"this midfield doesn't do enough offensively"

[Borys]

So I hear this a lot around here: "Fred - McTominay midfield offers next to nothing going forward", or "it's overkill defensively".

We've played the last 3 games with this combo behind Bruno. This was the first time in a while we've had some control over midfield (at the very least).
We've conceded 2 goals, both own goals (1 against Newcastle, 1 against PSG, clean sheet against Chelsea). Our defenders are having much less to do, which should be the case with well-functioning midfield shielding them.
At the same time, team has created a number of chances in open gameplay and let me quote from another thread after Chelse game:

That said we shouldn't forget that part of this game plan I think is capitalising of mistakes that will arise during the game whether forced through pressing or unforced and if Rashford had scored the opp in the first half then actually we might well be praising a clinical performance, it is fine margins.

It is a part of the reason we looked offensively blunt, but the smallest part.
Firstly, you need quality in attack in the first place - we had only Rashford who can be called that.
Secondly, it would be nice if fullbacks were joining the attack. Yesterday not only we played two conservative fullbacks, but also they were asked to stay back.
Thirdly, the midfield. It would be nice if McTominay and Fred were better passers, or could carry the ball better but with the way we were set up yesterday, I don't think it would've made much of a difference.

Now if we consider our options, it's possible we would be more dangerous playing Pogba instead of Fred or McTominay. But do you really think it would've made such a difference, if he had James and Mata up front against 5 Chelsea defenders? Rashford has been pretty good with limited service he got but I don't think sacrificing midfield balance for Pogba is the right way forward. Van de Beek at this moment I don't even consider as an option to replace either Fred/McTominay for obvious reasons.

"This midfield offers next to nothing going forward" is an accusation easily fixed if we start playing our best attackers in Greenwood and Martial, and be more brave with fullbacks.

"It's overkill defensively" is a weak argument as if there was Pogba in midfield against Chelsea, I'm pretty sure they would be attacking us more through the middle like all teams have done with Paul starting in deep midfield.

"Fred/McTominay would be better with a playmaker next to him" is obviously true, but firstly we don't have that player, and secondly, the way we're doing moves in transfer market, I don't have any hopes we're getting that kind of player anytime soon.

Although we're not scoring as many goals as we would've liked, chances are being created with limited attacking options we have right now.

So is this midfield really a problem?

 

[Thiagoal]

So I hear this a lot around here: "Fred - McTominay midfield offers next to nothing going forward", or "it's overkill defensively".

We've played the last 3 games with this combo behind Bruno. This was the first time in a while we've had some control over midfield (at the very least).
We've conceded 2 goals, both own goals (1 against Newcastle, 1 against PSG, clean sheet against Chelsea). Our defenders are having much less to do, which should be the case with well-functioning midfield shielding them.
At the same time, team has created a number of chances in open gameplay and let me quote from another thread after Chelse game:



It is a part of the reason we looked offensively blunt, but the smallest part.
Firstly, you need quality in attack in the first place - we had only Rashford who can be called that.
Secondly, it would be nice if fullbacks were joining the attack. Yesterday not only we played two conservative fullbacks, but also they were asked to stay back.
Thirdly, the midfield. It would be nice if McTominay and Fred were better passers, or could carry the ball better but with the way we were set up yesterday, I don't think it would've made much of a difference.

Now if we consider our options, it's possible we would be more dangerous playing Pogba instead of Fred or McTominay. But do you really think it would've made such a difference, if he had James and Mata up front against 5 Chelsea defenders? Rashford has been pretty good with limited service he got but I don't think sacrificing midfield balance for Pogba is the right way forward. Van de Beek at this moment I don't even consider as an option to replace either Fred/McTominay for obvious reasons.

"This midfield offers next to nothing going forward" is an accusation easily fixed if we start playing our best attackers in Greenwood and Martial, and be more brave with fullbacks.

"It's overkill defensively" is a weak argument as if there was Pogba in midfield against Chelsea, I'm pretty sure they would be attacking us more through the middle like all teams have done with Paul starting in deep midfield.

