Our style of play

[cyril C]

In other words our style of play is direct. I personally think a good style of play raises both a team's floor and ceiling. On bad days the former is important because it maintains high quality opportunity creation and keeps the attack from grinding to a halt. Right now I don't know if our current style can lead to sustained success on multiple fronts but we'll see how the season plays out. The proof will be on the pitch rather than anything I/we can say here for or against it

edit: to add I personally have my doubts because the variance between our good and bad days is wider than the grand canyon. Being as prone to winning big as you are to losing to no-named teams doesn't seem a recipe for success. Our current CL campaign reflects this as it feels like we just roll dice before every game

How direct were we during 1st half? We had 60-70% possession but hardly any shot (at all), let alone shot on target.

 

[Bilbo]

We don’t have one style of playing. We have a range of playing styles which depends on who is available to play and who the opposition is.

Ole’s philosophy appears to be Flexibility. It does mean that our performances and results are taking time to find a consistent level. But it is also a big reason why we are able to adapt during games and win after falling behind.

The overall approach is similar to the SAF days. We often have more possession than our opponents but often we don’t. When we are not playing a possession game it doesn’t mean we can’t control and win games. It is about being effective on the day.

I really enjoy watching us (mostly) and we are not far away from being a great side again. Not forgetting we are already the best team in the league over the last 24 games, if two or three of our guys recapture best form (and / or if we sign one or two in Jan) we can win the league. Don’t think we’ll win any cups because we can lose to anyone on our day, but the form table does not lie. And we do it all without having a style of play.

Pretty much this. Good post

 

[samolocix]

We are counter attacking team which cant defend

 

[buckooo1978]

Ole is visionary in adopting the Ali tactics against Foreman in Rumble in the Jungle

Take punishment first half, let the opponent punch themselves out then hit back at them

Ole's rope-a-dope reds

in reality Ole is pragmatic and flexible as @OrcaFat explained

weve no consistency in the way we approach games...

in reality its hard to think of a less consistent team and our formation in the last 2 months has changed on a near game by game basis

weve had 3 at the back, diamonds, 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3

if you look at how advanced Telles and AWB were against PSG it was really attacking- a very advanced 2 - 4 - 3 - 1 almost

We're definitely improving in spite of the issues IMO

 

[Kajus]

That's how our players play based on their strengths. They don't need to be persuaded to play otherwise. You don't expect McT to try and dribble past defences, Pogba to drop deep and tackle, Martial to sweat or Rashford to hug the line and deliver accurate crosses. It's not in their nature to do that. In fact certain players contradict that tactic. For example Pogba tend to dilly dally with the ball, Martial can't care less of dropping deep to help win the ball and he can't be bothered making those quick runs upfront while our fullbacks should be delivering more accurate crosses at a quicker tempo.

Proper coaching is meant to fine tune the squad making it more consistent and getting the best out of players. Meanwhile there needs to be a vision to take the team to new heights and allowing it to change the game if needed. I can't see that with this side. We added a painfully slow CB in a team that was meant to be fast paced, we bought a defensive FB in a team that rely on inside forwards with no idea of how to cross the ball, we then added Telles who always struggled defensively in a defence that's weak even with Shaw in it

So essentially:
- Buy a defensive full back means “Ole baaaaaad”
- Buy an attacking full back means “Ole baaaaaad”

Got it.

 

[Greck]

How direct were we during 1st half? We had 60-70% possession but hardly any shot (at all), let alone shot on target.

edit mistook your point

 

[ThinkTank@Cafe]

Formations:

1. 4-2-3-1 - Default
2. 3-4-3 (or 3-5-2) - away big teams
3. 4-2-2-2 (or 4-4-2 diamond) - away/tough opposition, need a comeback.

