No, nobody has the eyes to see that. The team performed differently, whether that was due to instruction or execution you frankly know feck all about. Yet you assume that that is the whole explanation for the difference.
We are an awfully coached team
- Thread starter bond19821982
- Start date
No, nobody has the eyes to see that. The team performed differently, whether that was due to instruction or execution you frankly know feck all about. Yet you assume that that is the whole explanation for the difference.
I would think that there is certainly some credibility to the notion that players would approach a game like yesterday slightly differently, in terms of intensity, but I wouldn't believe for one second that any manager would do the same.
Wait, did I say I know? I'm pretty sure I said I don't know. But hey, why read a post that has a different opinion to yours. Just attack like a bunch of weird hound dogs.
Ole is doing fine. Let's give him a bit more slack when the team doesn't play so good.
When you assess the performance against Palace, we worsened over time. It's literally managements job to ensure this doesn't happen. I know for some it's actually impossible to accept that Ole and co. take some responsibility for the bad performances. In more ways the one, he has the ability to change a performance such as the one we witnessed on Wednesday. It didn't happen and thats pretty much down to him.
That said, our performance yesterday was also something he was responsible for - like I said, originally, we set up differently and I fully believe it's something he would have ingrained into the team (not just the way we started but the way we managed the game).
There is no such thing as playing style.
You go to the backroom as wannabe coach, you get laughed at.
"OKAY LADS! I WANT MY TEAM TO BE LIKE PEP'S BARCELONA!"
*Awkward silence
It certainly doesn't seem so when the team is calm and professional with a very clear idea on what to do and how to play against a team in red hot form and on a 21 game run like yday! We go from this to the team that looked so flat against Chelsea and Palace who didn't look like they'd score in 5 hours.
I was surprised by the way we started too. We started on the foot, pressed them, got a penalty and could have scored another. We were used to starting the game in a very slow manner which usually fecks us up. Whatever happened yesterday in the first 10 minutes or so I hope we do it more frequently from now on.
Have a lay down lad, it must be so upsetting to see Ole debunk this myth, again.
It's difficult to know. 30 seconds isn't enough time to determine anything... Everything that happened in the first few minutes after the very early penalty could be attributed to City's shock from giving away that goal and us gaining confidence.
Because City played to our strengths, apparently.
As if that is something Pep simply has to do - it's inevitable, he can't help it and it doesn't in any way indicate a weakness on his part.
Implication: An awfully coached team can beat Pep's City just by turning up, because...that's what follows, I suppose. It just has to happen and it doesn't suggest in any way that Ole did anything right - he just showed up, basically.
And - again - the above does not mean that Pep did anything wrong. Victim of anti-Pep football - nothing more to say about that.
Yeah you're right, some don't like it. Opinions eh!
Beating City was never his issue. Infact it's one of his positives . He knows how to deliver against big boys. Problem is when we are asked to dominate and we shit on it. Unless he fix that inconsistency, I will ask him to be sacked.
I can very well take occasional beatings by City if we can dominate and win against clubs below us. The fact is once we start to dominate results will follow. God- I miss those relentless attempts to get a break. Now, we will easily know by 25th minute if we are going to get a break or not.
I can very well take occasional beatings by City if we can dominate and win against clubs below us. The fact is once we start to dominate results will follow. God- I miss those relentless attempts to get a break. Now, we will easily know by 25th minute if we are going to get a break or not.
We are going places in my opinion. The team are progressing. We need some new additions for next season if we are going to be able to challenge for first place and CL.
Are we an awfully coached team?
No, probably not. But to how much of an extent is pretty impossible to say without defining the term first (which btw. also applies to terms like patterns of play).
If we define it by being prepared for matches, knowing about key players of the opposition, finding an appropriate lineup and formation, then we are obviously not awfully coached. We might not be masterfully coached in all situations, but certainly not awfully.
If we define the term by having some and having implemented some passing routines (or patterns of play) to improve our handling of certain situations in a match, or with addressing weaknesses in our play than it is way more difficult to just shrug the question of. (I mean who isn't at least a bit puzzled by the fact that we are usually pretty suspect defending set pieces since ages?)
Passing routines and/or patterns of play is something different than a system or a tactic for me. It sits on way more tangible level and is more specific. When I say it I mean prepared and to some extent revised and trained movements with and without the ball. Often tiki-taka or Klopps Liverpool are mentioned in that context and I think that's in a way correct but they created whole systems out of shedloads of patterns of play. If we mix all those terms and meanings together, of course you can come to the conclusion that we as a team might not be ready to use that kind of thing, but it isnt a tiki-taka system that most on here want to see being introduced but only some minor parts of it.
