We are an awfully coached team

The Cat

Doesn't know his own mobile number
Joined
May 18, 2017
Messages
6,914
Location
Fighting the good fight in South Wales.
I used to subscribe to this shite but the reality is that our players aren’t that good. Good enough to be roughly where they are but that’s about it.

Too many Lindelof’s, Fred’s and a lack of reliable goalscorers.
It is not shite. We have a lot of very good players who hardly ever perform as they should. When they do you can see how good they are. A top class coach would improve them significantly.
 

Champagne Football

Full Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2015
Messages
3,996
Location
El Beatle
Ole was lumped with a bunch of players from wild spending under 3 failed managers.
The board did well to offload Alexis, Smalling, Fellaini etc
On top of that we have failed to land quite a few of Ole's targets - Sancho, Erling, Bellingham.

I think we'll start looking like a well coached team once Ole has a few more of his players in the team, once they are ready for first XI or purchased. The likes of - Garner, Donny, Diallo, Mejbri, Milenkovic etc
 

Flexdegea

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
752
So if our 2nd position is all down to players individual brilliance and other teams being bad combination we have a brilliant, brilliant team? Team which wins on their own despite the awful coaching or no coaching at all.

God forbid to give any, even the smallest credit to the coaching stuff and to think our position is a combination of individual brilliant and coaching which isn't 'awfully bad'.

Wise up mate.........Potter a far better coach it's that simple.............so I'm hearing
 

Womp

idiot
Joined
Jun 23, 2013
Messages
8,312
Location
Sydney, Australia
And if the flat Earth Theory was true, and Trump was a good president, for North Korea.

it wouldn’t be the first time smaller teams have a well functioning tactic, but said manager is not able to make a stronger team perform. There’s so much to it, such as managing and coaching much bigger egos.
That's not the argument being put forth though. Even individuals such as myself who are firmly Ole out seem to agree that his man management is superb, probably his best trait as a manager. The thread/the concerns are about the coaching of the squad collectively and whether it will ever be enough with the superb level of coaching in top level European football these days.
 

Majima

Full Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
3,678
Location
Kami's Lookout
But how do you separate whats "individual ability" and whats not? Like the two goals we scored today, not exactly highlight reel goals. Pogbas feck up that lead to 0-1, was that a coaching issue?

I agree that we can probably improve as a collective, but i cant really think of any players who have played at a much higher level under a different coaching team
Just like the 0-1, I agree not everything is always down to coaching issues. I try to focus on our general play. I define it by the player's awareness, and speed/ease of transitions through the pitch. E.g. take Liverpool's peak under Klopp, individually Henderson & Wijnaldum weren't world beaters. But they knew their roles inside out, and knew where everyone would be before/after they received the ball, so were rarely put in situations they didn't already have answers for. Everything was done simply & fast. You could say the same thing about all of them. I regard that as top coaching. Every top team shares those hallmarks imo.

Us though, you can see the unnecessary touches we take, the lack of movement, the sloppy passes, lack of imagination etc. I rarely feel like our players are ever in that level of control. Take today for e.g. mostly I think we lacked imagination in the final third today. When we needed some guile, instead we were just putting balls in without thinking. When stuff like this is happening a lot, it's hard to not question the management, and wonder if the player's quality is being maximised here.

For example we used to routinely dominate possession under LVG with average midfields. I remember us having 70% possession away to a title winning Chelsea, with Herrera, Rooney & Fellaini in midfield. We've now got Pogba & Bruno in midfield, two of the very best, I realise they're different, but the sloppy play we see so routinely shouldn't be happening as much.

Saying all that, I liked parts of our play today. Shaw & Wan-Bissaka both stretching the play as wingers, with the other inside the box getting 4+ players in the box vs. parked bus are very simple things we never used to see much before. Cavani always on the shoulder whenever Pogba had it on the half-turn in contrast to Martial, Greenwood's clever movement getting in channels etc are positive things to build upon.
 

Sylar

Full Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
27,712
If I am honest, I didn't expect Liverpool to drop off this badly, and I thought Chelsea could have done much better than what they are doing now, before the season started I hoped that we should be comfortable in top 4 and not far off from the likes of City and Liverpool who I expected would go head to head for the title and maybe us and Chelsea chasing them from afar, so for now and league wise I would say I am fairly happy where we are now.

But if we just look at games in isolation, not only we are inconsistent across games, we are inconsistent within the game sometimes, we will play terribly 1st half and come out in the 2nd half another team and turn it around, so I can't tell is the inconsistency caused by awful coaching? Injuries? Bad form of players? Lack of quality in certain areas? What is it exactly that makes us so inconsistent.
We are inconsistent but when a player goes from 4/10 to 9/10 within the same game that for me is on the players

Ole didn't change much and I doubt every half time he puts on coaching tactical masterclass. The inconsistency comes with the players taking it easy and lax then playinf with intensity

Yesterday game for example we were on top then conceded with pretty much their first attack with awb once again sleeping
It took half time for us to come out again and I think the half time talk is where Ole gets credit

We need one or two more leaders on the pitch that have a desire to win and not be second best. Maybe that comes if we win a smaller trophy and the hunger for more like weve seen with past teams

Our set up for the most part has been fine but a lot of this talk of individual brilliance is never countered with the number of individual mistakes that occur
 

Rossa

Full Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
8,653
Location
Looking over my shoulder.
That's not the argument being put forth though. Even individuals such as myself who are firmly Ole out seem to agree that his man management is superb, probably his best trait as a manager. The thread/the concerns are about the coaching of the squad collectively and whether it will ever be enough with the superb level of coaching in top level European football these days.
Why are you firmly Ole out?
 

Halftrack

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
2,391
Location
Chair
Pretty cool how we're second when Ole is shit, our coaching is non-existent, our coaches are crap, Rashford is shit/injured/being murdered by Ole, Bruno has been off the boil for nigh on a year, Lindelöf is the worst defender to ever play for the club, Maguire and AWB were wastes of money, McFred aren't good enough, Murtough struggles with time differences, and so on. Honestly, someone is doing a pretty good job. Probably Luke Shaw, most seem to like him. So thank you, Luke, for keeping us afloat despite the garbage we're forcing you to deal with.
 

The Siege

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
108
All of you using 2nd to justify this squad's situation need to really see how close we are to this bubble bursting. We may have a certain degree of mental fortitude that Ole may have driven in, but this entire idea of being a 'comeback team' is an unsustainable mess. All our players barring Shaw and Bruno + Rashford (for certain stints of the season) have been inconsistent. The spine of this team is still unsure at every level - Maguire-Lindelof? Fred-McT? Martial or Cavani? Who really makes the difference? Which of them really gel and work well?

I don't want Ole out, I want Ole to help this squad not be a shaky mess, and that has nothing to do with transfers and who we can bring in. There are teams with players who have far lower ceilings than our players, who get far more value for quality (eg. Leicester. This has also added a lot of transfer hype for their players from a financial perspective). We're kidding ourselves if we think this squad can't do better than finishing 10+ points behind the champions. And whether we like it or not, if the squad isn't performing at its highest level - it's on Ole, even if it is his coaching staff not supporting him enough.
 

