UPDATED!!! United vs Top 6 - An Injury/Availability Analysis - Still Happy With 6th?

[Powderfinger]

I think United might have suffered the worst injury luck of the current top six but its a lot closer than this analysis makes it seem.

As others have noted, the approach confuses injury with non-selection. If you account for times players were available but just not selected, Mainoo would be in yellow and Varane in green. Garnacho and Hojlund would also likely be green if they were automatic starters when fit for Ten Hag, which would put United at 7 green, 1 yellow, 3 red. Its still tough to lose three key players in the defensive spine (Casemiro, Martinez, Shaw) for so much of the year but not nearly as dramatic as this makes it seem.

Some other sides look a lot worse if you make slightly different choices about their best XI. Timber and Partey were expected to play tons for Arsenal and we've gotten almost zero from both. Matip was the most selected partner for Van Dijk during the first part of the season and he is done for the year. Bentancur is surely in Spurs' best XI when fit.

I also think Chelsea would look worse than United if they were included.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

And as long as we acknowledge the impact of those injuries and the comparable extent of ours to the only clubs doing better than us in the league then I’m happy to debate in the ETH or other threads any other finer points.

So have you looked at the teams we faced and their injuries for those games versus the injuries for games against other sides?

It’s all well saying, ‘we’ve had more injuries’ because we have but that’s not really the whole story.

We played massively depleted Newcastle & Spurs sides. A quick search on Forza Football shows Bournemouth had 7 first team squad members unavailable on that day versus our 6.

Yes overall we’ve been more injured than other Top 6 sides but we’re also playing teams during their own periods of injuries etc. & the data you’ve chosen doesn’t address that.

I don’t know what you mean by he’s managed down. I also think most PL sides are very good now so you do need your best players performing regularly and fit to over a season win more than you’ll lose or draw. On a one off basis knockout style I’d agree but we’re talking across a seasonal impact not isolated incidents where variance can reek havoc.

By managing down I mean things like Sunday. Shaw goes off at half time & he has to bring on Lindelof, now he could have swapped him with Dalot [still not ideal] or he could have asked him to tailor the the way he played but by the looks of it he was asking Lindelof to do a very poor Sgaw impression against Bailey who then had him on toast.

We’ve been without Casemiro for large parts of the season & he’s persisted with a single pivot etc.

My minds fuzzy as I’m fresh off surgery but I don’t remember lots of games where we played well but ‘replacement player wasn’t as good as first choice’ so he didn’t make a tackle or finish a chance. It’s generally been poor team performances which of course better players would counter but isnt simply a case of dropping Player X in then things getting better.

Your initial post is a great starting point but there are so many other things to be took into account imo.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Yes

He wouldnt have started Mainoo during the period he was injured. And regardless of injuries he dropped Mount and has benched him behind Eriksen, McTominay and Amrabat at various points this season, sometimes two of them.

In reference to Mount…

So here’s his PL season so far where not fully fit Ten Hag is quoted as saying such:

1. 68mins
2. 85mins
3. Injury
4. Injury
5. Injury
6. Injury
7. 77mins (not fully fit)
8. 63mins (not fully fit)
9. 2 mins (not fully fit)
10. 45 mins (not fully fit)
11. 11 mins (not fully fit)
12. 50 mins (not fully fit)
13. Injury
14. Injury
15. Injury
16. Injury
17. Injury
18. Injury
19. Injury
20. Injury
21. Injury
22. Injury
23. Injury
24. Injury

 

[saik]

Except this thread completely fails to show that he's been way more affected.

All it shows is that he's rotated his team more. Which is a hallmark of a floundering manager.

Not sure how you can say that when teams like Arsenal, City and Liverpool have their first choice XI available for way longer than us. You can argue who we can consider as their best XI but I don't see how injuries haven't affected us.

He also had to rotate more because he had different players available at different times. Not once this season he had all the players fit and available for selection at the same time.

I posed this question to another poster but City lost 3 games in the league this season. Rodri was unavailable for all 3 of those. Some players are just that important to some teams. Multiply that by 4 or 5 first choice players who have been injured/unavailable, ofcourse anyone would struggle.

