Ruben Amorim | 2025-26

Gordon'sHill said:
I think we need to stop obsessing about formations. When you are losing a game you try something new or throw on some different players. The most simple thing is to take off a spare CB and put an attacker on. Its not like we looked threatening before Amad scored, so we were on course to lose. What does 'throwing the formation out the window' even mean. Every other manage in the league changes formation, we are not talking about a religious gospel here. Amorim has thrown Maguire up front on occasion for example. The lenghts people will go to excuse him not making simple changes is staggering
Click to expand...
As I mentioned in my previous post, it's not like Amorim hasn't experimented. Against Brentford, he brought on Mainoo, Zirkzee, Mount and Yoro when chasing the game. Mainoo was on for Ugarte, and Zirkzee was on for Dorgu, Mount was on for Shaw. Not only did we fail to score, but because we were chasing the game and the defensive formation changed, we ended up conceding a last minute goal (though that also had to do with Bayindir diving out of the way). So that didn't work well.

In this game, Amorim explained that he was introducing a more attacking player in Maz in place of Yoro. So he's trying to draw a balance between putting on an attacker but not messing with the defensive balance, which is probably a lesson learnt from the Brentford loss. Kinda like what he was doing last season by starting Bruno as a 10, then later moving him behind as a CM and bringing on Zirkzee or Garnacho. Basically re-jigging within the formation so that players are not confused about their positioning and responsibilities. Is this too conservative a way to do things? Possibly, but I can see the rationale behind it, especially when our players don't seem to have know his system like the back of their hand such that he is able to teach them a new system when chasing games.
 
flameinthesun said:
What you described is what United and loads of teams have done if they are chasing a game or going for the win near the end. Nothing unusual in it.
Click to expand...
I think it's probably quite unusual in an away league game in the first quarter of the season when you just need a single goal to rescue a valuable away point. And especially when the team's confidence is fragile and you desperately don't want to lose the game. Fergie could certainly be pragmatic when needed.
 
horsechoker said:
Where would he need to finish in the league for you to be happy with him staying on?
Click to expand...
Generally I really like him, and would want him to be our manager for years. I like him the most out of all our managers since SAF, though I quite hate his system and his rigidity to it.

We need to play European football, so top 8 I think is the minimum. I am expecting a top 6 finish, personally I think only Arsenal, City and Liverpool are clearly better than us. Other teams are based on form of keyplayers, injuries etc.
 
Bright_Eyes said:
He plays with 3 CBs regardless of the situation. I think he believes we're more likely to pull one back with that structure remaining in place rather than upsetting the balance by throwing on another attacker, which would probably affect the build up and defensive stability. After all, you still need to make the chance for the attacker and not crumble at the back whilst chasing a goal. To sub a CB for an attacker would require the team to be trained in a different formation for those situations and he probably feels that they particular sub isn't the only way to chase a game. To take your argument to it's logical conclusion, when chasing a game we should sub all our attackers on for as many defenders as possible. It's too basic.
Click to expand...
Well records shows that we are not likely to pull one back with the structure in place,we have won only 8 matches out of 28 from a losing position, that's about 28%.

Even with 3 CBs we have been crumbling at the back,this season alone we have scored 17 goals in the Premier league (1less than the the league leaders Arsenal),but have conceded 16 goals.

We build up and attack in a 442/451 shape, so the team is not unfamiliar with 4 at the back .We would have won more games if Amorim show a bit more bravery, and in-game adaptability.
 
When your midfield is cack
And there's five at the back
That's Amorim
 
When you beat Liverpool
But Dyche sends you to school
That's Amorim
 
When some fans have lost faith
But you get up to 8th
That's Amorim
 
When your bench looks shallow
And you're playing Dalot
That's Amorim
 
AjaxCunian said:
Generally I really like him, and would want him to be our manager for years. I like him the most out of all our managers since SAF, though I quite hate his system and his rigidity to it.

We need to play European football, so top 8 I think is the minimum. I am expecting a top 6 finish, personally I think only Arsenal, City and Liverpool are clearly better than us. Other teams are based on form of keyplayers, injuries etc.
Click to expand...
Top 8 don't qualify for Europe
 
When you want to have a quick wank
But the next game is in about an hour mark
And you're afraid god will punish you by making United tanked
That's not Amorim
 
horsechoker said:
Where would he need to finish in the league for you to be happy with him staying on?
Click to expand...
Qualify for EL as minimum, hence 5/6th place. With the English coefficient I think Top 5 will get us CL. Hence, 5th qualify for CL or 6th qualify for EL.