Bobcat

Full Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
5,286
Location
Behind the curtains, leering at the neighbors
Just like the 0-1, I agree not everything is always down to coaching issues. I try to focus on our general play. I define it by the player's awareness, and speed/ease of transitions through the pitch. E.g. take Liverpool's peak under Klopp, individually Henderson & Wijnaldum weren't world beaters. But they knew their roles inside out, and knew where everyone would be before/after they received the ball, so were rarely put in situations they didn't already have answers for. Everything was done simply & fast. You could say the same thing about all of them. I regard that as top coaching. Every top team shares those hallmarks imo.

Us though, you can see the unnecessary touches we take, the lack of movement, the sloppy passes, lack of imagination etc. I rarely feel like our players are ever in that level of control. Take today for e.g. mostly I think we lacked imagination in the final third today. When we needed some guile, instead we were just putting balls in without thinking. When stuff like this is happening a lot, it's hard to not question the management, and wonder if the player's quality is being maximised here.

For example we used to routinely dominate possession under LVG with average midfields. I remember us having 70% possession away to a title winning Chelsea, with Herrera, Rooney & Fellaini in midfield. We've now got Pogba & Bruno in midfield, two of the very best, I realise they're different, but the sloppy play we see so routinely shouldn't be happening as much.

Saying all that, I liked parts of our play today. Shaw & Wan-Bissaka both stretching the play as wingers, with the other inside the box getting 4+ players in the box vs. parked bus are very simple things we never used to see much before. Cavani always on the shoulder whenever Pogba had it on the half-turn in contrast to Martial, Greenwood's clever movement getting in channels etc are positive things to build upon.
Peak Liverpool is a very high bar to set, and it also coincided with several of their key players (VVD, Salah, Mane) being in their peak years. Also keep in mind that Klopp had pretty much bought a whole new first XI from what he inherited. Lets not get dragged into another net spend debate, but the point is that he over a couple of seasons had assembled a squad that suited his style of play perfectly. Also their terrible form since Christmas pokes holes in the whole "coaching is everything" theory imo. If coaching is all that, then they could rely on their system to get them through a rough patch in form and some injuries

That bolded part i agree with. We do look really sloppy and unimaginative at times and honestly i dont think Carrick, McKenna and Phelan is the best coaching team in the world. That being said though, keep in mind that we are among the teams in Europe who have played the absolute most since Covid. Compared that to Brighton who mostly had the league to contend with in Covid times and its no wonder we look a bit leggy in comparison.

Another thing to consider is how much we struggle in attack right now. Rashford is running on fumes + hes struggling with niggles and injuries. Cavani really looks like the injury prone 34 year old he is. The less said about Martial the better and then we are left with Greenwood as our most potent attacker. On the bench we have James and Diallo, hardly a frightening prospect. We did dominate possession with LvG, but that was safety first football in every phase of play and most teams just let us have the ball really since we rarely tried to do anything with it. No point having 65% possession if you have one shot on target

The individual sloppiness imo is mostly down to fatigue
 

gazbradley

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 29, 2020
Messages
63
I think considering the age/experience of our coaches they’re doing a decent job and show signs of an exciting future. I could see the benefits of bringing in a more experienced coach to work alongside McKenna and Carrick (who I assume take charge of most sessions) but whether this would upset people I don’t know. I know we have Phelan but I don’t get the feeling he has a lot of involvement in the training sessions themselves although I could be wrong. Is there any decent coaches available we could look to bring in behind the scenes?
 

Bobcat

Full Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
5,286
Location
Behind the curtains, leering at the neighbors
How does one separate individual brilliance and coaching through actions on a football pitch? That doesn't seem trivial to me. If you fail to consider this in some detail and are perhaps of a particular persuasion then the danger is every bad result or action is indicative of poor coaching and every good result or action shows individual brilliance.

Or if you're a fan of Ralph Hasenhuttl for example, every bad action and result is because of the ineptitude of mid table players and cannot possibly be a function of the manager's limitations no matter how shambolic, however perceived over performance is superb coaching.

There is also the difficulty that consistently applied individual brilliance must in some way be a function of the manager's ability to get the best out of the players. Similarly, Pep has recently pointed out the obvious, that achieving the degree of technical precision that he has (indicating good coaching) is only possible with brilliant individuals.

You then also have to outline what exactly the representation of brilliant coaching is on a football pitch from a fans perspective. That isn't necessarily an objective measurement. Is it tapping the ball in after a 30 pass move? Is it quick incisive passing around the opponent's box? Is it a brilliant counter? Is it positional or possession based domination? Is it simply winning football matches or improving players? Because depending on preferences, a pretty convincing argument can be made for the manager in some of these aspects.
This should be threadmarked. Brilliant post
 

NZT-One

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
76
Location
Berlin
Yes, I would think set pieces have all fans watching from behind the sofa. However there's a definite individual element to that too of course. There is possibly no coincidence in the fact we are neither a massive threat in the opposition box nor particularly decisive in our own. We very much rely on Harry Maguire in both. Well, one man can't mark every area or opposition threat, of course. Against a team like Brighton, and possibly many others, how many individual matchups do you like the look of?
Nothing obviously wrong of what you wrote but I know, that there are coaches out there specifically helping teams working on their set pieces. Liverpool brought in a coach for throw ins and the improvement was there. So yeah, of course there is a big individual element in there but if you have a weakness for a long time, who is supposed to take on the issue? The players by "focussing better"? The job of the manager is to react to tendencies he recognizes in the team. To emphasize strengths and to limit effects of weaknesses. All in all - of course in a football match it is always easy to just cut the connection between the players and the coach because only the players are on the pitch. The question is, do you lose out on insights about your own team, your own traits and your own qualities if you do so.

That said, I don't wish to absolve the coaching system of all responsibility as the defending side should have a massive advantage no matter what the matchups. The Everton one was a clear blunder in terms of set-up and there have been others. How much of that is management and how much decision making on the pitch is hard to say but ultimately the result is the same, clearer thinking was needed. Also, some of our zonal marking does appear to cause the odd issue, but the alternative of man marking doesn't look that appealing, I would think the idea is to defend key areas with our (few) strong aerial presences.
For my feeling, this goes into a level of detail, that is seemingly beyond my own. And I am not sure, if we really have to go that deep into it if we want to talk about potential issues. I think, our defending as a team is alright these days. We are always available for a little blunder but mostly we are pretty solid. This is surely down to having Fred and McTominay there often times and to a lot of opponents choosing to not openly attacking us but it is what it is. The issues this thread is more about (for me) are on the other side of the pitch - transition and chance creation.

I agree, the movement is an issue. I do think the management is very much aware of this judging from what we can hear on TV these days. Whether that is something they could and should have improved..possibly, probably. There is some kind of disconnect between the runs being made, the forwards expectation of passes forward from our defence and midfield and also the frequency and types of runs being made. However, as usual it's not such a black and white thing either because Martial has struggled his whole career with this, and Greenwood is still very young and learning, and Bruno is a very clear exception in his ability to consistently find space. So again it's back to coaching v individuals.
I understand where you are coming from but this is an universal scissor then to always cut the argument. See 1st paragraph. "The players are on the pitch nobody else influences the game" . You can always say that, even the shittiest planner in the world can bring the explanation "the plan was sound but the execution wasn't". If that statement was valid to a high extent, then why do top teams usually go for top managers? All the budget could be spent on players if the manager has no effect at all?
We aren't looking at an "either or" situation here. Of course the players have the major influence. But the manager is close behind. Neglecting that wouldn't be a smart thing to do.