"Fred/McTominay would be better with a playmaker next to him" is obviously true, but firstly we don't have that player, and secondly, the way we're doing moves in transfer market, I don't have any hopes we're getting that kind of player anytime soon.

Although we're not scoring as many goals as we would've liked, chances are being created with limited attacking options we have right now.

So is this midfield really a problem?

Totally agree! McFred are the only combination we have where I feel confident we will ‘win the midfield battle’ and teams won’t just stroll through us. With four attackers ahead of them we should have more than enough to break down most teams!

 

[MyOnlySolskjaer]

There's a time and place for this combination of Fred and McTominay, I don't really criticise for it being used against Chelsea, it's just they happened to set up very cowardly. But in most cases, it should be one of Fred or McTominay.

I'd like to see; Scott and Van de Beek tried out together.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

So I hear this a lot around here: "Fred - McTominay midfield offers next to nothing going forward", or "it's overkill defensively".

We've played the last 3 games with this combo behind Bruno. This was the first time in a while we've had some control over midfield (at the very least).
We've conceded 2 goals, both own goals (1 against Newcastle, 1 against PSG, clean sheet against Chelsea). Our defenders are having much less to do, which should be the case with well-functioning midfield shielding them.
At the same time, team has created a number of chances in open gameplay and let me quote from another thread after Chelse game:



It is a part of the reason we looked offensively blunt, but the smallest part.
Firstly, you need quality in attack in the first place - we had only Rashford who can be called that.
Secondly, it would be nice if fullbacks were joining the attack. Yesterday not only we played two conservative fullbacks, but also they were asked to stay back.
Thirdly, the midfield. It would be nice if McTominay and Fred were better passers, or could carry the ball better but with the way we were set up yesterday, I don't think it would've made much of a difference.

Now if we consider our options, it's possible we would be more dangerous playing Pogba instead of Fred or McTominay. But do you really think it would've made such a difference, if he had James and Mata up front against 5 Chelsea defenders? Rashford has been pretty good with limited service he got but I don't think sacrificing midfield balance for Pogba is the right way forward. Van de Beek at this moment I don't even consider as an option to replace either Fred/McTominay for obvious reasons.

"This midfield offers next to nothing going forward" is an accusation easily fixed if we start playing our best attackers in Greenwood and Martial, and be more brave with fullbacks.

"It's overkill defensively" is a weak argument as if there was Pogba in midfield against Chelsea, I'm pretty sure they would be attacking us more through the middle like all teams have done with Paul starting in deep midfield.

"Fred/McTominay would be better with a playmaker next to him" is obviously true, but firstly we don't have that player, and secondly, the way we're doing moves in transfer market, I don't have any hopes we're getting that kind of player anytime soon.

Although we're not scoring as many goals as we would've liked, chances are being created with limited attacking options we have right now.

So is this midfield really a problem?

The problem was starting James with that pair of combative midfielders.


We should have played a diamond with both Bruno and Pogba on pitch. It's high time we stop pretending we have wingers and simply play split strikers.

We have enough play makers and attacking midfielders to make it work

 

[amolbhatia50k]

It's funny.

• We blame the forwards for the midfield looking average.
• We blame the midfield for the forwards looking average
• And we often blame the defence for the midfield looking average and visa versa

Feels like everything can be good enough if we just fix that other thing that isn't helping. Maybe if we actually get the team playing as good as the sum of its parts or better yet, better than that sum, we'd actually stop this silly dance.

 

[MadDogg]

Fred is fine on the ball in his own right. But he's not good enough to carry the responsibility by himself when he's partnered by someone who is worse in that regard (McTominay). It's fine against the truly top teams where we want to focus on destroying their control and launching our own attacks, but against teams we expect to control the game against he should be partnered by somebody who is at least as good as he is on the ball.

It's why I keep saying I want to see Fred-Matic together in most games. Matic is quite a lot better on the ball than McTominay, while still being much better defensively than Pogba. Hell, once Pogba is fully up to speed even Fred-Pogba might be fine against lower teams. Depending on how VDB performs, maybe he's another option next to him.

