Erm, did Twoy watch the first 30 minutes of the second half against Ipswich. Fantastic football
The pile-on spewed by so called Pundits thread
- Thread starter ColvaleGoa
- Start date
-
Hello, Guest! We have a new competition (with tagline and award as prizes) starting.
A new Odds or Evens competition is starting now. Click here to enter to submit your predictions. Submissions will be open for the next 7 days, 20 hours, 48 minutes, 40 seconds, and will close on Sep 12, 2026 at 15:00.
Yep...the thing is as well it's all well and good slating pundits for it, but it's no different on here.
We've had this "What's our style" stuff every manager since Ole.
The only team in the league who have a "style" they consistently impose on games is Arsenal, and that's because their style is to allow as little football to be played as possible. Well apart from the likes of Tottenham whose style is "let's be really sh*t every game".
If anything we're one of the few teams who's players can show a bit of flair and individuality.
I think it was Martin Samuel who made the comment that you will never go broke talking about Man Utd. A lot of punditry just reflects that.
Other posters have already highlighted that Carrick does have a style, and that what he's doing now isn't actually that much different to what he did at Boro. He just has better players to do it at United.
Carrick obviously does have a system. Our players clearly do know what they're doing with the ball and without the ball. That is a huge difference to what we saw under Amorim, when the team looked looked continually baffled by the instructions.
Carrick's crime, seemingly, is that he has not reinvented football...
...and he's won as many games as any Premier League coach since coming in. That's always going to get rivals hot under the collar.
PS) You don't get people asking why Argentina built their World Cup campaign about an ageing Messi who couldn't run. Or why France stuck two powerful lads in the middle at all times so Mbappe et al had the defensive security to fly forward freely. Most coaches work their tactics to suit the best outlet. It would be stranger if Carrick followed Ten Hag and played Bruno wide right, or Amorim and stuck him in a double pivot, just to suit some idea of how football should be played.
Other posters have already highlighted that Carrick does have a style, and that what he's doing now isn't actually that much different to what he did at Boro. He just has better players to do it at United.
Carrick obviously does have a system. Our players clearly do know what they're doing with the ball and without the ball. That is a huge difference to what we saw under Amorim, when the team looked looked continually baffled by the instructions.
Carrick's crime, seemingly, is that he has not reinvented football...
...and he's won as many games as any Premier League coach since coming in. That's always going to get rivals hot under the collar.
PS) You don't get people asking why Argentina built their World Cup campaign about an ageing Messi who couldn't run. Or why France stuck two powerful lads in the middle at all times so Mbappe et al had the defensive security to fly forward freely. Most coaches work their tactics to suit the best outlet. It would be stranger if Carrick followed Ten Hag and played Bruno wide right, or Amorim and stuck him in a double pivot, just to suit some idea of how football should be played.
To be fair I had no idea what Van Gaal was doing. Aimless passing around the back line under the guise of “possession football”. But yeah it was palatable for the purists.
Agree, although the style stuff has mainly been levelled at Ole and Carrick, as has the tactical novice type criticism (from the get-go, anyway).
The same people would be slagging off Fergie no doubt if he was in charge, since Ole and Carrick’s teams have been modelled in a similar way albeit without the success.
Lets try and do it over 90
simple really.
I don’t think we have a specific style of play and that the lack of any specific style of play is obvious when the team is on the pitch
He should but probably has it already
SAF reinvented his tactics at least 3-4 times during his stay at United. The United he left behind played a completely different style to the high energy, hard working style his double side played. Carrick has a style which is basic but effective. However comparing Carrick to SAF in terms of tactics is like comparing a child's scribble to a Van Gogh's masterpiece.
I'm less concerned about a squad's style than I am its quality and mentality. The baseline requirement for any club which aspires to trophy lifts is quality and although you no squad can be stacked with world class players back to front, it does need quality throughout. But a squad needs a winning mentality, and during the post-Fergie era we have lacked quality and a winning mentality. Our "style" went from "81 crosses" Moyes, to Van Gaal boringball, to Mourinho's relentless low block, to "let the boys have at it" Oleball, to ten Hag's empty midfield tactics, then Amorim's ridiculous numerical underload in midfield while placing all his chips on effing "wingbacks", we had a style of play under each of these managers but we never had a winning mentality under any of them. Between Moyes and Amorim you could say perhaps Mourinho for a few months, but at some point he decided to burn it all down because he didn't get Maguire or whoever it was he demanded but didn't get.