You mention that the lack of movement is down to "Martial struggling with it" or "Greenwood still young" but that is exactly the point where the influence of a manager/coach should materialize. And it is not just them, when in possession the whole team seems to be overawed. We play it mostly safe until the ball reaches Bruno who is then playing a pass no matter of its chances. Yesterday it felt similar with Pogba. How often have we witnessed Rashford head-down dribbling into 2 or more defenders?

The decisions we see on the pitch are partly bad. And yes - to a certain degree it is down to the players not being fast-thinking, not brave enough or confident in their own abilities. But that burden would be lifted as soon as there would be some sort routine play implemented. So players would know where others are, the distances wouldn't be so far, the strikers would make runs because they know they will be released, the players could be more confident because they know they would get backed up by others. I am not talking about taking all decisions away - but giving every player a few baseline moves he can fall back if other options aren't available.

You indicate, that the coaches ask for movement from the sideline... that's an easy thing to say but difficult to execute when the players don't know where to move which, for me, would be the most plausible explanation as to why is such an ongoing issue.

I found that post from another thread very well written:
Coming from a creative background, I believe we lack coaching. I have to operate creatively in a changing environment. It’s high pressure. When the creative aspect of my role is escaping me, I fall back on sound technical fundamentals to get by. This is where I believe we are failing. The coaching is poor. Good coaching in football means that when the players are not inspired to create something, the technical and trained aspects of their play are still sound. People are in the right positions, the next pass is easy to see, because it’s reflexive. It does not require thought. When players can rely on this aspect of play, then the other areas which are more creative and off the cuff are a layer of polish on top.
...



All in all - sure, we can put everything on the players and we never would be entirely wrong. The question for me and many more here is about the extent of what we can put on the players and where are other factors that might be able to help us improve as a team (which I guess is the common ground in a fan group).
This is what this thread is about for me - unfortunately it also attracts over-the-top-criticism (during the match) but what came after wasn't much better as well. Nobody is completely denying that Ole exceeds expectations and is doing a good job in general, a very good job in some aspects. Nobody is expecting us to turn into Barcelona-like machine over night or a team like peak-Liverpool. But some around here would like to see a few steps in these directions at least. If some posters can see that already - good for 'ya. I do not. And when I see how a team like Brighton performs, how brave and comfortable they are with the ball, I doubt that the lack of it in our team can solely be put on player quality.
 
Last edited:

Buchan

has whacked the hammer to Roswell
Joined
Jun 5, 2012
Messages
16,104
Location
The Republik of Mancunia | W3102
Much improved second half from the lads but it remains an inescapable fact that performances of this ilk are all too frequent in the last twelve months. There’s almost a militant feel to the two factions among posters over recent months (those who feel the manager should have imprinted a distinct style of play on the team in his 2.5 years in charge here v. those who believe this is the optimum any manager could do with this squad of players) and both sides inevitably fail to consider any of the reasonable points the other make.

I am guilty of this myself and have been on record as saying I would love nothing more than a club legend like Solskjaer being the one to deliver the title after a near-decade without success, but I have come to the conclusion (and I am as likely to be wrong about this as anyone else) that I don’t believe he will, unfortunately. His supporters will point to the progress he’s made overall here and I agree wholeheartedly: he’s done an admirable job all things considered. Deadwood shipped out, a more balanced squad built, the football - at its free-flowing peak - is the best in a decade, the atmosphere around the club likewise.

However, I believe this is as good as it’s going to get for Ole here. I don’t see us improving enough to dominate each and every week (and let’s face it, that’s the standard that City and Liverpool have set in this league for the past four seasons - mid-80s title-winning points totals won’t cut the mustard anymore) as we are far too inconsistent for a supposed top team. Relying on comeback wins almost every week is simply not sustainable long-term. His favouritism towards poorly-performing players week after week is another negative in my view, with some mystifyingly playing 90 minutes despite producing garbage displays whilst teammates actually involved in the play get hooked. Our zero improvement in defending set pieces is heinous for a club of our standing, also. It’s all just plain bizarre.

On the whole, I don’t think Solskjaer has shown enough to be tied down to another four years and I’d hold fire on the extension offer just yet. Anyone believing there aren’t upgrades out there are plainly ignorant or being deliberately obtuse. Is doing a good job good enough to remain Manchester United manager? When do our supposed high standards kick in and we, as a club, demand results in the form of trophies? Would Solskjaer survive 2.5+ years at any other top club in Europe? Would Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern, Liverpool, City, PSG, Juventus etc. stand for this apparent never-ending promise of ‘progress’ and ‘potential’?

I suppose what I am trying to convey, and this is a long-winded way of doing so, is there are merits in both camps (Out v. In) but the majority of both deal in extremes and middle ground is neither sought nor achieved. There is a highly pertinent discussion to be had about the manager’s future but I do find the exasperation (feigned or otherwise) from the ‘In’ camp to be both humorous and bizarre in equal measure. Like, why wouldn’t there be question marks about the manager? Klopp has had many directed at him this season and he’s won the lot in the last two seasons, for crying out loud.
 
Last edited:

RedDevilzFox

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
433
Sorry, no one who watched that game yesterday could objectively say we are a well coached team. The entire time I had no idea what football were we playing or that there was any plan.

Take the game win but this is not a guide to winning anything material. You can't fluke your way to a PL/CL title playing like this.
 

Forevergiggs1

Full Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2019
Messages
1,874
Location
Barcelona
Supports
United
Why are you firmly Ole out?
Because you never know what you're going to get with Ole after being in charge for so long. Yes we've had some great performances but those are far outweighed by anything ranging from average to terrible even if it's games we've been winning. Watching us has become a slog but to be fair it's been like that for almost a decade and not just under Oles watch. Little by little my passion for the sport is being whittled away and I'm afraid until we get actual footballing people making the decisions at the top nothing is going to change.
 

Foxbatt

Full Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
9,296
The second goal we scored is individual brilliance. When Bruno received the ball a better coached side would have someone running into the space behind the defense for him to put the ball into. That would have been an opportunity too.
There was none. It's his individual brilliance to wait and hold to cut it back to Pogba.
Our movements off the ball when we have the ball is what shows that we are not a well coached side. It's not when we don't have the ball. Why do we normally carry the ball so much instead of making the ball work? Not good coaching. We play useless triangles as other players in the team either don't know what is going on or are not involved. Only way they would understand it is if they practiced it.
As RVN has said recently, when Rio has the ball he knows he can start his movements, as eventually it's going to arrive to him in a good position for him.
Now we don't. We just stand there hoping for something. That's why it's stop and start.
 

anant

Full Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
6,718
The second goal we scored is individual brilliance. When Bruno received the ball a better coached side would have someone running into the space behind the defense for him to put the ball into. That would have been an opportunity too.
There was none. It's his individual brilliance to wait and hold to cut it back to Pogba.
Our movements off the ball when we have the ball is what shows that we are not a well coached side. It's not when we don't have the ball. Why do we normally carry the ball so much instead of making the ball work? Not good coaching. We play useless triangles as other players in the team either don't know what is going on or are not involved. Only way they would understand it is if they practiced it.
As RVN has said recently, when Rio has the ball he knows he can start his movements, as eventually it's going to arrive to him in a good position for him.
Now we don't. We just stand there hoping for something. That's why it's stop and start.
Hmm. Interesting observation. Only wish this was true.