 

[Borys]

It's funny.

• We blame the forwards for the midfield looking average.
• We blame the midfield for the forwards looking average
• And we often blame the defence for the midfield looking average and visa versa

Feels like everything can be good enough if we just fix that other thing that isn't helping. Maybe if we actually get the team playing as good as the sum of its parts or better yet, better than that sum, we'd actually stop this silly dance.

I don't know what "We" are you referring to as I didn't say either of those things, so I'm not sure how is this a reply to the thread, but clearly you can understand that all three "departments" are linked through midfield. And let me rephrase the OP:

If we played any other midfield in that game, we're not scoring many more goals with the attackers we used yesterday AND the defensive mindset.

 

[Lennon7]

Having VdB start ahead of McTominay would still work. Fred is a good defensive midfielder, he wins the ball quite often and gets right in the face of the opposition. VdB clearly isn’t a defensive midfielder but he’s so busy he’d have a similar effect defensively that Herrera did - snapping at their heels, tracking back and occasionally intercepting/winning the ball back. On top of that, he gets forward and has amuch better passing ability than McTominay.

It’d work even better if we try 5 at the back again. Shaw was great as a left centre back and the 3 centre backs would provide a bit more cover for the centre mids if we went with VdB. It also allows Telles to start, which would give us so much more than Shaw going forward. It makes too much sense to me so can’t see it happening.

 

[drdoityourself]

Mata is a good player. At least he can receive the ball and move it in front of the opposition defence. Bruno and Rashford are quality players so lets not let the inclusion of Daniel James free this midfield from having to make an attacking contribution.
McTominay's passing in this game was very poor. He also hesitates making himself available at first opportunity so the defence has to hoof it more often that not.

This midfield works when we expect 30% possession. The two of them is overkill in most matches and I feel that Fred is the better of the two. Surely Matic is a better option with Fred when we need two holding midfielders, his passing is much better. Doesn't run as much as McTominay but probably wouldn't need to, as possession would be easier to retain.

 

[NinjaFletch]

I think it's basically fine, the issue is that midfield with two non entities at full back going forward and a player who contributes as little as James as one of the front three.

The Telles signing and return of Martial and Greenwood will make a huge difference.

 

[Borys]

Having VdB start ahead of McTominay would still work. Fred is a good defensive midfielder, he wins the ball quite often and gets right in the face of the opposition. VdB clearly isn’t a defensive midfielder but he’s so busy he’d have a similar effect defensively that Herrera did - snapping at their heels, tracking back and occasionally intercepting/winning the ball back. On top of that, he gets forward and has amuch better passing ability than McTominay.

It’d work even better if we try 5 at the back again. Shaw was great as a left centre back and the 3 centre backs would provide a bit more cover for the centre mids if we went with VdB. It also allows Telles to start, which would give us so much more than Shaw going forward. It makes too much sense to me so can’t see it happening.

Well we don't know that, van de Beek has never played in midfield for us so time will tell. I'd give him a chance but only if we play 3 at the back. Which makes a lot of sense like you said, as we could also use Telles and have at least one threat coming from the wing.

I think it's basically fine, the issue is that midfield with two non entities at full back going forward and a player who contributes as little as James as one of the front three.

The Telles signing and return of Martial and Greenwood will make a huge difference.

Exactly. Makes no sense to temper with that midfield as we know we're far from full strength.

 

[arnie_ni]

The issue was 2 of the 4 in front were mata and James.

What are trying to do ole?

Sit in and counter? Well dont play mata instead of greenwood.

When we get the ball do you want to keep it abit, move them around, and count on your players intelligence to find space and create a chance? Well dont play james instead of vdb.

He contradicted himself with his front 4 selection ahead of that. It was never going to work.

 

[Bestietom]

There's a time and place for this combination of Fred and McTominay, I don't really criticise for it being used against Chelsea, it's just they happened to set up very cowardly. But in most cases, it should be one of Fred or McTominay.

I'd like to see; Scott and Van de Beek tried out together.

