big game mentality

[SadlerMUFC]

We didn't make an unforced errors like that. The Greenwood shot was a good effort off target but it wasn't a great chance. McTominay failed to pass in the other incident so its not a chance created.

The stats have proven you wrong, the game has proven you wrong. You're so blind in your bias that anything factual is deemed favouring the opposition, don't bother discussing with me because you have zero footballing logic.

So a shot that misses the top corner by mere inches isn't a great chance? Dude, drop the agenda...

 

[VP89]

So a shot that misses the top corner by mere inches isn't a great chance? Dude, drop the agenda...

No it's a great shot, you need to learn what a great chance is. There is no agenda - the stats and the game goes against what you said.

 

[justsomebloke]

So a shot that misses the top corner by mere inches isn't a great chance? Dude, drop the agenda...

No two people are ever going to agree on how big different chances were. But why discuss it? This is precisely what we have xG for. And Chelsea's xG in this game was much better than ours.

 

[justsomebloke]

I would love to see if we can play more attacking football and also more controlling game even against big team, whatever Ole tried it worked for him last season. This season teams don't attack much against us, one more area where we have to improve.

Well, playing attacking football and controlling games was just what we did not do against big teams last year. We beat them by dropping low, conceding possession and scoring on the counterattack. This year, they are trying to control games and play more attacking football, but with limited success.

Against lesser teams, there's not really much difference between this season and last (post-Bruno, obviously), either in results or style of play.

 

[VP89]

It's hard to get the diagnosis right if the description of the problem isn't. And I would suggest the problem with this (and many other posts on this topic) is that it conflates a lack of scoring with approaching the game with a cautious attitude. It's not that simple. And in this case, I believe it is wrong.

Last season in these games, we would drop deep, largely concede possession and rely on the counterattack. We have not played in that way this season in these games. What we have done instead is not more cautious (indeed, nothing could be more cautious, other than counterattacking with fewer players). Rather than cede the initiative, we have attempted to win it - to control possession and dominate games against big teams. This is a less cautious and more ambitious way to play football, and also a more demanding one. And it's the route you've got to take if you're going to become a contending team by playing the sort of football United wants to play. Also, the approach of the other team impacts on it - if they're taking a more balanced or defensive approach when they play you, the drop deep/counterattack style is unlikely to be effective.

But, it's a big transition, and it's not easy to make it work. It entails generally outperforming other very good teams, collectively and player by player. And we've struggled to get the results. But as far as I can see, it doesn't fit the facts to ascribe that to a cautious approach.

I don't see Fred and McTominay hanging back and not joining the attack. People are assuming that McFred bring less to the table offensively than Pogba and van de Beek, because that's how it has to be if you're correct in assuming that their presence is a sign of defensive intent. However, that is not how it is:

Player xG/90 - xA/90 - xGoal points/90
Pogba 0.11 - 0.05 0.16
VdBeek 0.09 - 0.04 0.13
McTominay 0.07 - 0.10 0.17
Fred 0.06 - 0.10 0.16
Matic 0.01 - 0.07 0.08

Which seems to suggest that McT and Fred makes at least as much contribution to our offense when they're on the pitch as Pogba or DvdB does, and a good deal more than Matic (to the surprise of no one). Since they also bring more defensive solidity, playing them frequently seems to me more like a smart approach than a cautious approach.

Our full backs are usually involved offensively too. Luke Shaw is tied for first in the PL in assists by left backs.

Several posters have made the point that this is a quality issue, not a structural or tactical issue, and that seems plausible to me.

It's a fair point, but I think if you actually boil down the XGs and the way the games are played out domestically in the bigger games of the league, it points to a cautious approach still.
I don't think we are more cautious than last season of course. We have gone at teams more but no way near as much as we should be, and I think we've gone at teams more also because they have adapted to us with more caution.

So we've had 2 legs at Chelsea now and Arsenal. I'd be curious to take a sample of say 5 games and see how our XG this season was compared to last season for these tests? Thats' Chelsea home/away, Arsenal home/away and Liverpool. Discounting City because we can agree it was right to be cautious against them, they weren't as on the ropes as Liverpool and still fielded a very strong side. But if what you're saying is true, and it's a quality issue, then our XG in these games this season should not really be less than last? It should be more if we are more proactive in said games, and the attackers just let us down?