The manager has to be a massive part of that winning mentality and more than tactics that's what set the Great Man apart from every other manager since his retirement. The timbers began to fall the day the club appointed Moyes and after all these years we still haven't fully recovered his panic management. Carrick may prove to be not up to the job but I actually think he has it in him to have us compete for a major trophy this season until the very end, when the quality of Arsenal will do us in. Apart from all that, Carrick wants build up play out of the back but looks for long balls where the half chance presents itself, but it all depends whether the opponent is high presser or a low block side. We famously perform worse against low quality, low block sides, but what opponents have and will again use against is alternating between a high press and a low-block, which Hull did against us, and we were unprepared for it. I would say mentally unprepared for it as the quality between the two sides is clear, which takes us back to the mentality problem we've struggled with for quite some time and was clear that the players weren't mentally prepared for Hull.
The manager has to be a massive part of that winning mentality and more than tactics that's what set the Great Man apart from every other manager since his retirement. The timbers began to fall the day the club appointed Moyes and after all these years we still haven't fully recovered his panic management. Carrick may prove to be not up to the job but I actually think he has it in him to have us compete for a major trophy this season until the very end, when the quality of Arsenal will do us in. Apart from all that, Carrick wants build up play out of the back but looks for long balls where the half chance presents itself, but it all depends whether the opponent is high presser or a low block side. We famously perform worse against low quality, low block sides, but what opponents have and will again use against is alternating between a high press and a low-block, which Hull did against us, and we were unprepared for it. I would say mentally unprepared for it as the quality between the two sides is clear, which takes us back to the mentality problem we've struggled with for quite some time and was clear that the players weren't mentally prepared for Hull.
There was a phase on here where people started referring to Ferguson as a "dinosaur" in terms of tactics.
I used to be one of the biggest moaners on here when we were actually good but this always baffled me. Like what do people watch to get this impression every other team has some unique style while United just wing it?
To be honest not really sure what people mean when they talk about (presumably a fixed) 'style of play' being made obvious to opponents; thought that was one of the reasons the team selections are not made until 1 hour before KO.
Surely it is all about using the skills, competences, etc. of your best players; they need to have the ball often.... and then do their stuff.
One of the old jokes in Busby's time was that the only player he ever gave any pre-match instructions to was Nobby Stiles, the instruction was .... "Nobby you win the ball, then give it to Bobby"
These days perhaps Carrick's instructions; given to all, would be ... "win the ball, then give it to Bruno"
Surely it is all about using the skills, competences, etc. of your best players; they need to have the ball often.... and then do their stuff.
One of the old jokes in Busby's time was that the only player he ever gave any pre-match instructions to was Nobby Stiles, the instruction was .... "Nobby you win the ball, then give it to Bobby"
These days perhaps Carrick's instructions; given to all, would be ... "win the ball, then give it to Bruno"
Its obvious when we play Cunha as a striker. The style is a withdrawn striker who will be deep and involved in the buildup. I have big question marks over how effective it feels, but we did get some results and Mbeumo especially got goals in that system last season.
When we play with Sesko the style is a more standard one, get down the sides and work some shots
When we play against the better teams it suits counter-attacking because we're going to have less of the ball anyway. We always have a counter-attack threat anyway because it suits our attacking players who all make use of pace, other than Bruno of course who is the brain and the one that can play them all in.
Just because our style is "standard" doesnt mean we dont have a style. It just means we havent picked a non-standard style that stands out and why should we? When we played 4-4-2 under Sir Alex it was the standard style.
Its only a problem when you arent getting results
What was SAFs system?
Style is basically tiki-taka, possession, and/or pressing. Anything that isn’t those things is vibes and no system.
If you’re not playing something traditionally exotic, you have no style or gameplan. The bar for punditry is low these days…
Who listens to/agrees with anything Troy Deeney says?
Students who don't want to get beaten up.
Troy Deeney...I mean since when has his opinion mattered? He probably gets ignored in his own household!