 

[hobbers]

Ten Hag has improved players over time, he has won trophies in his first season, he has just won back to back away fixtures etc. and yeah sometimes you need very good footballers to win football matches… that’s kind of the point.

Three players have improved over time, when playing for ETH. Simply because they are 18 19 and 20 and playing regularly. Sure he can have a bit of credit for realising Garnacho and Mainoo should be nailed on starters, but then everyone else with eyes could see that. Hojlund was a huge gamble that will always represent really poor squad planning, putting a huge burden on a £72m 20 year old to be your club's only number 9. Cant solely blame ETH for that but you also cant give him credit for giving Hojlund such a prolonged chance to impress, because there was no other choice.

Also, he won a trophy. Not trophies. Following in the footsteps of greats like LVG and Mourinho. He was also humiliated in the CL, which is his supposed forte.

 

[RedSky]

It's a good thread though, i'd be very interested to actually see the data on how many games players have missed through injury. If that's going to be the go to excuse for our crap season then that's the important data. I'm sure we'd be high up on the injury list what with Mount's long term problems along with Shaw/Casemiro/Mainoo. I know Sheffield United have had huge injury problems, probably the worst in the league by some distance.

 

[top1whoisman]

Yes

He wouldnt have started Mainoo during the period he was injured. And regardless of injuries he dropped Mount and has benched him behind Eriksen, McTominay and Amrabat at various points this season, sometimes two of them.

And as I've already said Casemiro was playing so badly I think his injury did us more good than bad.

Mount started most of the games before he got injured. Mainoo has started most of the games after he recovered from his injury. So considering those facts yes, he sees them as starters.

 

[hobbers]

In reference to Mount…

So here’s his PL season so far where not fully fit Ten Hag is quoted as saying such:

1. 68mins
2. 85mins
3. Injury
4. Injury
5. Injury
6. Injury
7. 77mins (not fully fit)
8. 63mins (not fully fit)
9. 2 mins (not fully fit)
10. 45 mins (not fully fit)
11. 11 mins (not fully fit)
12. 50 mins (not fully fit)
13. Injury
14. Injury
15. Injury
16. Injury
17. Injury
18. Injury
19. Injury
20. Injury
21. Injury
22. Injury
23. Injury
24. Injury

Sorry who is Mount supposed to have been displacing in the best eleven again? Mainoo? Casemiro? Bruno? Garnacho?

If he wasnt fully fit when available then that just means his default state is unfit and we spent £60m on a pseudo-footballer at ETH's request.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

From a negative angle, you could argue that it’s well known that Varane & Shaw are majorly injury prone, Casemiro is prone to disciplinary outages, Rashford has missed loads of days with last season being the exception to his norm, martial the walking dead and even Hojlund arrived with back issues.

so you’d have to question some of the forward planning too

so have we been building a house on sinking ground?

My answer to this would be I think we have been. I hope the team INEOS appoint can get to the bottom as to why.

Appreciate the effort here and I agree with the premise that we have been royally fecked with injuries, which has had a significant impact on team cohesion.

However, would be good to know availability % as well as playing %, to give context. As others have pointed out, ETH has made some tactical decisions that are questionable - e.g. dropping Varane. Mixing up the CBs so much this season has meant that their playing % is likely naturally a bit low.

(You don't have to do it, just raising it as a point!)

Availability is a bit subjective and the data is harder to find. You could argue that being on a bench is available but we all know managers use subs to build fitness etc. So without the actual club data I could present information but it wouldn’t be fact necessarily.

At least with this we can see the minutes share of players some of which are not down to injury but in our case a lot are.

So have you looked at the teams we faced and their injuries for those games versus the injuries for games against other sides?

It’s all well saying, ‘we’ve had more injuries’ because we have but that’s not really the whole story.

We played massively depleted Newcastle & Spurs sides. A quick search on Forza Football shows Bournemouth had 7 first team squad members unavailable on that day versus our 6.

Yes overall we’ve been more injured than other Top 6 sides but we’re also playing teams during their own periods of injuries etc. & the data you’ve chosen doesn’t address that.