0:18 Shaw receives the ball
0:19 Bruno starts making his run
VDB's movement means the guy marking Shaw is now blocking that channel unaware of Bruno's run behind him
0:21 Shaw sees the run and makes the pass
0:22 Observe Greenwood's run here. He's available for a pass and he would have received it as well had Bruno reached the ball a second quicker
0:25 Fernandes stops the ball and sees the options around him
Now observe VDB's movement again. The movement means that one of their defenders has to continuously look over his shoulder.
And at this moment at 0:26 Bruno makes the pass meeting the late run by Pog
And again look at VDB's movement here. Had Greenwood not gotten to the ball, I'd expect it would have fallen to VDB who again became free because of the movement

Easy to criticize movement a lot of times, but this goal was due to some fantastic movement by Bruno, Mason and VDB, and ofcourse a great pass by Shaw
 

Womp

idiot
Joined
Jun 23, 2013
Messages
8,312
Location
Sydney, Australia
Why are you firmly Ole out?
I've said it to death on here, I don't think he'll ever be good enough from a coaching perspective to compete with the level of coaching in Europe. All great teams have great players these days, what's quite often the difference is the system in place by the coaching staff, which is where I think Ole falls short
 

Flexdegea

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
752
The second goal we scored is individual brilliance. When Bruno received the ball a better coached side would have someone running into the space behind the defense for him to put the ball into. That would have been an opportunity too.
There was none. It's his individual brilliance to wait and hold to cut it back to Pogba.
Our movements off the ball when we have the ball is what shows that we are not a well coached side. It's not when we don't have the ball. Why do we normally carry the ball so much instead of making the ball work? Not good coaching. We play useless triangles as other players in the team either don't know what is going on or are not involved. Only way they would understand it is if they practiced it.
As RVN has said recently, when Rio has the ball he knows he can start his movements, as eventually it's going to arrive to him in a good position for him.
Now we don't. We just stand there hoping for something. That's why it's stop and start.

Surely this is parody at this stage? :lol:
 

always_hoping

Full Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
3,017
Hmm. Interesting observation. Only wish this was true.



0:18 Shaw receives the ball
0:19 Bruno starts making his run
VDB's movement means the guy marking Shaw is now blocking that channel unaware of Bruno's run behind him
0:21 Shaw sees the run and makes the pass
0:22 Observe Greenwood's run here. He's available for a pass and he would have received it as well had Bruno reached the ball a second quicker
0:25 Fernandes stops the ball and sees the options around him
Now observe VDB's movement again. The movement means that one of their defenders has to continuously look over his shoulder.
And at this moment at 0:26 Bruno makes the pass meeting the late run by Pog
And again look at VDB's movement here. Had Greenwood not gotten to the ball, I'd expect it would have fallen to VDB who again became free because of the movement

Easy to criticize movement a lot of times, but this goal was due to some fantastic movement by Bruno, Mason and VDB, and ofcourse a great pass by Shaw
A better goal the more times you watch it.

Good patterns of play, movement and a great pass by Shaw and cross by Bruno.
 

united_99

Takes pleasure in other people's pain
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
6,554
Pretty cool how we're second when Ole is shit, our coaching is non-existent, our coaches are crap, Rashford is shit/injured/being murdered by Ole, Bruno has been off the boil for nigh on a year, Lindelöf is the worst defender to ever play for the club, Maguire and AWB were wastes of money, McFred aren't good enough, Murtough struggles with time differences, and so on. Honestly, someone is doing a pretty good job. Probably Luke Shaw, most seem to like him. So thank you, Luke, for keeping us afloat despite the garbage we're forcing you to deal with.
Great post, the bolded part made me LOL!
 

NZT-One

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
76
Location
Berlin
Hmm. Interesting observation. Only wish this was true.



0:18 Shaw receives the ball
0:19 Bruno starts making his run
VDB's movement means the guy marking Shaw is now blocking that channel unaware of Bruno's run behind him
0:21 Shaw sees the run and makes the pass
0:22 Observe Greenwood's run here. He's available for a pass and he would have received it as well had Bruno reached the ball a second quicker
0:25 Fernandes stops the ball and sees the options around him
Now observe VDB's movement again. The movement means that one of their defenders has to continuously look over his shoulder.
And at this moment at 0:26 Bruno makes the pass meeting the late run by Pog
And again look at VDB's movement here. Had Greenwood not gotten to the ball, I'd expect it would have fallen to VDB who again became free because of the movement

Easy to criticize movement a lot of times, but this goal was due to some fantastic movement by Bruno, Mason and VDB, and ofcourse a great pass by Shaw
After watching it again, Shaws pass was really good, the rest is good, wouldn't say fantastic but I guess everybody has his own wording. For me personally the goal is not an obvious one for the individual performance category but it certainly has many elements. I am not sure about the question if the assist of Pogba was intentional or not, for me it wasn't, I think he wanted to fire a volley on goal, didn't really connect and Greenwood (and VDB) reacted the quickest with a well executed flying header by Greenwood. It was a very good goal and had some great pieces of technique in there but if some say they observed a pattern there, then the wish to see it must be really big.
Same goes for 1st goal: seemed to me that it was more or less a routine clearance that got loose due to Freds(?) aggressiveness, followed by a ruthless counter by quick thinking of Bruno and a very well executed finish by Rashford.

There is nothing wrong with individual brilliance, this is what we hope to see when we watch football for entertainment. The criticism (if any) is more directed at the point, that many teams not only have that individual pieces in their arsenal but also something else. A team structure that allows them to a) get in more and b) get in even better situations to make use of the individual brilliance we have in the squad. This is what is meant by maximizing the output.



Much improved second half from the lads but it remains an inescapable fact that performances of this ilk are all too frequent in the last twelve months. There’s almost a militant feel to the two factions among posters over recent months (those who feel the manager should have imprinted a distinct style of play on the team in his 2.5 years in charge here v. those who believe this is the optimum any manager could do with this squad of players) and both sides inevitably fail to consider any of the reasonable points the other make.

I am guilty of this myself and have been on record as saying I would love nothing more than a club legend like Solskjaer being the one to deliver the title after a near-decade without success, but I have come to the conclusion (and I am as likely to be wrong about this as anyone else) that I don’t believe he will, unfortunately. His supporters will point to the progress he’s made overall here and I agree wholeheartedly: he’s done an admirable job all things considered. Deadwood shipped out, a more balanced squad built, the football - at its free-flowing peak - is the best in a decade, the atmosphere around the club likewise.