Tactical approach regardless of formation:

1. Always have an AMC
2. Always have two CMs who work in shifts (one drops deeper, one goes forward/presses and vice versa)
3. Pass into space: this is becoming more and more important. One of the reasons why Martial and Greenwood struggle this season. For would be Greenwood defenders - the guy is insanely talented, has a world class finishing, but his off the ball movement in open space is pretty junior level.
4. Crosses from full backs. Well, at least putting a lot of effort to become better in this because it is important as we don't have wingers.
5. Situational pressing: we are not a Gegenpress team, never will be. We are more like a Fergiepressing. Fergie loved destroying opponents with relentless pressing but could opt for counter set up. Why? See 9.
6. Use high flair players in the final third (fast short passing, dribble attempts, risky passing, heels, etc. etc.). These players are also required to be disciplined in pressing and have a good teamwork (again, which both Martial and Greenwood lack this season). Finding the players who combine both aspects (flair and pressing) is a hard job so kudos to the Academy and scouting department.

Man management and season organization

7. Flexibility, as noted by some posters. 3 formations, ability to switch pressing on and off (the latter means we have an option other than pressing to use as tactical approach, and that option should be learned and coached into team).
8. Ole's man management style is Motivational. I believe, he is currently one of the best in the business in this regard. The transfer policy improved under Ole because of this trait. Scouts pay a lot of attention to a candidate mentality. The rest he is learning fast.
9. Ole is what I call "strategist". I.e. he is willing to sacrifice a tactical advantage for a strategic advantage to be effective in the long run. "Strategist" run teams tend to start slowly but become unstoppable once season equator is passed. The latter apples to Fergie, Ole is still learning and we yet have to see how his strategy works out.
10. Quick learner and adaptable.

 

[DRJosh]

I find it interesting from an analytical viewpoint how terms like “style” and “brand of football” become key buzzwords for the media and the majority fans when they, in reality, could mean very little to the players themselves who simply set up to best counter the opposition in front of them.

I do however think this notion of “style” serves a useful purpose in forging a relatable footballing identity for fans to connect with and for managers to build their reputations by, but serve very little else.

 

[devilish]

So essentially:
- Buy a defensive full back means “Ole baaaaaad”
- Buy an attacking full back means “Ole baaaaaad”

Got it.

You are being ridiculous now.

If we are playing with a high line then we need CBs with pace to drop deep quickly. If we play with inside forwards then we need wingbacks that can go forward and cross. However these wingbacks need to be capable of defending unless we don't have a prime Rio and a prime Stam to cover his arse. Telles is a defensive liability which is why inter let him go.

We spent 145m on a defence that is unsuited to our needs and lack any hint of leadership

 

[Cassidy]

I find it interesting from an analytical viewpoint how terms like “style” and “brand of football” become key buzzwords for the media and the majority fans when they, in reality, could mean very little to the players themselves who simply set up to best counter the opposition in front of them.

I do however think this notion of “style” serves a useful purpose in forging a relatable footballing identity for fans to connect with and for managers to build their reputations by, but serve very little else.

Indeed I mean managers and teams with identifiable styles hardly end up winning or doing well do they...

 

[Bilbo]

I find it interesting from an analytical viewpoint how terms like “style” and “brand of football” become key buzzwords for the media and the majority fans when they, in reality, could mean very little to the players themselves who simply set up to best counter the opposition in front of them.

I do however think this notion of “style” serves a useful purpose in forging a relatable footballing identity for fans to connect with and for managers to build their reputations by, but serve very little else.

Fans love a buzzword. I remember when Jose once talked about 'first station passing' in one of his post match interviews and everyone was using it for ages as though they'd thought of it themselves.

In reality none of us are beyond an intermediate level of understanding of what goes into coaching a team.

 

[Moby]

I don't want to discuss about styles but what you described isn't a style that's what literally every teams in football tries to do because scoring goals is how by rule you may win a football game.

Did you by any chance audition for the part of Sheldon Cooper in The Big Bang Theory?

 

[JPRouve]

Did you by any chance audition for the part of Sheldon Cooper in The Big Bang Theory?

Were you by any chance a writer in the show?

 

[Kajus]

You are being ridiculous now.