Fingers crossed he will bring us back to CL by finishing at least 5th.
 
Yakuza_devils said:
Qualify for EL as minimum, hence 5/6th place. With the English coefficient I think Top 5 will get us CL. Hence, 5th qualify for CL or 6th qualify for EL.

Fingers crossed he will bring us back to CL by finishing at least 5th.
Click to expand...
This is very possible. If we have cash and get him a solid midfielder in January then this will happen. Next summer we have to target Elliot Anderson. He fixes this midfield
 
Rusholme Ruffian said:
I think it's probably quite unusual in an away league game in the first quarter of the season when you just need a single goal to rescue a valuable away point. And especially when the team's confidence is fragile and you desperately don't want to lose the game. Fergie could certainly be pragmatic when needed.
Click to expand...

The point was around Amorim not having options to change games. He has options to change the formation, to go more attacking, to pack the midfield. etc.
 
flameinthesun said:
The point was around Amorim not having options to change games. He has options to change the formation, to go more attacking, to pack the midfield. etc.
Click to expand...
But most of his options are less reliable than the players that he had on the pitch? In both the Brentford and Brighton games he brought on some of those attacking options and we lost control of the game. Plus, the players that he kept on got the equaliser and nearly won it at the death. So why is this even a topic? Of all the sticks that have been used to beat Amorim with over the last 12 months this feels like one of the spindliest.
 
Rusholme Ruffian said:
But most of his options are less reliable than the players that he had on the pitch? In both the Brentford and Brighton games he brought on some of those attacking options and we lost control of the game. Plus, the players that he kept on got the equaliser and nearly won it at the death. So why is this even a topic? Of all the sticks that have been used to beat Amorim with over the last 12 months this feels like one of the spindliest.
Click to expand...

Again, the point is does he have options to change the game. He has options to pack the midfield, to make the team more attacking by playing 2 up top taking a CB off etc. There are options that he has to change the shape if we need a goal, if we need to be more defensive. He chooses to stick to his formation. This is not a stick to beat him with, its a fact.
 
flameinthesun said:
Again, the point is does he have options to change the game. He has options to pack the midfield, to make the team more attacking by playing 2 up top taking a CB off etc. There are options that he has to change the shape if we need a goal, if we need to be more defensive. He chooses to stick to his formation. This is not a stick to beat him with, its a fact.
Click to expand...
But he changed the game with the options that he had on the pitch?
 
Rusholme Ruffian said:
But he changed the game with the options that he had on the pitch?
Click to expand...

We are going in circles here....the point is does he have options on the bench to change the game. He has options to change the shape, he has options to pack the midfield, he has options to go more attacking. So he has options. Its not a position that he needs defending. He chooses to keep the formation how it is win lose or draw. That doesn't change the fact that he has the above options open to him.
 
flameinthesun said:
We are going in circles here....the point is does he have options on the bench to change the game. He has options to change the shape, he has options to pack the midfield, he has options to go more attacking. So he has options. Its not a position that he needs defending. He chooses to keep the formation how it is win lose or draw. That doesn't change the fact that he has the above options open to him.
Click to expand...
I don't think anybody said he doesn't physically have options did they? It's pretty obvious that he has a squad (pretty light on quality in midfield and up front, barring the starters), and we know he favours a back 5. So what?
 
Rusholme Ruffian said:
I don't think anybody said he doesn't physically have options did they? It's pretty obvious that he has a squad (pretty light on quality in midfield and up front, barring the starters), and we know he favours a back 5. So what?
Click to expand...
Some posters won’t be happy unless the team sheet isn’t laid out with a line of three at the back on sky sports. No point trying to discuss it. The team shape and approach has changed between and during games plenty.
 
Rusholme Ruffian said:
I don't think anybody said he doesn't physically have options did they? It's pretty obvious that he has a squad (pretty light on quality in midfield and up front, barring the starters), and we know he favours a back 5. So what?
Click to expand...

And he has options to change if he wants. So what? again, going round in circles here.
 
redDNA said:
Well records shows that we are not likely to pull one back with the structure in place,we have won only 8 matches out of 28 from a losing position, that's about 28%.