However, I believe this is as good as it’s going to get for Ole here. I don’t see us improving enough to dominate each and every week (and let’s face it, that’s the standard that City and Liverpool have set in this league for the past four seasons - mid-80s title-winning points totals won’t cut the mustard anymore) as we are far too inconsistent for a supposed top team. Relying on comeback wins almost every week is simply not sustainable long-term. His favouritism towards poorly-performing players week after week is another negative in my view, with some mystifyingly playing 90 minutes despite producing garbage displays whilst teammates actually involved in the play get hooked. Our zero improvement in defending set pieces is heinous for a club of our standing, also. It’s all just plain bizarre.

On the whole, I don’t think Solskjaer has shown enough to be tied down to another four years and I’d hold fire on the extension offer just yet. Anyone believing there aren’t upgrades out there are plainly ignorant or being deliberately obtuse. Is doing a good job good enough to remain Manchester United manager? When do our supposed high standards kick in and we, as a club, demand results in the form of trophies? Would Solskjaer survive 2.5+ years at any other top club in Europe? Would Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern, Liverpool, City, PSG, Juventus etc. stand for this apparent never-ending promise of ‘progress’ and ‘potential’?

I suppose what I am trying to convey, and this is a long-winded way of doing so, is there are merits in both camps (Out v. In) but the majority of both deal in extremes and middle ground is neither sought nor achieved. There is a highly pertinent discussion to be had about the manager’s future but I do find the exasperation (feigned or otherwise) from the ‘In’ camp to be both humorous and bizarre in equal measure. Like, why wouldn’t there be question marks about the manager? Klopp has had many directed at him this season and he’s won the lot in the last two seasons, for crying out loud.
Good post. I agree particularly with being puzzled by so many on here being ready to axe players as soon as they do a mistake, talk about upgrades for the consistent squad members but leaving the manager completely out of that thinking. It feels bizarre.
I mean I get that. The criticism at the start was way OTT. Jumping in to defend him was totally right back then and even today in some cases but this defense is turning into parts of the fanbase getting triggered with the slightest notion of critique. Fighting neither the post nor the poster but an imaginary member of a supposedly trigger happy, manager sacking cult who expects the world and is completely unable to see the great accomplishments and their obvious consequences in the future.
 

anant

Full Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
6,718
After watching it again, Shaws pass was really good, the rest is good, wouldn't say fantastic but I guess everybody has his own wording. For me personally the goal is not an obvious one for the individual performance category but it certainly has many elements. I am not sure about the question if the assist of Pogba was intentional or not, for me it wasn't, I think he wanted to fire a volley on goal, didn't really connect and Greenwood (and VDB) reacted the quickest with a well executed flying header by Greenwood. It was a very good goal and had some great pieces of technique in there but if some say they observed a pattern there, then the wish to see it must be really big.
Same goes for 1st goal: seemed to me that it was more or less a routine clearance that got loose due to Freds(?) aggressiveness, followed by a ruthless counter by quick thinking of Bruno and a very well executed finish by Rashford.

There is nothing wrong with individual brilliance, this is what we hope to see when we watch football for entertainment. The criticism (if any) is more directed at the point, that many teams not only have that individual pieces in their arsenal but also something else. A team structure that allows them to a) get in more and b) get in even better situations to make use of the individual brilliance we have in the squad. This is what is meant by maximizing the output.
I mean the movement by VDB is quite apparent there and if one can't see the fact that his movement is what led to the pass for Bruno being successful, maybe that has been the reason why you guys feel we're an awfully coached team?

Here's the thing, if that goal lies under individual brilliance category or 50/50 category, then there is no point having a coach. Because every goal by those standards will fall under individual brilliance. Arsenal's slick goal vs Norwich - individual brilliance for making those tight passes. Our counter attack vs BHA last year- Matic's individual brilliance. If a goal doesn't fall under that category, it will fall under individual error category, which brings me to the second paragraph.

Fred pressed their player, which won us the ball. Sure the attack was ruthless, but you have to appreciate the Rashford and Bruno's run there?

And let's for a moment take into account these errors out, but then by that logic, I think we are the best coached side in the world defensively. The goal we conceded yesterday was an individual error by AWB, the goals vs Leicester - individual errors by Fred, Fred/Matic and McT respectively. Goal vs Milan- Hendo's mistake. For the past 3 months we haven't conceded a goal by this logic. And I can go on by going into all the goals.

The thing is individual brilliance argument can work if you're inconsistent. There's literally been no team that would lose these few games if they were relying on individual brilliance.
 

NZT-One

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
76
Location
Berlin
I mean the movement by VDB is quite apparent there and if one can't see the fact that his movement is what led to the pass for Bruno being successful, maybe that has been the reason why you guys feel we're an awfully coached team?
I am not the OP and have never stated, that we are an awfully coached team. My stance (and that of many other) is, that we don't look like a well drilled team in comparison to others and that this is somehow connected to the manager and has to be included when evaluating him and his job.

About the move in itself - I agree, that movement of VDB enables the run of Bruno and the pass. But how do you draw the connection with the coaching then? I mean, I would get it when we see things like that repeatedly but we aren't. So this scenes shows some good movement, if you think, it is a sign for coaching, than ok, you might be right. I think it could be solely down to good movement of VDB (which he is known for since Ajax). You know what I mean? I am happy to include that in the credits list for the goal, but it doesn't make the goal a team goal. I mean, come on... Pogba fluked a shot, Greenwood reacted the fastest. These factors are within the equasion, no matter what happened before.

Here's the thing, if that goal lies under individual brilliance category or 50/50 category, then there is no point having a coach. Because every goal by those standards will fall under individual brilliance. Arsenal's slick goal vs Norwich - individual brilliance for making those tight passes. Our counter attack vs BHA last year- Matic's individual brilliance. If a goal doesn't fall under that category, it will fall under individual error category, which brings me to the second paragraph.
I tend to agree with you here. For every goal there is an argument to be made that it is a result of somebody making a mistake. I think, this has its origins in fans not wanting to give credit to opponents players so better trashing the defender than crediting the striker. You are right, it is difficult to draw a line here. But if that movement is coached, why do we see these runs so rarely? Why do we acknowledge such passes by Shaw so rarely? Because they don't occur on regular basis! Again, I know where you are coming from, I get that. But a) it was one instance of good movement which payed off and b) to pay off it took a fluked shot and a striker instinct to materialize.


Fred pressed their player, which won us the ball. Sure the attack was ruthless, but you have to appreciate the Rashford and Bruno's run there?
I do appreciate every run. Not debatable. But joining an attack or lets say "anticipating a starting a attack" from two offensive players isn't particularly coaching, wouldn't you agree? Don't get me wrong I give credit to everybody for this goal but it is kind of a standard goal which you would expect to be scored by most teams in the league. It's not particular individual brilliance and it isn't a well worked team goal as well. You would expect that goal to be scored with most top level teams no matter who the coach is.