If we are playing with a high line then we need CBs with pace to drop deep quickly. If we play with inside forwards then we need wingbacks that can go forward and cross. However these wingbacks need to be capable of defending unless we don't have a prime Rio and a prime Stam to cover his arse. Telles is a defensive liability which is why inter let him go.

We spent 145m on a defence that is unsuited to our needs and lack any hint of leadership

Alright, I'll bite.

You talk about the fact that we spent money on a defense that is unsuited to our needs, but you described two full backs with opposite playing styles and used the other's advantages as reasons for why they're not suited to our needs. It doesn't make sense. What I think you are trying to say is that neither is good enough overall, which is plausible. However, I'd like to you to identify fullbacks that were available this or the previous summer, were good enough and also 'suited to our needs'.

 

[Flexdegea]

I can't identify any tactical acumen from Ole. All I can see is a poorly coached team being dragged by the sporadic brilliance of individuals (mostly Bruno). I also think that most of the investment made in defence (by Ole/Mou/LVG) is money down the drain and that anyone with brains will probably get rid of most of those players or at least move them in a different position

So pogba screamer, Greenwood brilliance in box, and Mata's hitting wonder thru ball and rashford chip over keep............carried by bruno brilliance

 

[Dinghy]

It's a direct style of football and it's far more enjoyable to watch than whatever crap systems Moyes, Mourinho and LVG have tried to implement.

Rashford's chance that hit the post, is this "style" done close to perfection. West Ham are well organized, yet two direct passes carves them open completely.

 

[MikeKing]

I find it interesting from an analytical viewpoint how terms like “style” and “brand of football” become key buzzwords for the media and the majority fans when they, in reality, could mean very little to the players themselves who simply set up to best counter the opposition in front of them.

I do however think this notion of “style” serves a useful purpose in forging a relatable footballing identity for fans to connect with and for managers to build their reputations by, but serve very little else.

Yes.

At most it could serve as the basic premiss for a discussion such as "Would Klopp succeed in Premier League with his playing style?" Then you can discuss the pro's and the cons of said style and how it differs from the rest of the league. I remember he got a lot of critique on here that his style was demanding on his players and that they got physically exhausted by all the pressing. Klopp changed his tactics slightly, used more of a pragmatic approach and won the league. Yet, this identity that he initially brought with him has been given legitimacy, even though it's not quite the same. These discussions is never about the analysis as much as they are about simplifying things for the public and how they should rate managers.

Another example is Pep, and some might now say that his style is just tiki-taka even though he also has changed his approach many times. His style of football gives an identity to Man City as a club, as like with Liverpool they have none besides that, and now that they aren't playing very well, it's not the "style" that is in question but rather other aspects the manager is responsible for.

Ole did not have a good first stint in the PL, and nobody knows his "brand of football" from his time managing Molde. He is basically a man without a managerial reputation and the only evidence we have to make our mind up is what we see in front of us. We're not the best club in England, nor the best club in the world, which is what our identity was for many years thanks to SAF, so naturally "we don't have an identity, we have no style of play" will be thrown around simply because we're not winning trophies right now. That is in my opinion oversimplifying football though and undermining what it's about, but also our relatable footballing identity has been lost after he left. Ole is the closest we have been to looking like a "United team" since SAF, but yet he can't prove anything at all to some unless he wins.

However, SAF built his brand by winning at all costs with class, with quick, imaginative attacking players, other players specialised in their position and if they weren't of the quality required they could prove their usefulness by contributing in other ways, like Ole coming of the bench, O'shea stepping up, Park marking Messi. I even remember the grate dane in goal wanting to score goals. This is what United is about, and Ole has brought some of that back even if large portions of the fanbase might have lost sight of our identity after SAF left, and just want to identify with the feeling of being the best again. The only thing Ole can do to get a "style" rep like other managers is if he wins a trophy with this team, then he'll get the credit for making these changes to our identity.

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

Organised in defence, fast attacking transitions and quick interplay around the box. This is our style of play right now.

 

[Beachryan]

If we were playing our style for 60 minutes yesterday, I'm genuinely baffled by anyone claiming it's a good thing.