By managing down I mean things like Sunday. Shaw goes off at half time & he has to bring on Lindelof, now he could have swapped him with Dalot [still not ideal] or he could have asked him to tailor the the way he played but by the looks of it he was asking Lindelof to do a very poor Sgaw impression against Bailey who then had him on toast.

We’ve been without Casemiro for large parts of the season & he’s persisted with a single pivot etc.

My minds fuzzy as I’m fresh off surgery but I don’t remember lots of games where we played well but ‘replacement player wasn’t as good as first choice’ so he didn’t make a tackle or finish a chance. It’s generally been poor team performances which of course better players would counter but isnt simply a case of dropping Player X in then things getting better.

Your initial post is a great starting point but there are so many other things to be took into account imo.

Are you asking have I analysed every team in the PL injuries in each game they’ve played relative to one another? On a Wednesday?

No

I’m not going to look on the micro basis of game by game when if we’re being reasonable the % minutes share is a decent metric to look at how often the best players have played through injury/rotation etc.

I think you’re being harsh on the options available to Ten Hag when Shaw came off. Swap Dalots flank and we lose the overlap. We also don’t score the winner.

I agree the post is a good starting point and hopefully will encourage others to explore the questions they are sending my way.

At least now I think it’s clear there are issues beyond a normal expected level of disruption that we have dealt with relative to other sides.

 

[r0663664]

Of course teams lose players throughout season, who can tell me why Erik keeps playing the same formation even we don't have a like for like replacement? Shouldn't a coach have different tricks up his sleeves? I still remember that Alex beat Arsenal with 6 defenders in the XI. Shouldn't a coach move to a back 3 with overlapping wingback or go 442 for a win? I have not seen anything special about Erik whether we have crisis or not.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Three players have improved over time, when playing for ETH. Simply because they are 18 19 and 20 and playing regularly. Sure he can have a bit of credit for realising Garnacho and Mainoo should be nailed on starters, but then everyone else with eyes could see that. Hojlund was a huge gamble that will always represent really poor squad planning, putting a huge burden on a £72m 20 year old to be your club's only number 9. Cant solely blame ETH for that but you also cant give him credit for giving Hojlund such a prolonged chance to impress, because there was no other choice.

Also, he won a trophy. Not trophies. Following in the footsteps of greats like LVG and Mourinho. He was also humiliated in the CL, which is his supposed forte.

That’s again disingenuous argument. They get better by being coached and allowed to play games.

Otherwise we cannot give any manager any credit for any youth players developement by your logic. Sir Alex didn’t help Scholes, Giggs, Rooney, Beckham, Ronaldo etc. Yeah, na.

Ten Hag backing Højlund to be the main man is on him. If he fails you will blame Ten Hag for playing him so when he’s showing good signs he deserves some credit too. We can’t only blame him when things go wrong and not acknowledge when things go right. Otherwise you’re just arguing in bad faith.

It's a good thread though, i'd be very interested to actually see the data on how many games players have missed through injury. If that's going to be the go to excuse for our crap season then that's the important data. I'm sure we'd be high up on the injury list what with Mount's long term problems along with Shaw/Casemiro/Mainoo. I know Sheffield United have had huge injury problems, probably the worst in the league by some distance.

If I can find an easy to use site for that date (or if any of you lot can) please link me and I’ll do a write up on it when I get time.

Sorry who is Mount supposed to have been displacing in the best eleven again? Mainoo? Casemiro? Bruno? Garnacho?

If he wasnt fully fit when available then that just means his default state is unfit and we spent £60m on a pseudo-footballer at ETH's request.

Start of the season plan appeared to be:

Casemiro
Bruno Mount

At least we can agree that spending £55m on Mount and playing him when not fully fit has likely contributed to this long term injury.

That for me was poor management.

 

[elmo]

I think United might have suffered the worst injury luck of the current top six but its a lot closer than this analysis makes it seem.