It would be impossible to describe the evolution in tactics throughout over a quarter of a century of success. However if we take snapshots of the most successful one then
a- the double side - was the meanest and most hardworking side of the lot. I bet they ate nails for breakfast. We had a very dominant defense with 2 CBs who were unbeatable in air (Dolly and Daisy) with Parker acting as the then traditional FB (a bit like a 3rd CB). SAF was one of the first in the EPL to flirt with the attacking FB idea (ie Denis Irwin). CM was rock solid and incredibly hardworking with Keane being the more advanced and Incey being the traditional DM. Kanchelskis and Giggs provided ample width and pace. Even though they were traditional wingers SAF was already flirting with the inside winger concept at the time with the wingers given some license to cut inside and cause damage. Then there was Hughes who was a hardworking beast and Eric who was the typical 'mezza punta' of the time similar to the Baggio type of no 10
b- treble side. By that time Ince was gone and Scholes was, at the time, a forward pretending to be a CM. SAF compensated to that by telling the defense to be a bit more cautious (and adding Stam who was a machine), play Beckham as RW (who was certainly more hardworking then Kanchelskis was) and have the forwards drop deeper and help CM more. The result was a very solid defensive unit who could swiftly overload the opposition in transition with 4 extremely talented players (Giggs, Scholes, Yorke, Cole). Every player in that team could score goals (bar Gaz) and SAF could switch the game in a moment notice to a more traditional mezza punta (Sheringham) and a traditional fox in the box (Ole)
c- 2008 side. SAF aimed for the a mix of the treble side and the double side. Evra were given more licence to move forward. That was down to Vidic and Rio who were the perfect CB pair + Wes who was more of a CB then a RB. In CM he brought a combination of CMs but after 2008 he ended up settling with Carrick and Scholes mostly because they were amazing (by then Scholes was a deep lying playmaker) + Hargreaves and Ando was starting picking injuries. He then opted to an extremely hardworking forward line in Park, Rooney and Tevez who were meant to cover for the lack of inches of pitch covered by Carrick (he was a giant of player but he had a different approach to the Incey/Keano types) and of course the fact that hell will freeze between Ronaldo would backtrack. We returned to the focus type of player in Ronaldo with the difference that similarly to the treble side any player out of those lot could score goals which made us very difficult to mark against
d- SAF last side. SAF went for a cautious, counterattacking side were the team was expected to do the most out of the chances given to them. Workhorses (Young, Valencia, Cleverley) were expected to do the leg work for the ageing stars who couldn't provide the same work rate they did in their younger years. Meanwhile RVP was brought in to make the most out of the chances created. SAF built the foundation for the counter attacking system we can't seem being able to get rid off.
If you ask me for SAF's philosophy then it would be the following
a- never bring aholes, lazy players or players who think they are bigger then the club (the latter was a lesson learnt after Paul Ince departure)
b- balance is everything. It's ok for a great player to have weaknesses (ex Scholes can't tackle, Ronaldo doesn't backtrack, Bruce is painfully slow) as long as someone else can do that on his behalf.
c- man management is key. SAF could take a very ordinary player :cough: Gaz :cough: and make him believe that he can be amazing and go through a brick wall if he wanted. SAF's man management shifted significantly from one player to another. For example SAF was known for his hair dryer treatment. Yet he had never done that to Paul Scholes (various players confirmed that including Evra and Rio) and went to such extent were he gave the hair dryer to the unfortunate guy who happened to sit near Scholes even though Scholes was the one to blame.
d- the academy is important. It allowed SAF to build players in the image he wanted them, it stopped the club from wasting money on squad players thus allowing the club to spend big on the first team players he wanted
No I don’t think so, might have to enable the audio on the post.
Very happy with the pushback wrt Deeney's comments, we absolutely can't let Carrick get targeted with another "yeah he wins but what's his style of play"? The same accusations Ole faced despite while he was here ( and unfortunately a huge part of the fan base agreed with that) despite him picking up points. You don't have to play in exact patterns every game to succeed, a good manager is one who wins.
Great question. At least with Van Gaal and others, however weird their ideas were they had ideas...with Ole it was just letting the players express themselves as they wish. The best one can do to describe Oleball was that McFred would sit deep, strip the ball and then immediately find Bruno, who would then launch a long ball into the final third, come what may. It was fun to watch and for a while we were unbeatable, but we all witnessed the timbers fall on Ole and his brand of football. And after a quick check online, Ole is no longer managing any football club, whether in Turkey or a youth league.
Still though, that goal at the Camp Nou was a thing for the ages.
That was obviously not it though. You don't beat Pep's City multiple times and finish 3rd then 2nd by just "letting the boys express themselves" as you put it.
There might just be a system you're unable to see for some reason?
None of that is a system or “style of play” though is it. Fergie’s teams played very direct football built on getting the most from the players, not unlike Carrick and Ole who have more than likely been influenced by Fergie more than anyone else. He was an excellent man manager who instilled confidence and built an aura around the club. But tactically speaking, there was no “system” in the modern sense of the word. Good job he retired before the pretentious football purism came about.
There were systems or styles of play. Even carrick has a system. He overcrowd the CM pushing the opponents on the flanks. There are aspects of SAF game in his tactics like stressing on man management and develop the tactics according to the players he got but I wouldn't say he is a SAF clone or cheap copy, more of an inspiration just as there's aspects of conte game that came from Lippi.