I believe our style is to put out some relatively talented players, and hope they do the business because they're better at football than the other guys.

For all the talk of style and coaching and what not, we barely ever play the same way week to week. I certainly don't see the obvious coaching of a Guardiola or even Mourinho team, where there are clear repeated movements and shapes.

Under Ole we are nothing if not spectacularly inconsistent. If that's part of some grand strategy, great, but I think you're probably giving him too much credit.

 

[Dec9003]

We’ve always had a tactical plan under Ole, every single team in every professional league in England have a tactical plan, all of them.
Honestly, I think those who say they don’t see any plan in the way we want to play, either are just hoping Ole gets sacked and being obtuse deliberately, or they just don’t really know a great deal about the sport beyond saying things like Jose likes to park the bus and Pep likes to have lots of possession.

 

[meamth]

Formations:

1. 4-2-3-1 - Default
2. 3-4-3 (or 3-5-2) - away big teams
3. 4-2-2-2 (or 4-4-2 diamond) - away/tough opposition, need a comeback.

Tactical approach regardless of formation:

1. Always have an AMC
2. Always have two CMs who work in shifts (one drops deeper, one goes forward/presses and vice versa)
3. Pass into space: this is becoming more and more important. One of the reasons why Martial and Greenwood struggle this season. For would be Greenwood defenders - the guy is insanely talented, has a world class finishing, but his off the ball movement in open space is pretty junior level.
4. Crosses from full backs. Well, at least putting a lot of effort to become better in this because it is important as we don't have wingers.
5. Situational pressing: we are not a Gegenpress team, never will be. We are more like a Fergiepressing. Fergie loved destroying opponents with relentless pressing but could opt for counter set up. Why? See 9.
6. Use high flair players in the final third (fast short passing, dribble attempts, risky passing, heels, etc. etc.). These players are also required to be disciplined in pressing and have a good teamwork (again, which both Martial and Greenwood lack this season). Finding the players who combine both aspects (flair and pressing) is a hard job so kudos to the Academy and scouting department.

Man management and season organization

7. Flexibility, as noted by some posters. 3 formations, ability to switch pressing on and off (the latter means we have an option other than pressing to use as tactical approach, and that option should be learned and coached into team).
8. Ole's man management style is Motivational. I believe, he is currently one of the best in the business in this regard. The transfer policy improved under Ole because of this trait. Scouts pay a lot of attention to a candidate mentality. The rest he is learning fast.
9. Ole is what I call "strategist". I.e. he is willing to sacrifice a tactical advantage for a strategic advantage to be effective in the long run. "Strategist" run teams tend to start slowly but become unstoppable once season equator is passed. The latter apples to Fergie, Ole is still learning and we yet have to see how his strategy works out.
10. Quick learner and adaptable.

You missed one key style in Ole's tactics:
Quick combination between Full backs>>midfielders>>forwards, basically a hard hit pass to the midfield/forward, lay off back to the full back and release if given the opportunity. If there's no opportunity to fast break, give it back to Lindelof or Maguire to rotate to another side.

It's a pattern of play that is very visible since Ole took over.

One thing is for sure, I like that Ole always like his players to express themselves instead of following a strict rule of building an attack. I don't think Bruno will thrive under Jose or LVG, no chance.

 

[devilish]

Alright, I'll bite.

You talk about the fact that we spent money on a defense that is unsuited to our needs, but you described two full backs with opposite playing styles and used the other's advantages as reasons for why they're not suited to our needs. It doesn't make sense. What I think you are trying to say is that neither is good enough overall, which is plausible. However, I'd like to you to identify fullbacks that were available this or the previous summer, were good enough and also 'suited to our needs'.

I don't rely on an army of scouts Ole can rely upon but here is my take. Back in 2019-2020 our main issues were CB, RB, CM and RW. Defence in particular was getting alot of stick. Some of it was deserved but some wasn't. Sure United were indeed leaking lot of goals (54 EPL goals). However the 2 years prior we did very well (28 and 29). In fact in those years we leaked less goals then we did with AWB and Maguire in the team. So was it down to the defence being shit or was it more with Mou losing the dressing room and United having a new manager in January?