No two people are ever going to agree on how big different chances were. But why discuss it? This is precisely what we have xG for. And Chelsea's xG in this game was much better than ours.

Exactly - but he doesn't want to listen to that. Anything that puts the club second best is deemed agenda driven so I think there's no point.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

No it's a great shot, you need to learn what a great chance is. There is no agenda - the stats and the game goes against what you said.

I mentioned 4 great chances to score. Chances I saw with my eyes. Not what a website told me. You have gone out of your way to "prove" they weren't chances. Like I said, drop the agenda

 

[SadlerMUFC]

No two people are ever going to agree on how big different chances were. But why discuss it? This is precisely what we have xG for. And Chelsea's xG in this game was much better than ours.

You mean the home team with a back 5 and Kante that are on a new manager bounce were the better team? Wow, I'm shocked...

 

[roonster09]

Well, playing attacking football and controlling games was just what we did not do against big teams last year. We beat them by dropping low, conceding possession and scoring on the counterattack. This year, they are trying to control games and play more attacking football, but with limited success.

Against lesser teams, there's not really much difference between this season and last (post-Bruno, obviously), either in results or style of play.

Yeah and that's what where we have to improve, controlling the game against big teams and win it.

 

[jem]

because beyond the hype we still don’t have the players to attack with total abandon or defend for our lives. He’s pragmatic no doubt about it but we are second. That’s an improvement.
Hopefully the club get the finger out and actually help him this summer

I agree to an extent, but here's what I find annoying: we do have a player in Bailly, who can help us in this regard, yet Ole opts for Lindelof (even when Bailly is healthy.) As well, the last game was screaming out for a McTominay/DVB sub, yet Ole persisted with a clearly-tired McTominay. Those two decisions alone could have proved the difference in a tight game against Chelsea.

 

[tenpoless]

At first Ole seemed to have a calculation in his head "if we can snatch a draw from this tough match we'll be in a good position because we will win the other games". At least thats what I thought. But then we didnt exactly win the lesser games so his calculator obviously didnt work.

 

[justsomebloke]

It's a fair point, but I think if you actually boil down the XGs and the way the games are played out domestically in the bigger games of the league, it points to a cautious approach still.
I don't think we are more cautious than last season of course. We have gone at teams more but no way near as much as we should be, and I think we've gone at teams more also because they have adapted to us with more caution.

So we've had 2 legs at Chelsea now and Arsenal. I'd be curious to take a sample of say 5 games and see how our XG this season was compared to last season for these tests? Thats' Chelsea home/away, Arsenal home/away and Liverpool. Discounting City because we can agree it was right to be cautious against them, they weren't as on the ropes as Liverpool and still fielded a very strong side. But if what you're saying is true, and it's a quality issue, then our XG in these games this season should not really be less than last? It should be more if we are more proactive in said games, and the attackers just let us down?

Well, no. Clearly, what we've been doing this season against big clubs has been much less effective than what we did last season, in terms of producing scoring chances and goals. But as you point out we probably, for the most part, no longer have the option of doing what we did last year, because other teams approach us differently (and also because we can't keep playing them with essentially the same kind of approach that bottom teams have, if we're ever going to develop into a contender). So, the question is why is it less effective? As you also point out, it can't be less effective because it's more cautious, because it isn't more cautious. That leaves two possible explanations:

1. We have the right game plan, but lack the quality to implement it to the desired effect.
2. We'd get the right results if the game plan was even less cautious.

Since we know neither how we'd do with better players, or what the results would have been if we had played more adventurously, this obviously can't be answered with much certainty. But if you look at the balance of the xG in these games, it doesn't suggest to me that pegging up our xG a bit at the expense of accepting a higher xG for the opposition would be very likely to bring better results. And when I look at how our back 4 is performing, I'm having difficulty assuming that they would cope well with being significantly more exposed. And when I look at our squad and their stats, I don't really see much scope for different lineup decisions producing better results, either generally or specifically for scoring. All of this tends to point in the direction of #1, I think.

 

[justsomebloke]

I mentioned 4 great chances to score. Chances I saw with my eyes. Not what a website told me. You have gone out of your way to "prove" they weren't chances. Like I said, drop the agenda

Sorry, but "what a website told me", provided that's xG, is hugely more relevant than your subjective opinion of what you saw "with your own eyes".