There's far more depth in Carrick's tactics tthen ole
Fair enough, I agree. Although I don’t agree that Ole was just “go out and have fun” as per the suggestions by others in this thread.
I never said that it was that bad. However it was more of the traditional counter attack football.
There really wasn't much of a system, in the meaningful sense of the word, under Ole -- defend deep and counter...that was the strategy -- but even if you think there was, you're making my point. What we have lacked since Moyes was the mentality to see through an entire season. We would get up for opponents like City and play out of our skins, defending like it was D-Day in Normandy and then goals from the top shelf, but then we would crumble against bottom feeding clubs. I think it was Watford -- of all clubs, Watford! -- who thrashed us not just once under Ole, but twice. I can't explain why our mentality crumbled against such clubs, but it's an undisputed fact that it did then, and continued to crumble under Amorim. The defeat to Hull worries me, but we can discuss this point on another thread.
It was counter attacking football although one could argue that squad was incapable of playing much else. Midfield was nonexistent.
Videos used to be muted by default but you could unmute them. I can't even see the unmute button anymore. Click/tap on anything and the sign-in/register popup appears. Annoying!
I probably need to clear my browser cache or update the ad-blocker or something. Just wondered if they've changed something to try and force you to log-in.
Now if Gary Neville said it, I’d be heartbroken….but Troy…..nah….not concerned.
Generally...
Out of possession:
Defend mid to low. Press on short goal kicks only.
In possession:
Recycle the ball slowly at the back and wait for an opportunity to exploit wide areas and get plenty of crosses in. When winning the ball in defensive areas, look for Bruno and trigger runs in behind by the forwards. Defenders responsible for creating plays, midfielders there to defend the middle on transitions and support the CBs on build up. Quite rigid in what we do and predictable.
Last edited:
I don't care a single bit about the reactionary panic comments from pundits and fans after two games.
Everyone is entitled to say whatever they want, whenever they want. We're talking about a fecking football club not giving an opinion about someone's kid.
Of course pundits will stir shit up, it gives them views and keeps the social media train going along.
Considering I'm yet to find a pundit that I can take seriously for more than 2 minutes, I don't see why some concern themselves with whatever other people say or post on their social media channels.
Everyone is entitled to say whatever they want, whenever they want. We're talking about a fecking football club not giving an opinion about someone's kid.
Of course pundits will stir shit up, it gives them views and keeps the social media train going along.
Considering I'm yet to find a pundit that I can take seriously for more than 2 minutes, I don't see why some concern themselves with whatever other people say or post on their social media channels.
That's nonsense and you're just linking Ole and Carrick because they happened to have played for him. It's lazy, you may as well just say good manager play good football bad manager play bad football.
Sir Alex amended his tactics based on who we had at the club but each era definitely had a 'system'. Our tactics with Ronaldo in the team, our tactics with Tevez, with Beckham were all notably different to get the most out of the team. It wasn't dictated by a single player's style in a game, the whole setup changed to exploit our strengths.
Our current tactic of a mid block don't suit Maguire or Shaw. We invite crosses in rather than aggressively stopping the cross which doesn't suit anyone except Maguire.
We vacate the midfield to try pull the opponent out but without a Scholes or Carrick we struggle to then quickly beat the lines. It only works when the opponent loses structure.
The one thing we do well and it's very United DNA is that we're able to exploit space effectively. Once Ipswich conceded the first they were doomed.
At 0-0 we struggle because we lack aggressive fullbacks and we don't have our wingers/forwards attack the byline. Our wide men just dribble into the space, stop and pass it back or attempt a poor cross.
We're apparently doomed to revert to counter, space, and transition focused football eternally. A club of our stature needs a manager who can also figure out how to play dominantly so until Carrick figures that out he's right to be challenged on his system. I'm not even being purest here, if his solution is to lump it to Sesko and Mbeumo that's fine if it works.
Evra has said that under Sir Alex there werent really any tactics. Just individual play. "Play well or I'll kill you", he didnt tell them to make runs on the underlap instead of overlap or anything like that. He did say when Querioz was there, there were a few more tactics. But yeah. I dont see a problem with a manager not having a certain style that isnt standard and expecting players to fit that style/system. I think only a few of those managers have really succeeded at the biggest clubs. Usually sticking to it gets them fired.
Yeah, Neville spoke about how unusually meticulous the preparations for the Barca semis in 2008 were with Quiroz, SAF was never that type of coach, like Ancelotti his strength was in other aspects of being a football manager.
Its a shame Quiroz didn’t stay for the 08-09 season, could’ve been handy for the Barca final.