Anyway due to lack of WC talent available it was silly to spend 80m in a CB. Instead we should have retained Smalling (he's been our best CB since Moyes), we should have allowed Jones to feck off on a free and we should have signed a young CB with the characteristics to do well for us. That's what Sir Alex did with most of his CBs after all. As said I don't rely on an army of scouts so my pool of players is somehow limited. However Demiral ticked my fancy. He is tough, he is tall, he's got pace, he's got grit and he's well suited for the EPL. Demiral and Smalling with Lindelof, Bailly and Tuanzebe should have given us a platform to build the defence upon.

Regarding RB we had 2 promising players back then ie Dalot and Laird. Neither were ready for first team football yet however both were talented enough not to force us to spend big on a RB. Meunier would have been perfect. He was at the right age to take control of our RB, he was relatively cheap (ie he was heading towards his last years of contract), he is a United fan and he could defend and attack. With the money spared on Maguire/AWB, I would most certainly have added Bruno in summer as well and I would have taken Icardi on loan with right to buy (lnter owe us that with Lukaku and Sanchez)

Team building is not about spending ridiculous money of players in the hope that they click. Its about bringing people with the right characteristics to succeed. Also note that we run a business and players are human. An 80m signing will need to be able to handle the price tag + he better be a sure bet as well as the CEO won't be happy having you knocking at the door asking for new players in that same role.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

Our style of play is to create opportunities & score, says every team that isn’t a large underdog going into the game.

That’s not a style of play, it’s the minimum requirement to win a game.

 

[ThinkTank@Cafe]

You missed one key style in Ole's tactics:
Quick combination between Full backs>>midfielders>>forwards, basically a hard hit pass to the midfield/forward, lay off back to the full back and release if given the opportunity. If there's no opportunity to fast break, give it back to Lindelof or Maguire to rotate to another side.

It's a pattern of play that is very visible since Ole took over.

One thing is for sure, I like that Ole always like his players to express themselves instead of following a strict rule of building an attack. I don't think Bruno will thrive under Jose or LVG, no chance.

Good remark. They basically almost shoot at each other. A kind of pressing resistant passing. I don’t like the look of it, but it exists.

 

[MikeKing]

Good remark. They basically almost shoot at each other. A kind of pressing resistant passing. I don’t like the look of it, but it exists.

I think Chelsea do this too. Sort of a merge of the standard modern pressing and possession style. We have a similar idea of a style in the build up but with different attacking ideas and outlets during build up. If both teams had the exact same players I think it would look mostly very similar.

 

[jamesjimmybyrondean]

Our style of play is counter attack against against good teams that play on the front foot. Against lower sides we don't really have one. What we have is our best players expressing their individual talent and the chemistry they've developed from playing together.

 

[Adam-Utd]

We are very direct, but unfortunately until we can learn to play when pressed and out worked we won't win much.

 

[Crashoutcassius]

It is clear our style is to take counter attacks - we are maybe the best side in world football at it. Problem with counter attacking sides is, teams can force you to have the ball, and while we do have a plan b Ole hasn't made much progress with it in my view, or potentially doesn't have the players to do it well enough. Pogba telles and cavani are good examples of those players, so we may see some improvement as the season wears on, but if someone said that is the big worry as a united fan I would agree. Thankfully city and rbl etc are naive enough to press us high and get roasted 5 or 6 times a game

 

[spiriticon]

We have a direct, 4-3-2-1 based counter-attacking style which is very identifiable. Unfortunately this style is nullified when teams don't let us play on the counter.

It's not that we have no style, it's that our style is too obvious

'Ah lads, it's Man United. 2 lines of four in defence all day long and all the big strong guys in their box when in attack. Easy.'

 

[justsomebloke]

Why do I keep seeing we have no style? It’s really obvious to me. Is it this FIFA/ FM generation who build in a style before the game starts and think they are analytical geniuses now?