And I would like to see Fred and VdB tried together. More mobility.

 

[11101]

Ole set us up not to lose, first and foremost. You cant expect miracles with some of the players we had out there, but I think a big part of our bluntness in attack is our coaching, or lack of it.

Watching us pick the ball up in certain positions you look for a particular run and pass. If for example Pogba drops deep and picks the ball up on the left hand side, he should be expecting Rashford to start his run and barely need to look before playing a pass down the channel. What you see with us is inconsistency. Sometimes Rashford runs, sometimes he doesnt. Sometimes Pogba plays the pass and Rashford is on to it, sometimes Rashford runs and Pogba ignores him. We dont have patterns of play that allow us to get the ball forward quickly enough. We have the talent to always get a chance or two this way but it's not consistent enough.

 

[Bestietom]

We need a Soumare, or a Zakaria as DM. Maybe then we can be more offensive. Playing Fred and McTominay as a pivot is not good for our forwards. Neither one is a good passer of the ball.

 

[Lee565]

There is nothing really wrong with playing two defensive minded players in a double pivot as long as you have enough attacking prowess in your front 4, which we did not yesterday and which was mainly down to dan james being a pointless body in a red shirt yesterday like we have come to expect from probably our worst offensive player since bebe.

 

[EdinburghDevil]

I think there is a growing feeling that VDB was brought in with a view of slowly getting up to speed with the premier league and that Pogba will be off before long.

I'd play VDB and give Bruno a rest midweek in Champions League.

Top 6 teams aside, I'd then be playing McT or Fred with Pogba or VDB with Bruno furtherest forward.

Top 6 teams the McT and Fred base I think suits the team, play a bit more on the counter. I think Chelsea just sat in a lot more than anyone expected yesterday.

 

[el3mel]

It gives us good control on midfield but it's time to test playing VDB instead of one of them, I want to see a Fred - VBB - Bruno combo.

 

[Rozay]

The issue wasn’t so much the midfield yesterday but instead having a front 3 of Mata, James and Rashford in front of them which was never going to hurt anybody.

Having Cavani and Greenwood on the bench was a bigger issue here than having Pogba on the bench. Of course, Pogba’s ability to pass and carry the ball forward, and also keep hold of it in advanced areas is am asset, but if he’s to play, it should be ahead of Fernandes, or in place of one of the front 3 as we finished with against Paris. Playing him in a double pivot is a recipe for disaster, and will only lead to him being criticised for the things he isn’t good at.

I do think Donny could potentially play as one of the deeper two though, which should be tried.

 

[TMDaines]

The issue was 2 of the 4 in front were mata and James.

What are trying to do ole?

Sit in and counter? Well dont play mata instead of greenwood.

When we get the ball do you want to keep it abit, move them around, and count on your players intelligence to find space and create a chance? Well dont play james instead of vdb.

He contradicted himself with his front 4 selection ahead of that. It was never going to work.

Yep. He did the same at Newcastle and only won the match when he rectified it by subbing James off. Still baffled by people thinking James had a good game at Newcastle. We only won when he got out of the way and vacated the flank for Rashford and Bruno to do the damage.

 

[Leftback99]

No, the main problem was having players as average as Mata and James starting in attack against a quality team in Chelsea.

 

[Sultan]

Playing Mata is fine against teams who do not press. He's best days are now coming to an end. He's just playing with his head and experience these days. Against Chelsea, I would have started with Greenwood as a central striker with Cavani coming onto replace him around 70th minute. Rashford in his normal position and either VDB or Pogba playing with Bruno in Mata's position.

James was highly ineffective and looks lost on this stage and Mata was just a passenger against a defensive set-up. The team could still have been defensively solid playing Fred and McT if Ole feared giving Chelsea's strikers room to play against a defence lacking in confidence.

 

[acnumber9]

Playing Mata is fine against teams who do not press. He's best days are now coming to an end. He's just playing with his head and experience these days. Against Chelsea, I would have started with Greenwood as a central striker with Cavani coming onto replace him around 70th minute. Rashford in his normal position and either VDB or Pogba playing with Bruno in Mata's position.