As others have noted, the approach confuses injury with non-selection. If you account for times players were available but just not selected, Mainoo would be in yellow and Varane in green. Garnacho and Hojlund would also likely be green if they were automatic starters when fit for Ten Hag, which would put United at 7 green, 1 yellow, 3 red. Its still tough to lose three key players in the defensive spine (Casemiro, Martinez, Shaw) for so much of the year but not nearly as dramatic as this makes it seem.

Some other sides look a lot worse if you make slightly different choices about their best XI. Timber and Partey were expected to play tons for Arsenal and we've gotten almost zero from both. Matip was the most selected partner for Van Dijk during the first part of the season and he is done for the year. Bentancur is surely in Spurs' best XI when fit.

I also think Chelsea would look worse than United if they were included.

sure if you think being out for 3 months and missing preseason means he’s fit enough to be selected.

 

[hobbers]

Mount started most of the games before he got injured. Mainoo has started most of the games after he recovered from his injury. So considering those facts yes, he sees them as starters.

So much nonsense.

Since I went back and checked through those Mount appearances Benito listed..

Horrible performance in defeat to Palace, subbed 77th.
Poor performance vs Brentford, subbed 63rd.
Dropped vs Sheff Utd. Amrabat-McTominay start ahead of him, subbed on for injury time.
Amrabat-McTominay preferred again in the 3-0 defeat to City. Subbed on at half time and adds no value.
Still dropped vs Fulham, this time for McTominay-Eriksen. 11 minutes as a sub.
Starts vs Luton. Another dire performance and hooked on 50 minutes.
Never seen again.

I dont care how fit he supposedly was or wasn't for these games. Unfit footballers shouldnt be starting Prem games or getting pity subs. It just doesnt happen, and if it does it'd be truly shocking management.

So any attempt to use Mount being injured to excuse ETH is about as stupid as using Jones being injured to excuse Ole.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

So much nonsense.

Since I went back and checked through those Mount appearances Benito listed..

Horrible performance in defeat to Palace, subbed 77th.
Poor performance vs Brentford, subbed 63rd.
Dropped vs Sheff Utd. Amrabat-McTominay start ahead of him, subbed on for injury time.
Amrabat-McTominay preferred again in the 3-0 defeat to City. Subbed on at half time and adds no value.
Still dropped vs Fulham, this time for McTominay-Eriksen. 11 minutes as a sub.
Starts vs Luton. Another dire performance and hooked on 50 minutes.
Never seen again.

I dont care how fit he supposedly was or wasn't for these games. Unfit footballers shouldnt be starting Prem games or getting pity subs. It just doesnt happen, and if it does it'd be truly shocking management.

So any attempt to use Mount being injured to excuse ETH is about as stupid as using Jones being injured to excuse Ole.

The thing we can agree on is it was a mistake to play Mount when not fully fit to the extent we did this exacerbating his injury condition.

 

[Ole'sattheWheel]

I would like to see Newcastles stats for this. I know they aren’t top 6 but I found it really bizarre how much the pundits were going on about their injuries when they got knocked out of the CL.
Great thread btw OP

 

[didz]

If I can find an easy to use site for that date (or if any of you lot can) please link me and I’ll do a write up on it when I get time.

Manchester United absences

Manchester City absences

Liverpool absences

Arsenal absences

Tottenham absences

Aston Villa absences

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Manchester United absences

Manchester City absences

Liverpool absences

Arsenal absences

Tottenham absences

Aston Villa absences

Oh my god I love you <3

 

[top1whoisman]

So much nonsense.

Since I went back and checked through those Mount appearances Benito listed..

Horrible performance in defeat to Palace, subbed 77th.
Poor performance vs Brentford, subbed 63rd.
Dropped vs Sheff Utd. Amrabat-McTominay start ahead of him, subbed on for injury time.
Amrabat-McTominay preferred again in the 3-0 defeat to City. Subbed on at half time and adds no value.
Still dropped vs Fulham, this time for McTominay-Eriksen. 11 minutes as a sub.
Starts vs Luton. Another dire performance and hooked on 50 minutes.
Never seen again.

I dont care how fit he supposedly was or wasn't for these games. Unfit footballers shouldnt be starting Prem games or getting pity subs. It just doesnt happen, and if it does it'd be truly shocking management.