Lets get one thing out of the way, because I know it has been discussed here lately: it certainly isn't either patterns of play or individual brilliance. One can cover deficits of the other but the best teams of the previous years showed, that you gain a lot from partnering both concepts with each other. Manchester United should certainly explore that approach as it would open some doors that currently seem to be locked.
Prepared "maneuvers" would increase the speed of play which then would lead to providing less comfort for opposition teams and defenses against us. Right now, we make it relatively easy for them to stay in shape because we move the ball with a slow pace. Having some routines would not only tackle the issue of individual brilliance, it could also help the speed of play and it will add an element of off-the-ball-movement. It would also give some level of security to some of our players, when they recognize a prepared move they know where to be and which area is taken care of, less insecurity more room to focus on execution. It also would relief a bit of the creative burden, that is currently more or less solely on the shoulders of Bruno and Rashford.
For example one such move could be: Shaw receives the ball from the CB after a goalkick when he is around the halfway line, this triggers the move, the LW will come short, the CAM will move into space, ready to receive the ball from Shaw or the LW. He is then able to have some quick interplay with either the CM or the ST or the LW, who, if he pulled his defender out of position by coming short to Shaw, can then start to attack that space ready to receive the ball for a cross. The benefit of this prepared move would be, that Shaw only has to find out if CAM is reachable or not, if he isn't he either picks the easy ball to LW or CM. If anything goes south one of the CB will be ready to punt the ball forward. This might be stupid example, I am not a coach at the end of the day, but I think it shows the thing I have in mind. The benefits are obvious to me. Having one or two such moves ready will never be anything that harms us.
I have seen the notion, that patterns of play or an "all-too-rigid"-system would also be an issue as it would be easier to counter it. Well, at first, the level of rigidity is decided by the manager. It is not intended to restrict free decisions by competent players - it is only meant to create more and more promising options. And lets not pretend that Manchester United has a well-working freeflowing system that we should do anything to not disturb. We usually do not create much high-percentage chances, so why not adapt some new tools for the players to use. Not only that but the move I described might happen exactly like that without any preparation anyway but it wont be as fast then. If our experiences with such moves are good we could deploy more or different ones which then also will help us, to better define what sort of players we need to target for transfer or to promote from the academy.
To be honest, in my view there is not even a little downside to that. On the contrary I think that the approach, that seems to be the most supported on here, to just wait and hope for a successful summer transfer window, is irresponsible (in my personal view). We all know United's transfer activities over the last years, we know their issues. We already have been informed about the shortages due to the effects of the pandemic. On top of that, probably there will be an international tournament happening during the summer - so the odds in my view are pretty dire.
We have to find ways to play better with the players available. Of course we should (and have to) strengthen the squad. Of course a more systematic approach will not automatically lead to unlimited success but it would be a step in the right direction (as I would consider such an approach as pretty modern). Pochettino, Rose, Nagelsmann, Bielsa, Potter - patterns of play enable their teams to punch above their weight so there must be something that is at the very least worth exploring. I dont care if we add another assistant coach who is able to do that, or if Carrick and McKenna get together and find some ways - but the game evolves and we have to keep in touch with it.
There is no valid reason to not have this kind of thing as another (additional) arrow in the quiver. I cant speak for the other posters on here but I think, at least some of them see it exactly like that: an additional arrow next to the arrows we already have (and where the fanbase seems so divided about their respective qualities). Diminishing that aspect of the game just because somebody threw a thing that looked alike as criticism against the manager is a very bad idea.
(on a personal note: 1st post on redcafe after at least 8 years of reading, happy to be here)
No, probably not. But to how much of an extent is pretty impossible to say without defining the term first (which btw. also applies to terms like patterns of play).
If we define it by being prepared for matches, knowing about key players of the opposition, finding an appropriate lineup and formation, then we are obviously not awfully coached. We might not be masterfully coached in all situations, but certainly not awfully.
If we define the term by having some and having implemented some passing routines (or patterns of play) to improve our handling of certain situations in a match, or with addressing weaknesses in our play than it is way more difficult to just shrug the question of. (I mean who isn't at least a bit puzzled by the fact that we are usually pretty suspect defending set pieces since ages?)
Passing routines and/or patterns of play is something different than a system or a tactic for me. It sits on way more tangible level and is more specific. When I say it I mean prepared and to some extent revised and trained movements with and without the ball. Often tiki-taka or Klopps Liverpool are mentioned in that context and I think that's in a way correct but they created whole systems out of shedloads of patterns of play. If we mix all those terms and meanings together, of course you can come to the conclusion that we as a team might not be ready to use that kind of thing, but it isnt a tiki-taka system that most on here want to see being introduced but only some minor parts of it.