James was highly ineffective and looks lost on this stage and Mata was just a passenger against a defensive set-up. The team could still have been defensively solid playing Fred and McT if Ole feared giving Chelsea's strikers room to play against a defence lacking in confidence.

Mata created our best chance and forced a good save from their keeper. If anybody was a passenger it wasn’t Mata.

 

[Feed Me]

You see the limitations of Fred and McTominay in an attacking sense when we have to break down a compact team that leaves very few spaces. Against PSG, when there were big gaps to pass through, they looked excellent. Against Chelsea, they didn’t have the precision to work the ball through tighter gaps.

 

[Ekeke]

50% of the ball isnt exactly dominating when we're at home. Fred and McTominay is certainly a defensive minded midfield for the situation, but I do think it helps Lindelof having that extra help.

The problem is it doesnt help the attack. And thats our problem with fitting Pogba in right now. Either we lack defensively because hes in a deep midfield role, or we lack offensively because he's not in the team and the players that replaced him dont have the vision and creativity to find players in dangerous areas like he does.

I'd argue that we should try DVB again in the DM role because he should be the closest to getting both right

 

[Berbasbullet]

Obviously this thread is aimed at Fred and McTominay.

They’re both excellent but I do agree, there was a few times yesterday where the ball ping ponged between them and the back 4 giving Chelsea time to set themselves.

 

[UnofficialDevil]

It's funny.

• We blame the forwards for the midfield looking average.
• We blame the midfield for the forwards looking average
• And we often blame the defence for the midfield looking average and visa versa

Feels like everything can be good enough if we just fix that other thing that isn't helping. Maybe if we actually get the team playing as good as the sum of its parts or better yet, better than that sum, we'd actually stop this silly dance.

Exactly, we are masters of excuses.

 

[Wolverine]

The issue was James who offered literally nothing
Greenwood in his place, or Mata on that side cutting in with Pogba starting or even Van de Beek starting would have been better
Fred and McTominay give us a good base but it made no sense having James start who didn't put a single cross in and ran into a defender at each turn.

Its about maximising your chances offensively, we did create chances for Rashford but we'd create more by playing our best offensive players. And I don't think it affects balance/defense as shown against PSG. Not having Telles as well made no sense either.

 

[Alexit]

The issue was 2 of the 4 in front were mata and James.

What are trying to do ole?

Sit in and counter? Well dont play mata instead of greenwood.

When we get the ball do you want to keep it abit, move them around, and count on your players intelligence to find space and create a chance? Well dont play james instead of vdb.

He contradicted himself with his front 4 selection ahead of that. It was never going to work.

Yeah, McFred is fine. I feel very comfortable with those two in front of the defense. As you pointed out the issue yesterday highlighted why Sancho is needed around here. If we have to resort to the likes of James, Mata, (daresay Greenwood) to offer width then we're screwed. And royally so.

We now have an abundance of riches in midfield and can chop and change to suit our opponent or an in-game situation but out wide is where we fall short now.

We now have the opposite problem from SAF's time. It's always something.

 

[R77]

We'd definitely look easier on the eye if McFred had better forward pass completion, though I feel that failed counters are sometimes no worse than keeping the ball. I'd rather see someone try and it not come off than get stuck in sterile possession. That's been a part of how we play and it's fine when we're purring along, but adds to the disjointed clumsiness when we're not. There are tentative attempts at evolving away from it and controlling play more, if only later in games so far, but we absolutely had to go back to basics after the start we had.

I actually thought Mata was done, but feel he's being underrated and misunderstood somewhat btw. Him dropping deep to be an option for build up on the right, and coming centrally to playmake and offer link up and for the attack, has been important in (almost) solving the problems being complained about. You have to wonder as to the extent of his Indian summer, but he's been good.

 

[Web of Bissaka]

As others have said, it's clear as day the problem vs Chelsea is the lack of quality in front.
Not the defense nor midfield.