 

[justsomebloke]

You mean the home team with a back 5 and Kante that are on a new manager bounce were the better team? Wow, I'm shocked...

No, I mean Chelsea had a much better xG than we did. Which makes it a bit pointless to discuss who was closest to scoring in the game as a whole. It's Chelsea.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

No, I mean Chelsea had a much better xG than we did. Which makes it a bit pointless to discuss who was closest to scoring in the game as a whole. It's Chelsea.

But they didn't score. And either did we. We both had chances yet they were the home team and played with a back 5 plus Kante. And at the end of the day I felt we were the only team that could have won that game. Sorry if you're biased against United and have an Ole agenda and feel differently

 

[justsomebloke]

I agree to an extent, but here's what I find annoying: we do have a player in Bailly, who can help us in this regard, yet Ole opts for Lindelof (even when Bailly is healthy.) As well, the last game was screaming out for a McTominay/DVB sub, yet Ole persisted with a clearly-tired McTominay. Those two decisions alone could have proved the difference in a tight game against Chelsea.

I won't say I've not thought the same thing, but I guess I accept that there's a lot of factors going into those decisions that aren't necessarily visible to me.

 

[Ali Dia]

I agree to an extent, but here's what I find annoying: we do have a player in Bailly, who can help us in this regard, yet Ole opts for Lindelof (even when Bailly is healthy.) As well, the last game was screaming out for a McTominay/DVB sub, yet Ole persisted with a clearly-tired McTominay. Those two decisions alone could have proved the difference in a tight game against Chelsea.

I know this isn’t the best answer and I’m open to just being wrong here but Fergie used to have favourites and he’d make strange selections all the time, especially in big games where it wasn’t beautiful but we were grinding results and performances. It’s easy to forget that and just remember the trophies. Maybe he’s rewarding Mct and Lindelof for being excellent trainers or showing leadership. Who really knows with Donny. I’m looking at it like a Fred 2.0 who should come good next season. It may not happen but it wouldn’t be a shock if it did.

I would have made the subs/changes you’ve suggested too. Bailly has been great against Chelsea in the past but we didn’t really need him in the end. I guess that’s part of the reason it’s nice to make your peace with who the manager is so you can trust their decisions even if you don’t always fully agree with it. Maybe Ole reckons Bailly needed another few days and will start him tonight? Who knows what his motives are

 

[justsomebloke]

But they didn't score. And either did we. We both had chances yet they were the home team and played with a back 5 plus Kante. And at the end of the day I felt we were the only team that could have won that game. Sorry if you're biased against United and have an Ole agenda and feel differently

Jesus, is that all it takes now to be assumed to be "biased against United" and have an "Ole agenda"...

I think I could reasonably be described as fairly fervently supportive of OGS and his project, to say nothing of the club. Look up my posting history if you don't believe me.

The point I intervened in concerned who had the biggest chance of scoring in this game. The xG makes it pretty plain the answer to that question is "Chelsea". That's all.

I'd also point out that however much we love MU or OGS, there's no reason to adopt a fantasy image of how Chelsea played in this game. They played pretty much exactly like they have in every game since Tuchel took over. Same formation, same emphasis on possession and counterpressing. And just like in their previous games, that brought them dominance of possession, more shots and a higher xG than their opponents, although by a smaller margin than in their previous games (unsurprisingly, as those were against weaker teams than United). Unlike Lampard's side at OT (which consequently had less possession, fewer shots and a lower xG than us), this was not a team that came to park the bus.

 

[Bosnian_fan]

Jesus, is that all it takes now to be assumed to be "biased against United" and have an "Ole agenda"...

I think I could reasonably be described as fairly fervently supportive of OGS and his project, to say nothing of the club. Look up my posting history if you don't believe me.

The point I intervened in concerned who had the biggest chance of scoring in this game. The xG makes it pretty plain the answer to that question is "Chelsea". That's all.