And let's for a moment take into account these errors out, but then by that logic, I think we are the best coached side in the world defensively. The goal we conceded yesterday was an individual error by AWB, the goals vs Leicester - individual errors by Fred, Fred/Matic and McT respectively. Goal vs Milan- Hendo's mistake. For the past 3 months we haven't conceded a goal by this logic. And I can go on by going into all the goals.
Firstly, the topic was chance and goal creation so talk about defense are somewhat misplaced. For what it's worth, I think we defend quite well as a team. But a) this is aided having good protection (even if it is just by numbers) by Fred and McTominay and b) many teams not really going all in against us knowing our strength in counter attacks.

The thing is individual brilliance argument can work if you're inconsistent. There's literally been no team that would lose these few games if they were relying on individual brilliance.
Hmm difficult to challenge that. What I can tell you is, that I think, that we have quite a few really good players in the squad, are set up relatively conservative and well defensively and make good use of the few chances we create (overachieving on our xG). But I am happy to try to meet you somewhere in the middle: I wouldn't say we rely on individual brilliance solely to score goals. But it makes a big percentage of it and it is brought into attention in this light due to these moments often being exactly that - moments or flashes. When we would play like most of the 2nd half yesterday in every match, even in every other match, the criticism would look different. But for these good 25 min where the question really was "when do we score" and not "if we score" you have the 45min in 1st half that create doubts.
 

dpansheth

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 27, 2012
Messages
395
We were second under Jose too.
In Mou's second season, our playing style were not something to be happy about, but we did finish with 81 points and with a GD of 40. so results were there.
currently we are 2nd, with 60 points and GD of 26. if we secure 21 points out of 24 available then we will be where we were in 17-18 season: not much to say about playing style but results are there in EPL.
 

DSG

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2014
Messages
759
Location
A Whale’s Vagina
Pretty cool how we're second when Ole is shit, our coaching is non-existent, our coaches are crap, Rashford is shit/injured/being murdered by Ole, Bruno has been off the boil for nigh on a year, Lindelöf is the worst defender to ever play for the club, Maguire and AWB were wastes of money, McFred aren't good enough, Murtough struggles with time differences, and so on. Honestly, someone is doing a pretty good job. Probably Luke Shaw, most seem to like him. So thank you, Luke, for keeping us afloat despite the garbage we're forcing you to deal with.
:lol:
What a post! Spot on.
 

anant

Full Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
6,718
Hmm difficult to challenge that. What I can tell you is, that I think, that we have quite a few really good players in the squad, are set up relatively conservative and well defensively and make good use of the few chances we create (overachieving on our xG). But I am happy to try to meet you somewhere in the middle: I wouldn't say we rely on individual brilliance solely to score goals. But it makes a big percentage of it and it is brought into attention in this light due to these moments often being exactly that - moments or flashes. When we would play like most of the 2nd half yesterday in every match, even in every other match, the criticism would look different. But for these good 25 min where the question really was "when do we score" and not "if we score" you have the 45min in 1st half that create doubts.
I'll just challenge you on the last part. Others are completely subjective and I don't see any point discussing when it's unlikely either of us will change the stance.

Firstly- overachieving xG on it's own is not bad. I agree we will revert to mean (I'll be addressing this as well later), but the thing is even in absolute terms, since Oct, our xG is the 2nd highest in the league. Now coming back to the reverting to mean part, We're overachiveing by 7.2 goals, 2 OGs and overachieving by 2 on Set pieces+pens aside, we're overachieving by just 3.2 goals. It's hardly something to be alerted by as it's a pretty insignificant number.

Now coming to the percentages part of goals scored by individual brilliance. This is how I define it, " A worldie goal scored by a player which would be a nomination for goal of the month award and as a result of play that is unlikely to have been practiced on the training ground" So, Pogba's goals vs Fulham and WHU, Rashford's goal vs BHA at AmEx, and his goal vs Newcastle at OT, Bruno's goal vs Everton at OT are some examples. A goal from a cross or a counter is unlikely to be ever a goal due to individual brilliance.

Yesterday, for example, the reason why we were shite in the 1st and great in the 2nd half was because BHA stopped attacking us. Basically, in the 1st half, we were getting the ball in our half itself and they were fantastic in defensive transitions, which meant that by the time we got the ball upfield, they were already in place and we never had sufficient players in their half to break them down. However, in the 2nd half, we gained a lot of territory and we were able to put in more people for attacks against their slightly deeper block 55th min onwards.

Do we need to do better? Of course, but people expecting teams to win every game 2-0, 3-0 is unlikely to ever happen which is what the forum seems to be demanding from Ole to be convinced of him
 

Isotope

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2012
Messages
16,992
Supports
Ole Ole Ole
In Mou's second season, our playing style were not something to be happy about, but we did finish with 81 points and with a GD of 40. so results were there.
currently we are 2nd, with 60 points and GD of 26. if we secure 21 points out of 24 available then we will be where we were in 17-18 season: not much to say about playing style but results are there in EPL.
I salute your optimism there.
 

VivaRonaldo85

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
746
For the folk who use our league position to justify that the coaching is all good and Ole should therefore not be criticised, think of it like this. If you can agree that Pep is a better Coach than Ole, do you think he would be doing better with United’s squad right now, hypothetically speaking? If so, how much better? By better, would we be less than 14 points off the top of the table and would we still be in the champions league rather than the Europa? On all known previous form, I would have us doing much better not just in terms of consistent quality of football but ultimately points on the board and whisper it quietly, a trophy by now.
 

anant

Full Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
6,718
For the folk who use our league position to justify that the coaching is all good and Ole should therefore not be criticised, think of it like this. If you can agree that Pep is a better Coach than Ole, do you think he would be doing better with United’s squad right now, hypothetically speaking? If so, how much better? By better, would we be less than 14 points off the top of the table and would we still be in the champions league rather than the Europa? On all known previous form, I would have us doing much better not just in terms of consistent quality of football but ultimately points on the board and whisper it quietly, a trophy by now.
Not sure what your point is here? I think everyone agrees Pep>Ole and with him the gap would have been lower.

It's like saying,
For the folk who use our league position to justify that the coaching is all good and Tuchel(/Poch/Rodgers or whoever your fav manager is) should therefore not be criticised, think of it like this. If you can agree that Pep is a better Coach than Tuchel, do you think he would be doing better with Chelsea’s squad right now, hypothetically speaking? If so, how much better? By better, would we be less than 23 points off the top of the table and as favourites for top 4 ? On all known previous form, I would have us doing much better not just in terms of consistent quality of football but ultimately points on the board and whisper it quietly, not a thrashing by WBA.
 

VivaRonaldo85

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
746
Not sure what your point is here? I think everyone agrees Pep>Ole and with him the gap would have been lower.

It's like saying,
I’m saying this is Ole’s limit. There are clearly much higher level coaches in world football should we want to progress again. Ole has steadied the ship and in 10 years time we’ll look back and think he actually had a decent spell as manager after a turbulent few years. But the football and overall play is pretty ordinary given the individual talent we posses more than it is exciting or gets you off your seat. Using Pep is an extreme example of course but it makes the point.
 