So any attempt to use Mount being injured to excuse ETH is about as stupid as using Jones being injured to excuse Ole.

I never said he played well. Just stated the fact that he started most of our games prior to his injuries. Therefore it is indeed valid to mention his injuries when discussing the availability of our players.

 

[Chumpsbechumps]

Fair play Benito.

You have the patience of a saint with some of the responses you are getting.

Quality rebuttals of the level of

- “I don’t like that information” but statements are made regularly that other clubs like Spurs have same injury problem, this information challenges that , so why would they like it if they only want to accept information that reaffirms their belief that the manager has been and is the problem

- “Sure Chelsea probably have worse injuries” no effort to verify , one of the many vague throw out comments made where somebody isn’t arsed even confirming Something they say

- “ Sure it’s selective, sure is that guy really a starter?” Well nobody seems to want to actually say who our starting 11 should be like you asked multiple times. It’s easy to poke holes in others arguments then actually have a definitive opinion we can debate

- “ 400 million on transfers …” Well who can argue with somebody who thinks our manager agrees transfer fees for players and keeps quoting the money spent in a thread about mitigating reasons this Season that have affected performance

Incidentally , these injury issues are seperate to all the other nonsense that has been going on. Can we have a list of clubs in top 6 with all the other crap like ownership for sale and players dramas on top of this? Oh wait…….

 

[TheReligion]

Well said. Standards are at an all time low when this fanbase is 'happy' being 6th, 15 points from the top and having 0 GD in February.

Reality is this manager has spent over 400m, majority of that on some absolute dross. We're no better than 21/22 when one manager was sacked for being shit and another was one of the worst lame ducks in history for 6 months. Just like now we were 6th with 0 GD. Oh and at least we made it out of the CL group that season, instead of finishing bottom of a piss easy group.

His best player this season has been Maguire and top scorer is McT (his goals have won us league leading 12 points), two players he desperately tried to flog off in the summer. Laughable really.

Previously all managers have been held accountable for injuries and rightly so. Sure the odd injury is bad luck but if there's a genuine crisis then questions have always been asked of the manager's methods in regards to training, games, rotation etc. But with the ETH crew nothing is ever his fault. Going full strength in 4 competitions for 60 games last season was always moronic and at it was going to catch up with us sooner or later. We're seeing the consequences of that this season.

Martinez keeps getting rushed back from injuries, and when he's clearly injured in a game is told to get back on until the injury is properly aggravated. And when we don't win games this sorry lot is quick to point out that we can't judge the manager because Martinez was missing.

The likes of Mings and Buendia would be starters for Villa but have been injured all season. But hey, can't list them in red in Villa's lineup because that doesn't suit the agenda-driven narrative OP is trying to present. Same with the likes of Stones and Timber.

Surely you don’t actually believe this about Martinez?

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Fair play Benito.

You have the patience of a saint with some of the responses you are getting.

Quality rebuttals of the level of

- “I don’t like that information” but statements are made regularly that other clubs like Spurs have same injury problem, this information challenges that , so why would they like it if they only want to accept information that reaffirms their belief that the manager has been and is the problem

- “Sure Chelsea probably have worse injuries” no effort to verify , one of the many vague throw out comments made where somebody isn’t arsed even confirming Something they say

- “ Sure it’s selective, sure is that guy really a starter?” Well nobody seems to want to actually say who our starting 11 should be like you asked multiple times. It’s easy to poke holes in others arguments then actually have a definitive opinion we can debate

- “ 400 million on transfers …” Well who can argue with somebody who thinks our manager agrees transfer fees for players and keeps quoting the money spent in a thread about mitigating reasons this Season that have affected performance

Incidentally , these injury issues are seperate to all the other nonsense that has been going on. Can we have a list of clubs in top 6 with all the other crap like ownership for sale and players dramas on top of this? Oh wait…….

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Surely you don’t actually believe this about Martinez?

It’s a bad take but let’s not judge too harshly.

 

[RedBanker]

Amazing post. Doesn't sell me one bit on ETH though.

 

[Fortitude]

Well said. Standards are at an all time low when this fanbase is 'happy' being 6th, 15 points from the top and having 0 GD in February.