I'd also point out that however much we love MU or OGS, there's no reason to adopt a fantasy image of how Chelsea played in this game. They played pretty much exactly like they have in every game since Tuchel took over. Same formation, same emphasis on possession and counterpressing. And just like in their previous games, that brought them dominance of possession, more shots and a higher xG than their opponents, although by a smaller margin than in their previous games (unsurprisingly, as those were against weaker teams than United). Unlike Lampard's side at OT (which consequently had less possession, fewer shots and a lower xG than us), this was not a team that came to park the bus.

I'd actually call him more biased against United than you, as acknowledging your own shortcomings is a key to growth and progress. If he sees football on level "They've lined up in backline of five plus Kante so they are by default defensive", I'm not really sure you're going to convince him even by presenting arguments as strong as those.

 

[jem]

I know this isn’t the best answer and I’m open to just being wrong here but Fergie used to have favourites and he’d make strange selections all the time, especially in big games where it wasn’t beautiful but we were grinding results and performances. It’s easy to forget that and just remember the trophies. Maybe he’s rewarding Mct and Lindelof for being excellent trainers or showing leadership. Who really knows with Donny. I’m looking at it like a Fred 2.0 who should come good next season. It may not happen but it wouldn’t be a shock if it did.

I would have made the subs/changes you’ve suggested too. Bailly has been great against Chelsea in the past but we didn’t really need him in the end. I guess that’s part of the reason it’s nice to make your peace with who the manager is so you can trust their decisions even if you don’t always fully agree with it. Maybe Ole reckons Bailly needed another few days and will start him tonight? Who knows what his motives are

Yeah, all valid points.

 

[jem]

I won't say I've not thought the same thing, but I guess I accept that there's a lot of factors going into those decisions that aren't necessarily visible to me.

True - he gets to see the players in training every day.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

Jesus, is that all it takes now to be assumed to be "biased against United" and have an "Ole agenda"...

I think I could reasonably be described as fairly fervently supportive of OGS and his project, to say nothing of the club. Look up my posting history if you don't believe me.

The point I intervened in concerned who had the biggest chance of scoring in this game. The xG makes it pretty plain the answer to that question is "Chelsea". That's all.

I'd also point out that however much we love MU or OGS, there's no reason to adopt a fantasy image of how Chelsea played in this game. They played pretty much exactly like they have in every game since Tuchel took over. Same formation, same emphasis on possession and counterpressing. And just like in their previous games, that brought them dominance of possession, more shots and a higher xG than their opponents, although by a smaller margin than in their previous games (unsurprisingly, as those were against weaker teams than United). Unlike Lampard's side at OT (which consequently had less possession, fewer shots and a lower xG than us), this was not a team that came to park the bus.

They had a couple more shots and a little more possession. All things you'd expect from the home team when two big teams meet up. Doesn't change the fact that I felt like we dropped 2 points while Chelsea gained 1...

 

[OleTheGreat]

I don't know. We don't seem to care that City are pulling away and Ole was right when we were atop the table. It is not a big deal getting up there but it would take a lot for us to stay there. We haven't lost games but we have drawn 7 games and many to the top 6 sides and that's a huge concern but I'm happy in a small way because in the previous years we were losing many games to smaller teams and winning against top opponents but this season we have drawn many games to the top teams and kept winning against smaller teams. I think we have come to expect many things from this team but since we have lost Pogba to the injury, we have struggled in March. I still think he's pivotal to our team and a glue between our backline and our frontline. He invariably picks those passes that helps in defense and he drives with the ball so casually. We don't have a replacement for Pogba and letting him go in the summer will be a huge mistake.

Ole's been brilliant with Pogba and he should by all means sign a new contract and continue with us because when we get a decent striker and a good center back to compliment Maguire, we can definitely go for the league but for today, I sincerely hope we win and get set for Sunday. Keep the title hunt going until the very last month.

Cavani
Rashford Bruno James
Fred Matic
Shaw Maguire Lindelof Bissaka
De Gea must be good enough to beat CP but who knows what might happen because we show up only when we want to.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

I think Ole is responsible in part for our inability to score, but I put that blame more on our inability to move effectively off the ball to open up space, especially in the middle third of the pitch. We already have a full backline that struggles in progressive passing, especially under pressure, and McFred pose the same issues when they are played together. So we struggle significantly in progressing play out of the back into the final third, and it just limits our attack before they even have a chance to get on the ball.