Ole's screen

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 18, 2020
Messages
99
Location
Right next to Ole’s seat
Supports
KC Chiefs
I’m saying this is Ole’s limit. There are clearly much higher level coaches in world football should we want to progress again. Ole has steadied the ship and in 10 years time we’ll look back and think he actually had a decent spell as manager after a turbulent few years. But the football and overall play is pretty ordinary given the individual talent we posses more than it is exciting or gets you off your seat. Using Pep is an extreme example of course but it makes the point.
That is you placing an arbitrary ceiling on his potential and ours with him as manager based on very little tangible evidence. Ole has been breaking every ceiling placed on him by others from the very beginning of his career both as a player and especially as a Man United manager and I believe (being a fan of Ole and having followed his career for 20 odd years as a United fan) he can continue to do so. Isn't this what being a supporter of a club is? I, for one, would enjoy a title win with Ole in charge, more than say 3 title wins with a different manager who doesn't have the connection that Ole has.

As an aside, this is where I cannot really fathom other United fans - especially those who are old enough to have seen his playing days - not putting their faith in him to take us back to the top. Its not a given that any coach we hire - as well as they may have done in other clubs (as we saw with Jose and LvG) - would do any better than Ole has done and would do any better going forward than Ole would do. And while I really don't like doing so, the temptation to call people "not real fans" does flow from this I think.
 

NZT-One

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
76
Location
Berlin
I'll just challenge you on the last part. Others are completely subjective and I don't see any point discussing when it's unlikely either of us will change the stance.
Ok... could have spent the time typing differently then but alright.

Firstly- overachieving xG on it's own is not bad. I agree we will revert to mean (I'll be addressing this as well later), but the thing is even in absolute terms, since Oct, our xG is the 2nd highest in the league. Now coming back to the reverting to mean part, We're overachiveing by 7.2 goals, 2 OGs and overachieving by 2 on Set pieces+pens aside, we're overachieving by just 3.2 goals. It's hardly something to be alerted by as it's a pretty insignificant number.
True. If it came across as something bad, it wasn't meant like that. Overachieving on the xG means, that your striker (or chance converters) are doing just fine. Which is why I don't understand people slagging the form of our strikers or the need of worldclass striker to transform our team up to the likes of Liverpool or City. The strikers are about fine, the chance creation is a problem since a long time. We are quite good at converting our chances, it is just that we don't create a lot.

Our xG (47.2) right now is the 4th best in the league behind ManCity (60.3), Liverpool (54.1) and Chelsea (48.1). Notable mentions are the places 5-7 xG wise with Leeds (45.9), Leicester (44.3), Brighton (41.8). I don't really see the point in using just a subset of results ("since october"). But if we want to make full use of the available numbers to emphasize a point - our xG is way closer to Leeds, Leicester and Brighton than it is to ManCity and Liverpool. Considering the different budgets, this should at least ring a bell, don't you think?
(https://fbref.com/en/comps/9/Premier-League-Stats)

Now coming to the percentages part of goals scored by individual brilliance. This is how I define it, " A worldie goal scored by a player which would be a nomination for goal of the month award and as a result of play that is unlikely to have been practiced on the training ground" So, Pogba's goals vs Fulham and WHU, Rashford's goal vs BHA at AmEx, and his goal vs Newcastle at OT, Bruno's goal vs Everton at OT are some examples. A goal from a cross or a counter is unlikely to be ever a goal due to individual brilliance.
Ok, there we have it. For me the term individual brilliance is more weighted at the "individual" than on "brilliance". It doesn't need to be a "worldie". I agree a cross rarely is pure individual but if the cross perfectly placed into a packed box or the striker is needed to make a top class finish to convert a suboptimal cross... I think, you know what I mean. It isn't either or. But good to know, that you consider another factor. I don't. Would be interesting to know, how other contributors feel about it.

Yesterday, for example, the reason why we were shite in the 1st and great in the 2nd half was because BHA stopped attacking us. Basically, in the 1st half, we were getting the ball in our half itself and they were fantastic in defensive transitions, which meant that by the time we got the ball upfield, they were already in place and we never had sufficient players in their half to break them down. However, in the 2nd half, we gained a lot of territory and we were able to put in more people for attacks against their slightly deeper block 55th min onwards.
Got it. Agree with the observation, but I am not so sure if Brighton took the foot of the gas pedal or if we finally started to put the foot on it. But I guess, this depends on ones philosophical stance. I surely don't want to deny that Brighton played really well and they put in a lot of effort (esp. in 1st half). So of course, this has affected the game but for me, in 1st half, we didn't even tried to challenge them. To make it more difficult for them to get back into shape. In the 2nd half, we upped our tempo which made it more difficult for them which led to errors. There won't be a definitive answer on that unfortunately. Would be really interesting to know how the team itself (manager included) saw that.

Do we need to do better? Of course, but people expecting teams to win every game 2-0, 3-0 is unlikely to ever happen which is what the forum seems to be demanding from Ole to be convinced of him
"The forum"? I really don't see it like that. The majority on here is behind the manager mostly. A few seem so traumatized by the early In-vs-Out debate, that they don't want to be associated with anything that could be constructed as "Ole-Out". Which leads today to this bipolar thing we enjoy every game...

I can tell you, I don't expect us to win every game. I don't even expect us to be 2nd or to challenge City. But a) I am disappointed if we show problems beating teams we are expected to beat and b) I am disappointed about the way we went out of 1st league plus CL and cups. All this is fine and can happen but the way we did, left a little sting and it created doubts that are even accelerated by some of the (for me) hollow praise, the manager gets. (I SAID SOME. Don't react as if I didn't put in almost every 2nd of the few posts here that I think that Ole has done an admirable job in many aspects)

That is you placing an arbitrary ceiling on his potential and ours with him as manager based on very little tangible evidence. Ole has been breaking every ceiling placed on him by others from the very beginning of his career both as a player and especially as a Man United manager and I believe (being a fan of Ole and having followed his career for 20 odd years as a United fan) he can continue to do so. Isn't this what being a supporter of a club is? I, for one, would enjoy a title win with Ole in charge, more than say 3 title wins with a different manager who doesn't have the connection that Ole has.

As an aside, this is where I cannot really fathom other United fans - especially those who are old enough to have seen his playing days - not putting their faith in him to take us back to the top. Its not a given that any coach we hire - as well as they may have done in other clubs (as we saw with Jose and LvG) - would do any better than Ole has done and would do any better going forward than Ole would do. And while I really don't like doing so, the temptation to call people "not real fans" does flow from this I think.
It shouldn't flow anyway because it makes the discussion leave a rational level and start a circle of personal stuff. Not needed, not wanted. So even if you feel the need (and your post shows there is a need), just don't do it.

The bolded part is true. But it works in both ways. Only that we now have more of a touch about what he does well and what he doesn't. So yeah, Ole-Out camp doesn't know if other manager would do better - maybe he wouldn't but maybe he would. Exactly the same for Ole-In camp, isn't it?
 