Lets get one thing out of the way, because I know it has been discussed here lately: it certainly isn't either patterns of play or individual brilliance. One can cover deficits of the other but the best teams of the previous years showed, that you gain a lot from partnering both concepts with each other. Manchester United should certainly explore that approach as it would open some doors that currently seem to be locked.
Prepared "maneuvers" would increase the speed of play which then would lead to providing less comfort for opposition teams and defenses against us. Right now, we make it relatively easy for them to stay in shape because we move the ball with a slow pace. Having some routines would not only tackle the issue of individual brilliance, it could also help the speed of play and it will add an element of off-the-ball-movement. It would also give some level of security to some of our players, when they recognize a prepared move they know where to be and which area is taken care of, less insecurity more room to focus on execution. It also would relief a bit of the creative burden, that is currently more or less solely on the shoulders of Bruno and Rashford.
For example one such move could be: Shaw receives the ball from the CB after a goalkick when he is around the halfway line, this triggers the move, the LW will come short, the CAM will move into space, ready to receive the ball from Shaw or the LW. He is then able to have some quick interplay with either the CM or the ST or the LW, who, if he pulled his defender out of position by coming short to Shaw, can then start to attack that space ready to receive the ball for a cross. The benefit of this prepared move would be, that Shaw only has to find out if CAM is reachable or not, if he isn't he either picks the easy ball to LW or CM. If anything goes south one of the CB will be ready to punt the ball forward. This might be stupid example, I am not a coach at the end of the day, but I think it shows the thing I have in mind. The benefits are obvious to me. Having one or two such moves ready will never be anything that harms us.
I have seen the notion, that patterns of play or an "all-too-rigid"-system would also be an issue as it would be easier to counter it. Well, at first, the level of rigidity is decided by the manager. It is not intended to restrict free decisions by competent players - it is only meant to create more and more promising options. And lets not pretend that Manchester United has a well-working freeflowing system that we should do anything to not disturb. We usually do not create much high-percentage chances, so why not adapt some new tools for the players to use. Not only that but the move I described might happen exactly like that without any preparation anyway but it wont be as fast then. If our experiences with such moves are good we could deploy more or different ones which then also will help us, to better define what sort of players we need to target for transfer or to promote from the academy.
To be honest, in my view there is not even a little downside to that. On the contrary I think that the approach, that seems to be the most supported on here, to just wait and hope for a successful summer transfer window, is irresponsible (in my personal view). We all know United's transfer activities over the last years, we know their issues. We already have been informed about the shortages due to the effects of the pandemic. On top of that, probably there will be an international tournament happening during the summer - so the odds in my view are pretty dire.
We have to find ways to play better with the players available. Of course we should (and have to) strengthen the squad. Of course a more systematic approach will not automatically lead to unlimited success but it would be a step in the right direction (as I would consider such an approach as pretty modern). Pochettino, Rose, Nagelsmann, Bielsa, Potter - patterns of play enable their teams to punch above their weight so there must be something that is at the very least worth exploring. I dont care if we add another assistant coach who is able to do that, or if Carrick and McKenna get together and find some ways - but the game evolves and we have to keep in touch with it.
There is no valid reason to not have this kind of thing as another (additional) arrow in the quiver. I cant speak for the other posters on here but I think, at least some of them see it exactly like that: an additional arrow next to the arrows we already have (and where the fanbase seems so divided about their respective qualities). Diminishing that aspect of the game just because somebody threw a thing that looked alike as criticism against the manager is a very bad idea.
(on a personal note: 1st post on redcafe after at least 8 years of reading, happy to be here)
Last edited:
Yeah we definitely have to cut out the arrogant approaches to games against the likes of Sheff Utd & WBA if we ever want to seriously contend for a league title again, of course we need to have that bit of ingenuity in midfield and out wide to win these games but the approach should be the same no matter who is the opposition.
Look at the stats for that game
. We were fortunate they didn't score with such stats and showcase it was mainly a good defensive shape with having top defenders that lead to our victoryStats win matches!Look at the stats for that game
Look at the stats for that game
There is only one stat that counts and that's goals scored, we were lucky they didnt score one they were lucky we didnt score 4.
Possession doesn't count for much its what you do with it that counts, city had a lot more shots than us but they were mostly low percentage efforts, we created the best chances and very much deserved to win.