To Ole's credit, we press miles better than we did last season and aren't afraid of teams when we do so, which is impressive considering our two CB's. I just think that Rashford and Bruno also struggle to take care of the ball in these games as well, which even further hurts our attack. By all means take risks against teams like Burnley where we'll dominate the game, but against a big side where we already are lacking control in the midfield its just stupid to see Bruno trying to play Hollywood passes or take shots from 30 yards out after we work hard to get the ball to him or Rashford in space.

 

[Grande]

This is what happens when analysis is made on the basis of results instead of performances.

Looking at the performances a year ago and now - and I’m talking about tactics, not quality - we are playing differently now and more attacking minded. Before, we used to tailor our formation to the opposition, play with a low block and have more emphasis on counterattacks from deep.

Now we play 4-2-3-1 even against the best, press high much more, higher line more, more variation between counter and possession. These are tactical choices with higher risk.

What is interesting is that now we have teams like Chelsea set up more to nullify us than to dominate us, even at home.

This is also explained in iterviews by Solskjær and diverse players - we played more reactive tactics a year ago because we were not good enough yet to get results any other way. Now we play more ambitiously our own style because we choose to, even if we’re not yet at the level were we regularily beat top teams that way.

We have sacrficed tactical ingenuity and results (consistently beating better teams) for development and progress. The trade of is that weholdnour own against the top teams even in a phase of development, and we pick more points against the lesser teams.

He's chatting bullshit though. Our Liverpool game this season was no different to last year. Our game vs City was as much them tailoring cautiously to us as it was us to them, both Arsenal games this season was no different to last. And Spurs was a diabolical implosion.

It's quite funny, Ole and Maguire would come out after the Liverpool game and say "the way we approached the game shows how far we've come" and posters lap it up. If I'm not mistaken had less shots on target, same possession to the fixture last season (something like 33%) and tailored the team around the opposition. There was no "progression" in our approach to the game even though Liverpool looked like shadows of themselves.

This idea that Chelsea also only set up to nullify us is very odd. They played the same system they have played in every game under Tuchel and brought Kante in but that's about it. They actually had evens possession, better chance creation, stronger XG and more shots. They didn't set up to just contain us. We dominated about 35 mins of the first half before they took better control in the second. And their change in approach isn't a reflection of how far we've come - it's a reflection of them having changed their manager.

No that's not in reference to you specifically. But there is a narrative that is being put out and accepted without actually evaluating. For example that poster claimed Chelsea had set out just to nullify us which they obviously didn't.

Feel free to answer me to my ‘face’ next time you want to say I’m bullshitting, lapping it up or not evaluating. I can handle it and it is more ingenuous.

I think you’re acting a bit lazy in dismissing it as ‘not evaluating’, as it is exactly what I’m trying to and I think you are missing my point. It seems to me you are conflating ‘approach’, ‘tactic’, ‘attempt’ with ‘result’, ‘outcome’ and ‘performance’.

I’m not saying United has created more chances, had more possession, produced more shots at goal, deserved to win, or even played better. In fact, I think we’ve played slightly worse in our top games this last year compared to before, and so results reflect that fairly.

My point is about our approach to these games. If you look at our games vs Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea, Liverpool, PSG, Barca and City after Solskjær arrived, or if you pick the games vs Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs, Leicester and City last season, I think you’ll find a markedly different approach to this season’s games vs Sevilla (yeah, I’m including that here, as the closest we had to a preseason was before the Europa League games), Spurs, Chelsea, Arsenal, PSG, Leibzig, City, Leicester and Liverpool. I actually think the shift started before, that is, between last seasons win at City and the loss at Arsenal.

The difference was that before, we’d switch formation, we’d radically lower press height voluntarily (as opposed to forced), we’d play long balls out from the back most of the time, and we’d be careful not to lift the back four much when we had possesion in the other half. This is how we’d start many of the games, or retreat to within a short spell of the game.

After the wins at home to spurs and away to City last season, and a few more disappointing underachievements against lesser opposition, I for one noticed a change. Against Arsenal, we played more or less like we would have done against Burnley and Watford, or Arsenal at home. 4-2-3-1, attempted the high press for larger parts of the game, lifting the backs when we had the chance and sometimes even the CB’s. And were spanked, because we didn’t do it very well, lost the ball quickly, were overplayed, the defenders grew nervous and cautious again due to that. That’s how playing proactively against a team of good ball players look if you’re not adept at it and used to it, though. At that time, our results against lesser teams started (very) slowly improving, even before the exchanging of Lingard/Pereira/Mata with Bruno as the lynchpin.