Last edited:

gerdm07

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2011
Messages
1,788
Pretty cool how we're second when Ole is shit, our coaching is non-existent, our coaches are crap, Rashford is shit/injured/being murdered by Ole, Bruno has been off the boil for nigh on a year, Lindelöf is the worst defender to ever play for the club, Maguire and AWB were wastes of money, McFred aren't good enough, Murtough struggles with time differences, and so on. Honestly, someone is doing a pretty good job. Probably Luke Shaw, most seem to like him. So thank you, Luke, for keeping us afloat despite the garbage we're forcing you to deal with.
Love it
 

anant

Full Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
6,718
Our xG (47.2) right now is the 4th best in the league behind ManCity (60.3), Liverpool (54.1) and Chelsea (48.1). Notable mentions are the places 5-7 xG wise with Leeds (45.9), Leicester (44.3), Brighton (41.8). I don't really see the point in using just a subset of results ("since october"). But if we want to make full use of the available numbers to emphasize a point - our xG is way closer to Leeds, Leicester and Brighton than it is to ManCity and Liverpool. Considering the different budgets, this should at least ring a bell, don't you think?
(https://fbref.com/en/comps/9/Premier-League-Stats)

Ok, there we have it. For me the term individual brilliance is more weighted at the "individual" than on "brilliance". It doesn't need to be a "worldie". I agree a cross rarely is pure individual but if the cross perfectly placed into a packed box or the striker is needed to make a top class finish to convert a suboptimal cross... I think, you know what I mean. It isn't either or. But good to know, that you consider another factor. I don't. Would be interesting to know, how other contributors feel about it.

"The forum"? I really don't see it like that. The majority on here is behind the manager mostly. A few seem so traumatized by the early In-vs-Out debate, that they don't want to be associated with anything that could be constructed as "Ole-Out". Which leads today to this bipolar thing we enjoy every game...

I can tell you, I don't expect us to win every game. I don't even expect us to be 2nd or to challenge City. But a) I am disappointed if we show problems beating teams we are expected to beat and b) I am disappointed about the way we went out of 1st league plus CL and cups. All this is fine and can happen but the way we did, left a little sting and it created doubts that are even accelerated by some of the (for me) hollow praise, the manager gets. (I SAID SOME. Don't react as if I didn't put in almost every 2nd of the few posts here that I think that Ole has done an admirable job in many aspects)
The reason for analyzing just from October is quite obvious - lack of fitness that affected performances. I mean it's not just us, look at City, bayern, psg etc. as well. If I want to compare against others, I'd prefer a fairer comparison. Obviously injuries mean that the comparison will never be fair, but this way, it's atleast fairer.

As far as your definition of worldie is concerned, I get your point and it is quite fair but then again, you'd say that nearly every corner is a result of individual brilliance, or TAA's performances last season were individual brilliance. It's near impossible to draw the line. Hell, even in the argument I presented, I'm quite certain our players practice long range shooting. Now by saying a worldie is individual brilliance, I'm taking away credit from those training sessions.

And as far as your last paragraph is concerned, I wasnt pointing at you specifically, but more around a lot of moaners who are never willing to give praise. A win vs BHA is a good result, a 1-0 vs WHU is a good result, wins vs AVL and all were good results. The game could have been more entertaining, but we were in control in large parts of the game and with such a tight fixture schedule this is all you can hope for. I don't think he's a perfect manager, but sometimes, it seems he gets criticized because he wasn't/isn't a fancy name
 

NZT-One

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
76
Location
Berlin
I answer the other way around...

And as far as your last paragraph is concerned, I wasnt pointing at you specifically, but more around a lot of moaners who are never willing to give praise. A win vs BHA is a good result, a 1-0 vs WHU is a good result, wins vs AVL and all were good results. The game could have been more entertaining, but we were in control in large parts of the game and with such a tight fixture schedule this is all you can hope for. I don't think he's a perfect manager, but sometimes, it seems he gets criticized because he wasn't/isn't a fancy name
I understand your point and there is a chance, that in some cases, the managers name might really be not fancy enough. Additionally something new and potential great is always appealing, more so than the thing you know the pros and cons of. So I get your feeling, that the criticism is coming from that sort of direction but maybe it does only way fewer cases than "you" think.
I think, the mood around here would be more relaxed, if not anybody, who is expressing criticism would be met with such a prejudice because for some, they just see things a bit differently than for example you. I highlighted in your sentence the core thing: you decided based on your judgement, that "this is all we can hope for". But this is your personal stance, an absolutely valid one but a subjective opinion not really having more substance than the stance of somebody who acknowledges the good to great results but isn't satisfied about us seeing this brand of football more often than not.

As far as your definition of worldie is concerned, I get your point and it is quite fair but then again, you'd say that nearly every corner is a result of individual brilliance, or TAA's performances last season were individual brilliance. It's near impossible to draw the line. Hell, even in the argument I presented, I'm quite certain our players practice long range shooting. Now by saying a worldie is individual brilliance, I'm taking away credit from those training sessions.
You're right, it is very difficult to draw the line and even if you draw one, it will be a relatively subjective one. I think, the "brilliance" term has sent a few to this direction. I mean, training dribblings or freekicks, technical abilities, to be able to come up with individual pieces here and there is nothing short of well done and good job. I don't think many here mean it in a way to take something away from the players when these goals are scored. After all, we want to buy players we know are capable of coming up with these moments.

It is more about the "individual aspect". One player comes up with something very good to edge it.

On the opposite moving the ball fast within a few players to then create an opening that can be exploited just like in the sequence you described yesterday. This is what I expect from our team more than once per game, I want to see a team which you can get the impression of that they play together every day. There have to be synergies, fast actions due to players being so familiar to each others movements, strengths, tendencies. I didn't had that feeling for a long time, it is always playing ball into feet almost never into space, rarely using momentum in transition, always taking few touches looking up to then play the pass to the player right next.

The emergence of synergies will happen automatically over time, the longer this group plays together, but I think, good coaching can a) force and b) accelerate that process. And for a group that plays together since a few years now, we are not quite advanced here. Therefor my impression is, that Ole, for all the freedom he gives to his players, he overburdens most/some/a few of them. A player with Brunos courage, vision and quick thinking flourishes - but who else?

The reason for analyzing just from October is quite obvious - lack of fitness that affected performances. I mean it's not just us, look at City, bayern, psg etc. as well. If I want to compare against others, I'd prefer a fairer comparison. Obviously injuries mean that the comparison will never be fair, but this way, it's atleast fairer.
:)
I know, why you did it, but United has a deeper squad than most other teams so this "fair" is always somewhat faulty. Plus I mean it isn't like we played the big teams there so I understand your thinking but for me, it is a bit overstated. To be honest I see no huge issues with the bad start, it is what it is, our preseason wasn't a good one but we overcame it. Well done. Therefor I see no reason to not go with all results of the season. They of the season are very good - even with the first ones. It is the performances overall - not just at the start. And they don't change, even if you take the first few matches away. What is your take on the numbers I presented xG wise, I asked if it rings a bell - does it for you or do you think, that's fine and part of the process (this is no trick question)?

You said we are 2nd xG wise excluding a few matches - did you calculate on your own or how did you come up with the number?
(genuinly interested because I find it pretty tedious to work with fbref to get that sort of data, maybe you have better way)

Nice conversation by the way
 
  • Like
Reactions: roonster09