Being able to keep a good side out when they have a good spell is a vital quality to have for a top team .
Agreed, one of Fred and McT is probably enough against shite teams that will sit back. However Donny has shown very little to suggest he deserves to play ahead of even Mata in that role.
Deserves a like or 4
Jesus. Responding to this kind of ignorance will get someone banned. It isn't just possession Stat, they were dominant in almost every other offensive stats by a wide margin. Normally with such stats, a goal would come from that. It didn't in that case yesterday mainly due to several factors which include poor finishing, good defensive structure, and have top defenders. You can respond to this if you want, but I m quite sure what you say won't convince me that the victory wasn't mainly down to having good defensive shape, top defensive players and some elements of luck. I m not going to go into a pointless debate about something that is obvious.
Exactly. This is what happened when we played Sheffield United, WBA, Palace, Everton and WestHam recently.
You are the one that is ignoring the quality of our attacking play yesterday, claiming that beating city at the Etihad was purely down to good defensive shape with good defensive players.
We defended well no doubt and it was the base of the performance, if you cant defend you have no chance against city, plenty of teams have gone there and set up with a good defensive shape with good defenders and come away with nothing.
Ole, the coaching staff and the players deserve a lot of credit for coming up with a plan that not only kept city quiet but caused them all manner of problems defensively we completely threw them off and they didnt have an answer, they looked a complete mess at times, it's not the first time ole has achieved this against good managers and good sides so it deserves its credit.
We are not perfect we still have problems like the debacle on wednesday night showed and as much as Ole, the coaching staff and the players were criticised for it quite rightly they should also be praised when they get it right like on sunday.
our Xg was 2.11 and City's was 1.28
a margin that big wins you the game more often than not
I don’t know what a well coached team looks like to be honest. One thing that I’ll bleat about whenever given the opportunity I like where this team is going.
Id like to say we are starting to replicate SAF in a way but not there yet. Team are not playing their usual game and they get praised for shape and solidity, not how dominant they were against us.
That can only be good for the players confidence, which breeds success.
The so-called better teams in the league are happy with a point against us and their fans don’t even complain.
Id like to say we are starting to replicate SAF in a way but not there yet. Team are not playing their usual game and they get praised for shape and solidity, not how dominant they were against us.
That can only be good for the players confidence, which breeds success.
The so-called better teams in the league are happy with a point against us and their fans don’t even complain.
Counter attack is one of the style of play.
I think we are mostly playing a direct high pressure football when the team is full energy this season.
When losing the possession
High pressure pressing combine fast short/long pass and fast release for high transition to front three for counter attack.
When having the possession
- Inverted winger hold the ball -> dribble himself to the box, or pass to full back to cross, or one-two pass with midfielder/ CF.
- CF hold the ball -> Go wider & Inverted winger cut in -> pass to full back to cross, or one-two pass with midfielder / inverted winger.
It is the attacking pattern in the current match.
- AM hold the ball -> penetrated pass if CF and inverted winger run behind the man, or switch to other side.
The is the pattern what we play.
It is similar with Klopp's tactic but less aggressive pressing, and the less quality or consistent (including ability of passing / dribble / crossing / read game / timing / decision / pressing) of front three / two full back are different than them. Can all ability be coached? I don't think so.
We are declined when our first 11 players start to get injury and 2 match in a week. Our bench power was weak already before injury matter.
And we are facing a team that almost break the record of most win in row and a luxury bench team.
The team is a bunch of game raisers. We tend to do well in high pressure games when the odds are against us.
Make us favourites and they suddenly play down to whatever level of the opponent is at.
What a great post and you've summed up how I feel about Ole.
Don't wait another 8 years before posting mate.
We played excellent football in the second half but I'm a bit confused why this thread would be bumped in defence of coaching. By the same bunch who would call people knee jerks for criticising after a loss no less.
We need consistent performances not just the occasional memorable result. If anything that game shows the level we can play to and negates this whole argument of the players not being good enough some were willing to jump on.
We're not a minnow we can't just raise our game in a derby and then go back to inconsistent half arsed performances elsewhere. Ole deserves praise for his tactics there but it doesn't remove the issue of coaching one bit.
We need consistent performances not just the occasional memorable result. If anything that game shows the level we can play to and negates this whole argument of the players not being good enough some were willing to jump on.
We're not a minnow we can't just raise our game in a derby and then go back to inconsistent half arsed performances elsewhere. Ole deserves praise for his tactics there but it doesn't remove the issue of coaching one bit.
Excellent first post, points very well made. If I could 'like' it I would.