Our style is simple, to score goals. We get the ball and we try to create and score. No silly tika taka. It’s literally constantly creating goal scoring opportunities.

It’s the reason for our inconsistency in games. In periods it doesn’t work, we lose the ball a lot, the other team dominates. But when it does it’s magical. We scored 3 goals in 15 minutes yesterday by doing exactly this.

I’m personally a big fan of this. I don’t care about dominating possession stats. I just want us trying to constantly score.

Er, I think this is inaccurate and simplistic. What you write can at most describe the mentality. If we're talking about style of play, the question is how do we try to score goals? We clearly don't go about that in a random fashion.

And if we're talking about that, I would point out that especially when we succeed we do more tika-taka than most teams. Lots of quick small passes in and around the box, whenever we have the opportunity. Also, we are rather obviously trying to dominate possession, and generally seem to prefer to play our way out of defence. We are generally much less counterattack-oriented than f.e. Tottenham are. While we take those opportunities when they present themselves, we usually only drop low and wait for the opposition to expose themselves when we are in the lead, we no longer seem to have that as our primary approach. Much more than before, we play with a high press, attempt to control the ball and to build up attacks.

To my mind, we don't have a very direct style of play, except on the counterattack (which are by definition direct). If anything it is rather too elaborate, with too much time and too many touches spent on processing the ball in the build-up, and too little movement. That indicates an emphasis on getting the ball upfield, and then relying on the skills of the attackers to get something done even if the opposition is in balance. Though I could wish for more urgency and fewer touches in the execution of that, I think it actually works out as a smart combination: Counterattack when the opportunity presents itself, but don't rely on it - have controlling the ball and breaking down established defences as your basic bread and butter approach.

EDIT: Can't believe the number of people on this thread who think we still play a direct counterattack style, as if nothing had changed since spring 2019. But then half the journos think we do too, so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. While we still score quite a few counterattack goals, our scoring this year has been pretty much evenly distributed between counterattacks, established play goals and set piece/penalty goals.

 

[justsomebloke]

We have a direct, 4-3-2-1 based counter-attacking style which is very identifiable. Unfortunately this style is nullified when teams don't let us play on the counter.

It's not that we have no style, it's that our style is too obvious

'Ah lads, it's Man United. 2 lines of four in defence all day long and all the big strong guys in their box when in attack. Easy.'

I disagree. I don't think we've had a counterattacking style since Bruno arrived, and certainly not a direct one. Which is not to say we don't do counterattacks. In fact, I don't think any of the above makes much sense. Also, judging from our record over the past year or so, it's not really "easy".

 

[spiriticon]

I disagree. I don't think we've had a counterattacking style since Bruno arrived, and certainly not a direct one. Which is not to say we don't do counterattacks. In fact, I don't think any of the above makes much sense. Also, judging from our record over the past year or so, it's not really "easy".

Ok the 'easy' bit was a joke, but what style do you think we play? I mean it's all subjective of course, there's no right or wrong judgement when discussing 'style'.

 

[Poborsky's hair]

Like many said our "style" is very direct and that I like very much, not exaclty fighting for possession but quickly finding the right players with the right ball. However that is far from enough. We are too relaxed off the ball, maybe because we don´t have the right players or the manager can´t make us press like a top team from 2020, often it´s just one or two players trying to half heartedly press when others are just saving energy or not on the same page. That is the ey for success imho.

I also think we rely too much on individual quality instead of a drilled system,and that´s the reason of our inconsistency - That´s why we will have big issues like 60 mins against WHU or basically any other team which will turn up with a bit more quality or a team who is simply up to it. Also the reason why we will fin dit hard to win anything these days.

I think Ole´s style and management is very similar to SAF´s, however when you look at the teams of SAF, he had build some superb teams with a lot of players individually brilliant players with great mentality, he wasn´t much of a progressive tactiatian but a fantastic motivator and Manager (with big M) who could identify the right players and motivate them to show their 8-9/10 games every week rather than 5/10 one day and 9/10 the other.