Reality is this manager has spent over 400m, majority of that on some absolute dross. We're no better than 21/22 when one manager was sacked for being shit and another was one of the worst lame ducks in history for 6 months. Just like now we were 6th with 0 GD. Oh and at least we made it out of the CL group that season, instead of finishing bottom of a piss easy group.

His best player this season has been Maguire and top scorer is McT (his goals have won us league leading 12 points), two players he desperately tried to flog off in the summer. Laughable really.

Previously all managers have been held accountable for injuries and rightly so. Sure the odd injury is bad luck but if there's a genuine crisis then questions have always been asked of the manager's methods in regards to training, games, rotation etc. But with the ETH crew nothing is ever his fault. Going full strength in 4 competitions for 60 games last season was always moronic and at it was going to catch up with us sooner or later. We're seeing the consequences of that this season.

Martinez keeps getting rushed back from injuries, and when he's clearly injured in a game is told to get back on until the injury is properly aggravated. And when we don't win games this sorry lot is quick to point out that we can't judge the manager because Martinez was missing.

The likes of Mings and Buendia would be starters for Villa but have been injured all season. But hey, can't list them in red in Villa's lineup because that doesn't suit the agenda-driven narrative OP is trying to present. Same with the likes of Stones and Timber.

I’ve never ever seen you write so much in a post!

 

[Spark]

My answer to this would be I think we have been. I hope the team INEOS appoint can get to the bottom as to why.

Availability is a bit subjective and the data is harder to find. You could argue that being on a bench is available but we all know managers use subs to build fitness etc. So without the actual club data I could present information but it wouldn’t be fact necessarily.

At least with this we can see the minutes share of players some of which are not down to injury but in our case a lot are.

So suppose a table of all first team squad players and their availability for selection since the start of the season would be it. If they make the subs bench, they're technically available for selection regardless as to whether or not they should actually play (Palace's Olise would have been classed as available for the game he played 9 mins in after half time, only to get injured properly).

I've tried finding the data just now, but it's surprisingly difficult. I definitely think it would show that United have likely had the fewest available minutes out of all the first team squads you've compared against.

 

[Smores]

Its a good effort but so much of this is not only subjective but non static. When you mix in fluctuating form, squad size, squad rotation, relative impact of losing X player it's hard to take much of this at face value.

We've been very unlucky with Shaw and Martinez and that's probably more of an impact than any other team has faced. Yet we've spent what we've spent and the idea that we're just unlucky that Mainoo and Casemiro have been out is nonsense.

If Man City had a huge injury crisis and showed as much red they'd still have the best squad in the league available. You can only judge based on players available and given that we shouldn't have been between 10th and 6th with a shite GD.

 

[Rood]

Not had time to look at all the stats here but I absolutely agree with the general premise and have said all season that injuries are the major reason for our huge drop in form from last season

Always difficult to get a measure of our injuries Vs other clubs but remember finding these stats a few months back. it's a very basic 'number of injuries' and doesn't take into account severity but even on that measure we were joint worst at the time

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[didz]

So suppose a table of all first team squad players and their availability for selection since the start of the season would be it. If they make the subs bench, they're technically available for selection regardless as to whether or not they should actually play (Palace's Olise would have been classed as available for the game he played 9 mins in after half time, only to get injured properly).

I've tried finding the data just now, but it's surprisingly difficult. I definitely think it would show that United have likely had the fewest available minutes out of all the first team squads you've compared against.

Have you tried scrolling up?

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

My thoughts are that the same issues that plague us when players are injured are the same that are present when everyone is fit. Which comes down to tactics/coaching.

The graph is a bit misleading because Garnacho has largely been available all season but Antony played on the right more at the beginning. Varane was benched for reasons unknown despite being available. Mainoo is better than Mount and is an auto starter at this point since his introduction. Casemiro, Shaw, and Martinez are the main culprits missing significant time that otherwise start.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Amazing post. Doesn't sell me one bit on ETH though.