Rashford is the only one we can rely on and he's the only one that came close on at least 2 separate occasions, while James and Mata barely did anything to break Chelsea defense nor threatening to score, at all. It's on the manager for choosing them and then wasting so many minutes with the duo.

 

[Walters_19_MuFc]

In a 4231, all we want our defensive midfielders to do regards on the ball is, keep the ball moving at a quick pace and get it into our front four. I feel Fred and McTominay since coming in have done that, whilst making us look a lot more defensively solid. The creativity needs to come from our front four plus two full-backs.

 

[georgipep]

As others have said, it's clear as day the problem vs Chelsea is the lack of quality in front.
Not the defense nor midfield.

Rashford is the only one we can rely on and he's the only one that came close on at least 2 separate occasions, while James and Mata barely did anything to break Chelsea defense nor threatening to score, at all. It's on the manager for choosing them and then wasting so many minutes with the duo.

Only Mata put Rashford on goal for his first opportunity and then also hit a good shot to test Mendy.

 

[AltiUn]

There's a time and place for this combination of Fred and McTominay, I don't really criticise for it being used against Chelsea, it's just they happened to set up very cowardly. But in most cases, it should be one of Fred or McTominay.

I'd like to see; Scott and Van de Beek tried out together.

Yeah this is my stance too.

 

[Borys]

50% of the ball isnt exactly dominating when we're at home. Fred and McTominay is certainly a defensive minded midfield for the situation, but I do think it helps Lindelof having that extra help.

In those 3 games we never lost modfield battle with Fred-McTominay, what happened EVERY TIME Pogba-Matic played. I never said "dominating".

The problem is it doesnt help the attack. And thats our problem with fitting Pogba in right now. Either we lack defensively because hes in a deep midfield role, or we lack offensively because he's not in the team and the players that replaced him dont have the vision and creativity to find players in dangerous areas like he does.

I agree but what do you think would've Pogba done better yesterday to win the game? I don't recall him creating many goalscoring opportunities when playing in midfield recently, and remember we played James and Mata on the wings against 5 Chelsea defenders. It was a tight game in midfield in the first half, definitely not one to risk Pogba dwelling on the ball.

I'd argue that we should try DVB again in the DM role because he should be the closest to getting both right

So basically what we failed with Pogba, you want to try now with van de Beek. Makes little sense to go for him in the first place but that's for another discussion.

EDIT: Seems like most people are replying to the thread title without reading the OP.

 

[Bobcat]

Scott and Fred are great against teams that push their midfield forward in attack since both are adept at breaking up play and provide a stable platform in front of our defense, but neither of them are exactly deep lying playmakers. Yesterday Chelsea parked the bus and hoofed to Werner/Havertz which means they had 8 players behind the ball for most of the game.

A front 3 of James, Mata and Rashford is not going to get through that unless the latter pulls up a worldie from somewhere

 

[DWelbz19]

It's funny.

• We blame the forwards for the midfield looking average.
• We blame the midfield for the forwards looking average
• And we often blame the defence for the midfield looking average and visa versa

Feels like everything can be good enough if we just fix that other thing that isn't helping. Maybe if we actually get the team playing as good as the sum of its parts or better yet, better than that sum, we'd actually stop this silly dance.

Normally one thing that’s able to fix all of that, isn’t there?
——
I think McTominay and Fred are midfielders who are at their best off the ball than they are on it. It’s important to have those in your side, especially for Champions League games away from home, but I don’t think they’re a sustainable pairing otherwise.

 

[DWelbz19]

In those 3 games we never lost modfield battle with Fred-McTominay, what happened EVERY TIME Pogba-Matic played. I never said "dominating".

This is so subjective it’s not really worth discussing. How do you quantify “losing a midfield battle”?

 

[RedDevilCanuck]

Pogba is now a winger or impact sub.

 

[Borys]

This is so subjective it’s not really worth discussing. How do you quantify “losing a midfield battle”?

You're right, it's more of an impression about our midfield being easy to cut through, losing most second balls, losing possession easily, not tracking back etc. You could argue that I used the word "every", but surely you must admit we looked much more comfortable in midfield against PSG and Chelsea.