I don´t know if you look at some of the players who played for us, we would still be quite far ahead in terms of squad quality perhaps compared to the squad now. Maybe not that faraway but I don´t see how can anyone with the mentality or quality of Martial or Lindelof win us the title. I think SAF would have it very difficult now when there are more proggressive managers in the league, Klopp, Guardiola, even Ancelotti and Mourinho to take away points from you, also the huge upgrade on quality thanks to the money influx to EPL...

So this I reckon sort of style formed by the players themselves is really dependable on players themselves. Are they goog enough to start for Manchester United and give their all every games despite having a bad game?

If we manage to add players like Bruno, Rashford, Maguire or Fred and so we fill the squad with both individual brilliance/skill and commitment we could possibly have a good chance to win something. If we don´t have those players we will be inconsistent unless we add structure to our style and more refined style of play and that is definitely down to manager and coaching.

 

[justsomebloke]

Ok the 'easy' bit was a joke, but what style do you think we play? I mean it's all subjective of course, there's no right or wrong judgement when discussing 'style'.

OK, fair enough. I wrote a good deal about that above. But trying to sum up, and going both on what little has been said about that from Ole and what is observable in the games, it looks to me like we have an emphasis on controlling the ball and getting it safely rather than quickly upfield. Once there, it's down to the creativity of our forwards to do something with it, and they way they try to do that is strikingly often through quick little combination plays around and in the box, on the basis of controlling the ball and moving it quickly around the edge of the box. When those don't result in goals they quite often result in set pieces. With around 2/3 of our goals coming form either established play or set pieces, this seems to be a reasonably effective approach.

Defensively we don't seem to drop as deep as we used too, and to put more emphasis on pressing, though that looks a bit like work in progress. Ole is on record talking about that too.

At the same time, they are clearly still very focussed on taking opportunities for counterattacks, and do that ery well. But it's much less pronounced than before, and we are now pretty consistently able to get the necessary goals in other ways. The majority of our counterattack goals - 7 outof 11 this season, by my reckoning - has come when we're already in the lead.

All in all, a hybrid style - based on dominating games and breaking defences down, but prepared to be opportunistic. I quite like it. But it requires a lot from the attackers especially, and isn't easy to pull off.

 

[justsomebloke]

Like many said our "style" is very direct and that I like very much, not exaclty fighting for possession but quickly finding the right players with the right ball. However that is far from enough. We are too relaxed off the ball, maybe because we don´t have the right players or the manager can´t make us press like a top team from 2020, often it´s just one or two players trying to half heartedly press when others are just saving energy or not on the same page. That is the ey for success imho.

I also think we rely too much on individual quality instead of a drilled system,and that´s the reason of our inconsistency - That´s why we will have big issues like 60 mins against WHU or basically any other team which will turn up with a bit more quality or a team who is simply up to it. Also the reason why we will fin dit hard to win anything these days.

I think Ole´s style and management is very similar to SAF´s, however when you look at the teams of SAF, he had build some superb teams with a lot of players individually brilliant players with great mentality, he wasn´t much of a progressive tactiatian but a fantastic motivator and Manager (with big M) who could identify the right players and motivate them to show their 8-9/10 games every week rather than 5/10 one day and 9/10 the other.

I don´t know if you look at some of the players who played for us, we would still be quite far ahead in terms of squad quality perhaps compared to the squad now. Maybe not that faraway but I don´t see how can anyone with the mentality or quality of Martial or Lindelof win us the title. I think SAF would have it very difficult now when there are more proggressive managers in the league, Klopp, Guardiola, even Ancelotti and Mourinho to take away points from you, also the huge upgrade on quality thanks to the money influx to EPL...

So this I reckon sort of style formed by the players themselves is really dependable on players themselves. Are they goog enough to start for Manchester United and give their all every games despite having a bad game?