Even with 3 CBs we have been crumbling at the back,this season alone we have scored 17 goals in the Premier league (1less than the the league leaders Arsenal),but have conceded 16 goals.

We build up and attack in a 442/451 shape, so the team is not unfamiliar with 4 at the back .We would have won more games if Amorim show a bit more bravery, and in-game adaptability.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying we've turned a corner yet but United have pulled a goal back after conceding, to rescue a point or win the game, in each of the last three games without changing the whole set up. They also haven't capitulated after conceding which they would likely have done last season leading to us losing most of those games.

Obviously we need a larger sample size but it does seem like there's more fight in this team now and that the formation is becoming less of a concern.
 
horsechoker said:
Where would he need to finish in the league for you to be happy with him staying on?
Click to expand...
WIth our squad, I think finishing 5th would be par and I'd be fine with him getting there. Depending on the context of our season, 6th may be okay as well. Anything below that simply isn't good enough.
 
According to The Athletic, one of the concerns Liverpool had about hiring Amorim as Klopp's successor was that his slower, less dynamic style of play would fail to energise supporters. This is something that I would hope Ineos would have considered (alongside the obvious fact that our squad didn't suit his formation), however they either overlooked it or disagreed about the notion of his slow style of play. Ineos and Amorim are fortunate that the matchgoing United fans are a tolerant bunch. Fanbases of much smaller clubs would have been up in arms about the lack of excitement on display since Amorim arrived. It feels like we're so desperate for him to succeed that we're willing to "suffer" (in Amorim's words) for a year or so, in the hope that we'll eventually see entertaining football on a consistent basis despite very little evidence of it coming to fruition.
 
NLunited said:
I think he was referring to changing formations during games, like the 442 press.
Click to expand...
Yep, and that might have been a point if we hadn't got back into the game. The fact is that we did get back into the game and very nearly won it at the end. We've won 3 and drawn 1 of our last 4 games, so why is the formation even being moaned about at this particular juncture?
 
Scotty Doesn't Know said:
According to The Athletic, one of the concerns Liverpool had about hiring Amorim as Klopp's successor was that his slower, less dynamic style of play would fail to energise supporters.
Click to expand...
From the club who made the backpass a key strategy that's rich. Seriously who cares about the reasons why other clubs may not have appointed him - clubs make mistakes about managers all the time. And the appointment of Amorim may yet prove to be one of them, but while things are on the up how about letting the negativity take a back seat for a while?
 
Rusholme Ruffian said:
From the club who made the backpass a key strategy that's rich. Seriously who cares about the reasons why other clubs may not have appointed him - clubs make mistakes about managers all the time. And the appointment of Amorim may yet prove to be one of them, but while things are on the up how about letting the negativity take a back seat for a while?
Click to expand...
I don't think the current decision makers at Liverpool were at the helm when the backpass rule was introduced :D

I appreciate your point about letting the negativity take a back seat for a while, and that is pertinent when we've won 3 and drawn 1 of our last 4 games. Nevertheless, James Pierce's quotes on The Athletic emerged this week, so his points made about Amorim were relevant to bring up.
 
NinjaZombie said:
Is this the one where Carragher talks about Amad being done at the back post, Dalot being ineffective as an attacking wing back in the final third and him ending it off with a question to Evans about how the system doesn't feel traditionally "United"?

We played a back 4 under Ole and Ten Hag and our fullbacks were regularly getting "done at the back post" so I don't think that's a formation thing. Under Fergie, we used to have a lop sided attacks where one of the fullbacks pushed higher than the other (this was usually Evra getting to the byline while Neville rarely went past the opposition penalty box). And there's no use for having wingers for the sake of having wingers. That tradition, I'd argue, is less about the position itself and more about having exciting players who wanted to get on the ball and do something positive with it, like Cunha and Mbeumo have done so far this season.
Click to expand...

Fergie also had world class wingers who had no problem putting shift helping the defense (Giggs, Becks were not only world class wingers but also world class workhorses)
horsechoker said:
Where would he need to finish in the league for you to be happy with him staying on?
Click to expand...
I was actually agreed with Brexit Jim's assesment that our squad is good enough to challenge for CL spots, so finish 5th or 6th is the bare minimum for me.
 
So we're gonna base opinions on why Liverpool didnt take Amorim now ffs and take whatever Athletic writes as a gospel. Who the fcuk cares why didnt Liverpool take him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.