This season, we’ve stuck to our main formation, mostly made attacking player choices (yes, including Pogba on the wing), tried much harder at playing out from the back, tried much more to keep the high press up. Of course, not being good enough yet at high press, even a team like Arsenal will be able to play you low with the type of players they have, so the outcome doesn’t have to be more possession or having the ball in their half more. But if you remember our away win at PSG, in the second half we pinned them back for surprisingly large parts with high press and bouts of possesion high up the pitch that they clearly didn’t expect, and which we of course never were close to playing them at home or away two seasons ago - because we didn’t remotely try.

Doing it this way actually is the more risky solution, even if it has resulted in a lot of drab draws, a few grand halves and a collapse - or rather because of it. Because playing a more similar game to our normal game, we lose much of the opportunity to punish teams that attack high with long balls into large spaces for Rashford and James.

The games at home vs Chelsea last season and this actually might provide the best example. Last season, we invited pressure, gave them loads of semi-chances, and quashed them on the counter. This season, we tried (emphasis on try) to take the game to them, didn’t really manage it, didn’t in any way get dominated, but neither team were really close to opening the other up because of lack of quality.

With Solskjær a fan of directness, and players like Rashford, Martial, James and Bruno, we’re always going to use counters heavily, but this year we are sacrificing that a bit against the top opposition to try to develop our plan b and c, in my opinion.

 

[VP89]

Feel free to answer me to my ‘face’ next time you want to say I’m bullshitting, lapping it up or not evaluating. I can handle it and it is more ingenuous.

I think you’re acting a bit lazy in dismissing it as ‘not evaluating’, as it is exactly what I’m trying to and I think you are missing my point. It seems to me you are conflating ‘approach’, ‘tactic’, ‘attempt’ with ‘result’, ‘outcome’ and ‘performance’.

I’m not saying United has created more chances, had more possession, produced more shots at goal, deserved to win, or even played better. In fact, I think we’ve played slightly worse in our top games this last year compared to before, and so results reflect that fairly.

I apologize for the tone, it was unnecessary - but happy to discuss further from here.

My point is about our approach to these games. If you look at our games vs Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea, Liverpool, PSG, Barca and City after Solskjær arrived, or if you pick the games vs Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs, Leicester and City last season, I think you’ll find a markedly different approach to this season’s games vs Sevilla (yeah, I’m including that here, as the closest we had to a preseason was before the Europa League games), Spurs, Chelsea, Arsenal, PSG, Leibzig, City, Leicester and Liverpool. I actually think the shift started before, that is, between last seasons win at City and the loss at Arsenal.

The difference was that before, we’d switch formation, we’d radically lower press height voluntarily (as opposed to forced), we’d play long balls out from the back most of the time, and we’d be careful not to lift the back four much when we had possesion in the other half. This is how we’d start many of the games, or retreat to within a short spell of the game.

So my point is regarding the opposition themselves too. Take the Liverpool game - they are a complete different outfit to the side that we played last season. Even a cautious approach from Ole will look more progressive because of how poor Liverpool have become as a threat to dominate games now. Even still you can see tactically and in approach that his stance was no different. Pogba right, we soak and try to hit on a break - this is also reflected in a 34% possession stat which is not dissimilar to our attempt last year. Whether we were deeper last season to this season is another point, and whilst it has virtue, we cannot infer that we suddenly are more progressive because we aren't parking the bus anymore?

If I were to take the Arsenal games home + away and the Chelsea game at OT, I also see no large difference in how we set out. I do not think we were that deep against either of those teams last season and I dont see a difference this year with the exception of the opening 45 against Tuchel, where we were a lot more proactive.

After the wins at home to spurs and away to City last season, and a few more disappointing underachievements against lesser opposition, I for one noticed a change. Against Arsenal, we played more or less like we would have done against Burnley and Watford, or Arsenal at home. 4-2-3-1, attempted the high press for larger parts of the game, lifting the backs when we had the chance and sometimes even the CB’s. And were spanked, because we didn’t do it very well, lost the ball quickly, were overplayed, the defenders grew nervous and cautious again due to that. That’s how playing proactively against a team of good ball players look if you’re not adept at it and used to it, though. At that time, our results against lesser teams started (very) slowly improving, even before the exchanging of Lingard/Pereira/Mata with Bruno as the lynchpin.