If we manage to add players like Bruno, Rashford, Maguire or Fred and so we fill the squad with both individual brilliance/skill and commitment we could possibly have a good chance to win something. If we don´t have those players we will be inconsistent unless we add structure to our style and more refined style of play and that is definitely down to manager and coaching.

1. Our style is not direct.We have the ability to take opportunities for counterattacks, but our play in possession is if anything elaborate and slow.
2. I agree our pressing game is inconsistently applied - that needs improvement. Also, the fact we're moving in that direction is interesting, and possibly part of the reason why we look less solid defensively at times. Last season we did much more of dropping deep and trying to control things rather than pressing for re-possession. Probably, that puts less strain on the defense than a high-pressing game does.
3. Do you really think Marcus Rashford and Bruno Fernandes are going to be better players in a tightly drilled system? I don't. We've got attackers who have a versatility of skills that allows them to excel on the basis of their own judgment, who can counterattack and also do great things on small surfaces against established defences. That in my view is exactly how we should play. Can Daniel James or Jesse Lingard replicate that? Nope. But the answer to that is a better squad, not a simpler style of play. I actually like the fact that we're trying to play in a way that is more ambitious than we can always deliver. Seems to me a good way to move forward and improve.
4. We had issues against West Ham because we lack the squad depth to cope with not having our best players on the pitch.

 

[romufc]

I am worried for some fans who watch football but say all we do it put talented players and hope for them to do something special.

How many goals / chances have we created with playing the way we did int he second half where Bruno or Pogba pick it up and Rashford goes? I can recall alot of games this season alone where we've put Rashford through on goal.

People say no patterns of play yet almost every other game Rashford is through 1 v 1.

Again no pattern of play, the left channel, we create chances with the interlink between LW/LB/ CAM. How often have we seen this? lots of times.

Its all crap that people who hate Ole want to beat him with

 

[Poborsky's hair]

1. Our style is not direct.We have the ability to take opportunities for counterattacks, but our play in possession is if anything elaborate and slow.
2. I agree our pressing game is inconsistently applied - that needs improvement. Also, the fact we're moving in that direction is interesting, and possibly part of the reason why we look less solid defensively at times. Last season we did much more of dropping deep and trying to control things rather than pressing for re-possession. Probably, that puts less strain on the defense than a high-pressing game does.
3. Do you really think Marcus Rashford and Bruno Fernandes are going to be better players in a tightly drilled system? I don't. We've got attackers who have a versatility of skills that allows them to excel on the basis of their own judgment, who can counterattack and also do great things on small surfaces against established defences. That in my view is exactly how we should play. Can Daniel James or Jesse Lingard replicate that? Nope. But the answer to that is a better squad, not a simpler style of play. I actually like the fact that we're trying to play in a way that is more ambitious than we can always deliver. Seems to me a good way to move forward and improve.
4. We had issues against West Ham because we lack the squad depth to cope with not having our best players on the pitch.

3) I absolutely think that Rashford would easily score 20+ goals for this Liverpool side if he played instead of Mane/Salah. Perfectly drilled system is not about not being creative yourself but mostly it helps the chance creation in general. The off the ball play of Liverpool is so much better than ours, they win it further up the pitch and so it means they can attack faster, they play plenty of long balls behind the defence. The same with Fernandes, very direct player who works hard. Klopp would love him. By well drilled system I don´t mean Van Gaal zombie football obviously. Liverpool are evrything we are but much better at pressing.

And as for 1) I think we are very direct team, we always set up so we can release our quick forwards as soon as we can, however it can look slow when we lineup with players like Matic or Pogba, who hold on th eball very long or with no runners, especially when we play Martial who can´t hold the ball neither can make runs. That was why the first half against WHU was so frustrating. We have excellent passers except horrible McT but they were marking usreally tight.. and yeah we play from the back becausewe need to regain a bit of possession but as soon as we find the opening we play it straight up. Also with players like AWB it is sometimes hard to get that angle for a pass or opening but that intention is clear how we want o play when in possession. The problem is off the ball gameplay and low quality in squad like you mentioned when some players cant execute the right orders, play the way we want