Nor should it but hopefully if you’re genuinely open minded you’ll have a better appreciation for the issues he’s dealt with.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

My thoughts are that the same issues that plague us when players are injured are the same that are present when everyone is fit. Which comes down to tactics/coaching.

The graph is a bit misleading because Garnacho has largely been available all season but Antony played on the right more at the beginning. Varane was benched for reasons unknown despite being available. Mainoo is better than Mount and is an auto starter at this point since his introduction. Casemiro, Shaw, and Martinez are the main culprits missing significant time that otherwise start.

It’s not a graph and all the data is in spoilers.

Garnacho I agree has largely been available all season I’m not suggesting otherwise.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

Three players have improved over time, when playing for ETH. Simply because they are 18 19 and 20 and playing regularly. Sure he can have a bit of credit for realising Garnacho and Mainoo should be nailed on starters, but then everyone else with eyes could see that. Hojlund was a huge gamble that will always represent really poor squad planning, putting a huge burden on a £72m 20 year old to be your club's only number 9. Cant solely blame ETH for that but you also cant give him credit for giving Hojlund such a prolonged chance to impress, because there was no other choice.

Also, he won a trophy. Not trophies. Following in the footsteps of greats like LVG and Mourinho. He was also humiliated in the CL, which is his supposed forte.

I’ve sort of given up arguing with him over this, he clearly presents long drawn out points as research but is hilariously biased in how they are presented, and even small things like saying “trophies” just of exposes it all.

It’s actually quite funny when I take a step back and realize I’m now on the opposite end of the spectrum when last year I was fully defending ETH from the start. Guess that’s what a lack of progress and startingly confounding tactics will do for you.

 

[Daydreamer]

Isn't there a bit of circular logic here, as has been mentioned already? For example, Garnacho is at 66%, but as far as I can remember (and google seems to confirm), he hasn't had an injury this season. So he should really be at 100% and it would make more sense to base it on minutes available for selection (which would presumably require a lot more work to gather).

I dunno - I do like Ten Hag and wouldn't be getting rid of him yet. And our injuries have been frustrating. But there have been large parts of this season that were absolutely terrible, even taking injuries into account. Martinez, Shaw, and Casemiro are the three big ones, and it's been annoying that they've been out for so long, but then I'd argue that a good manager should be able to change the tactics to account for injuries like that. And sure, you can expect and accept a drop off in levels - but we were absolutely terrible for a good while.

Yeah, I've got quite a bit of push back, but I didn't think my comment was all that aggro. I think the OP has done a great job of laying out his point. I just think there are inherent flaws in premise as a whole.

Looking at the Transfermarkt absences stats, there isn't actually that much difference between the injury records of the top six teams. I think it feels more apparent at United because:

• Fans naturally have a great awareness of the problems facing their club
• Sancho has not been considered for selection for pretty much the whole season
• Varane has been overlooked even when fit (as an outsider I can't get my head around this one)
• Mainoo was an unused substitute for five games
• Garnacho, as mentioned above, wasn't trusted as much early on
• Most importantly, United haven't coped with injuries very well.

I think this last point is key. This week I've read a lot about Arsenal having a thin squad this season, pointing to our threadbare bench against West Ham. No major outlet mentioned that we had 7 first team players unavailable. Why? Because we won by six goals. Arsenal, Liverpool and City have all suffered long-term injuries to key players and it's not really discussed. Because they manage to cope with it, it's not really much of a story.

 

[the hea]

Fantastic post @BenitoSTARR, really shows how unfortunate we have been with injuries this season.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

I’ve sort of given up arguing with him over this, he clearly presents long drawn out points as research but is hilariously biased in how they are presented, and even small things like saying “trophies” just of exposes it all.

It’s actually quite funny when I take a step back and realize I’m now on the opposite end of the spectrum when last year I was fully defending ETH from the start. Guess that’s what a lack of progress and startingly confounding tactics will do for you.

If you look at the effort put into showing you data not interpreting it all for you and you conclude from that that me mistyping trophies over trophy on my mobile is exposing a bias then you’re just being an ignorant little child.

I am not claiming to be from an entirely impartial perspective. I think the criticism of Ten Hag managing this particular period has been a bit over the top.