I did not see us go at Arsenal at home anything like how we go against Burnley or Watford. I'd be very curious to see the pressing stats here.

This season, we’ve stuck to our main formation, mostly made attacking player choices (yes, including Pogba on the wing), tried much harder at playing out from the back, tried much more to keep the high press up. Of course, not being good enough yet at high press, even a team like Arsenal will be able to play you low with the type of players they have, so the outcome doesn’t have to be more possession or having the ball in their half more. But if you remember our away win at PSG, in the second half we pinned them back for surprisingly large parts with high press and bouts of possesion high up the pitch that they clearly didn’t expect, and which we of course never were close to playing them at home or away two seasons ago - because we didn’t remotely try.

Doing it this way actually is the more risky solution, even if it has resulted in a lot of drab draws, a few grand halves and a collapse - or rather because of it. Because playing a more similar game to our normal game, we lose much of the opportunity to punish teams that attack high with long balls into large spaces for Rashford and James.

The games at home vs Chelsea last season and this actually might provide the best example. Last season, we invited pressure, gave them loads of semi-chances, and quashed them on the counter. This season, we tried (emphasis on try) to take the game to them, didn’t really manage it, didn’t in any way get dominated, but neither team were really close to opening the other up because of lack of quality.

With Solskjær a fan of directness, and players like Rashford, Martial, James and Bruno, we’re always going to use counters heavily, but this year we are sacrificing that a bit against the top opposition to try to develop our plan b and c, in my opinion.

I do see where you're coming from I think it's just an opinion on how to evaluate from the game. From your angle, I appreciate you see that it's a change in how we are more proactive because we aren't trying to sit back and hit on a counter. But from my angle, we are not pressing nor taking the game to the opponent enough. Passages of play may well take place more in the middle of the park, but again looking at the teams we've faced we are capable of doing better than that. We've let too many games drift by because of that as a consequence.

 

[Grande]

I apologize for the tone, it was unnecessary - but happy to discuss further from here.

So my point is regarding the opposition themselves too. Take the Liverpool game - they are a complete different outfit to the side that we played last season. Even a cautious approach from Ole will look more progressive because of how poor Liverpool have become as a threat to dominate games now. Even still you can see tactically and in approach that his stance was no different. Pogba right, we soak and try to hit on a break - this is also reflected in a 34% possession stat which is not dissimilar to our attempt last year. Whether we were deeper last season to this season is another point, and whilst it has virtue, we cannot infer that we suddenly are more progressive because we aren't parking the bus anymore?

If I were to take the Arsenal games home + away and the Chelsea game at OT, I also see no large difference in how we set out. I do not think we were that deep against either of those teams last season and I dont see a difference this year with the exception of the opening 45 against Tuchel, where we were a lot more proactive.


I did not see us go at Arsenal at home anything like how we go against Burnley or Watford. I'd be very curious to see the pressing stats here.

I do see where you're coming from I think it's just an opinion on how to evaluate from the game. From your angle, I appreciate you see that it's a change in how we are more proactive because we aren't trying to sit back and hit on a counter. But from my angle, we are not pressing nor taking the game to the opponent enough. Passages of play may well take place more in the middle of the park, but again looking at the teams we've faced we are capable of doing better than that. We've let too many games drift by because of that as a consequence.

That’s alright. I don’t think we are pressing high often enough either, but I see that we are trying. Pressing high is one of those things that, when you don’t succeed at it, you won’t see that much of it, because you are played low. Which today was well in evidence against a weak, but well organized Palace. There was always a man or two who was five or ten yards off, and then you just have to give up and retreat, or blow your lungs and still concede. I could count on a hand the number of times we won the ball in their half, even if that evidently was the tactic for the whole game. It was a despicable match, though.

 

[croadyman]

Quite honestly Ole this season in big six games has rapidly turned into Jose from after that game at Anfield in 17/18 when they were prime for the taking and if memory serves me right later that day City stuck SEVEN past Stoke to rub it in