However I’ve also been one to acknowledge some tactical flaws and managerial issues too. But people like yourself would much rather ignore that nuance.

You are more than welcome to present any data to counter this. But you know you can’t.

The data acknowledges it’s my opinion of the best XI and also to counter this is presented in full for each side spoilered.

None of these points are long and drawn out. As for the data how you choose to interpret or ignore it is up to you.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Manchester United absences

Manchester City absences

Liverpool absences

Arsenal absences

Tottenham absences

Aston Villa absences

I would ask everyone to look at these and honestly point out any players they feel are misrepresented by the data I presented.

I’ve looked through all 6 sides and I’m very happy with the OP being reflective of these absence logs too.

So if you disagree here is where to go to find your data to discredit anything.

 

[Leftback99]

The point isn't the injuries it's that performances are barely better with the injured players back.

On a side note, Diego Carlos has done his hamstring for Villa now. Running out of excuses to not catch them.

 

[Chumpsbechumps]

Amazing post. Doesn't sell me one bit on ETH though.

I know you already got a response but nobody is looking to convince anybody that people should change their mind on ETH or even that people are wrong to want him out. There is no objectively absolute fact with regards to whether ETH should be sacked or retained.

I find that when I try to elaborate On why I’m ok seeing ETH get more time, you get quite weak responses (if any at all) from people who just seem to have an unhealthy rage at the thought of anybody thinking anything other then sack him. I don’t care who wants him sacked or their reasons for wanting it. I understand completely why some people have written him off and do think there is merit to their concerns.

But there have been many things going on during ETH time here that not even previous managers had to handle: And it’s not just “injuries” or “difficult players” or “ownership instability” or “ffp affecting loan options” it’s all this relentlessly going on at the same time. Does that explain the first half of the season and champions league disaster ? I honestly don’t know , but I’m interested to see if it might be now that we seem to be seeing an end to player drama , ownership clarity, forward players building up confidence and injuries clearing up.

Im not going to go over it again, but some of the posters really don’t seem to grasp what Benito is doing with this thread. All they see is information “defending ETH” and are attacking it with mostly ego waffle that amounts to nothing.

All Benito did here was post factual information that clarifys why he feels our injuries have been more of an issue then the teams above us. I know personally how frustrating it is, when you spend all that time putting information together to try to clarify your stance (not prove anybody wrong, but clarify why you feel a certain way) and you get the kind of half arsed sh*te that some have posted.

I’ve lit a candle and said a prayer for Benito.

“Lord …. please grant Benito the gift of patience , tolerance and humility… As he navigates a cesspool of ignorance …::.. Grant Benito the wisdom to call it quits when he inevitably fails and prevent him from getting dragged down a level into tit for tat bollox . Amen”

 

[BenitoSTARR]

The point isn't the injuries it's that performances are barely better with the injured players back.

On a side note, Diego Carlos has done his hamstring for Villa now. Running out of excuses to not catch them.

It will take a bit of time to get players fit and synced up but I think it will happen.

 

[TheReligion]

Yeah, I've got quite a bit of push back, but I didn't think my comment was all that aggro. I think the OP has done a great job of laying out his point. I just think there are inherent flaws in premise as a whole.

Looking at the Transfermarkt absences stats, there isn't actually that much difference between the injury records of the top six teams. I think it feels more apparent at United because:

• Fans naturally have a great awareness of the problems facing their club
• Sancho has not been considered for selection for pretty much the whole season
• Varane has been overlooked even when fit (as an outsider I can't get my head around this one)
• Mainoo was an unused substitute for five games
• Garnacho, as mentioned above, wasn't trusted as much early on
• Most importantly, United haven't coped with injuries very well.

I think this last point is key. This week I've read a lot about Arsenal having a thin squad this season, pointing to our threadbare bench against West Ham. No major outlet mentioned that we had 7 first team players unavailable. Why? Because we won by six goals. Arsenal, Liverpool and City have all suffered long-term injuries to key players and it's not really discussed. Because they manage to cope with it, it's not really much of a story.

Arsenal, Liverpool and City all have long term managers who have built their own squads.

United don’t.