BS. What you said was But what was instructed on Wednesday was different from yesterday. Surely, you've the eyes to see that?
If that doesn't mean that you think you know that the players received different instructions on Wednesday than on Sunday, kindly explain what you do mean.
Me personally, I don't believe there such a thing called an awfully coached team, a manager will do everything he can to prepare the team for a game of football, from training, coaching, tactical instructions, personnel management, motivation, etc...
However, during the game what matters is the players decision making, how they react to the situation during the game, and this depends on whether they have bought in the manager's plans and apply the necessary effort for it, and so on.
The manager is not on the pitch and he can't instruct each and every player on each and every situation during a game that is being played at a high pace at the professional level.
I am not absolving Ole from responsiblity for example for the terrible performances against the weaker teams such as Sheffield or WBA or Palace, my point is that the issue is not coaching per say, but "Team Management"
And the question should be "Are we properly managed team?"
And the answer to that question will tell us if Ole is a good manager or not.
However, during the game what matters is the players decision making, how they react to the situation during the game, and this depends on whether they have bought in the manager's plans and apply the necessary effort for it, and so on.
The manager is not on the pitch and he can't instruct each and every player on each and every situation during a game that is being played at a high pace at the professional level.
I am not absolving Ole from responsiblity for example for the terrible performances against the weaker teams such as Sheffield or WBA or Palace, my point is that the issue is not coaching per say, but "Team Management"
And the question should be "Are we properly managed team?"
And the answer to that question will tell us if Ole is a good manager or not.
Did you watch the game against Palace and the one against City? Did you see any differences in the performances, the way we set up and the way we started both games?
Do you think that we set out with the same plan against two different teams?
To Ole's credit, we have become a lot better keeping the ball. By no means great but definitely improvement from the last number of years.
He's going to have to sort out the lack of chances we create against a team that sits deep though.
He's going to have to sort out the lack of chances we create against a team that sits deep though.
During what timeframe do you reckon he should do that?
I’m just asking because we seem to be the same team as when he got the job two years ago in terms of strengths and weaknesses and what type of team we struggle against, and we’ve spent a ton of money in that time period. That’s my biggest problem with Ole, I don’t think he’s capable of it beyond the universal strategy of buying better players. Not for a lack of trying but based on his two years in charge.
Genuinely asking, do you reckon that some ideas take more than two years to implement for a manager?
Where did this notion come from that playing direct football is somehow shit and beneath us? Fergie always did that and i cant recall people moaning about it then. Do people long for the days we tried to bore the opposition to death under Van Gaal?
Yeah, it would be nice to "dominate" all the lesser teams, but we are not quite there yet and teams that consistently dominate lesser teams in the league is quite rare. The best versions of the top clubs manage to do it from time to time, but doing it in a competitive league like the PL is not exactly an easy task
Yeah, it would be nice to "dominate" all the lesser teams, but we are not quite there yet and teams that consistently dominate lesser teams in the league is quite rare. The best versions of the top clubs manage to do it from time to time, but doing it in a competitive league like the PL is not exactly an easy task
One thing i have noticed is that teams who play a high line against us, get in trouble. Sociedad, RB, City.
Its when teams sit back, that we struggle.
I am unsure whether we need a new Striker or new RW to beat teams that sit back.
Its when teams sit back, that we struggle.
I am unsure whether we need a new Striker or new RW to beat teams that sit back.
Great post . I think it should be bookmarked at the top of the thread. It’d probably end all debate .
Have to say I admire City’s possession play even though it’s not always very efficient. United is clearly a better counterattacking team. On Sunday we looked sharper and more dangerous than City, but many value possession play more highly than counterattacking football.
Possession play require higher individual or technical skills, especially in the CM positions. That’s also why City and many other teams plays better possession football than us. Lets face the fact. Both Fred and McT have other strengths than playmaking and offensive technical skills. They aren’t “distributors”. When we solely talk about these skills, I don’t think our CM quality is among top 6 in PL. So I understand why we focus so much on counterattacks. Isn’t efficient football and good coaching about playing on team’s strengths; take advantage of the squad quality and try to camouflage weaknesses?
We should stop dreaming and accept that our squad have some limitations when it comes to possession play. How can we expect Fred, McT, James and Greenwood to play City, Liverpool or Barcelona style of football? Shouldn’t we be happy when our team is able to fulfill it’s potential? We occupy the second place despite some limitations when it comes to technical skills and possession play.
Possession play require higher individual or technical skills, especially in the CM positions. That’s also why City and many other teams plays better possession football than us. Lets face the fact. Both Fred and McT have other strengths than playmaking and offensive technical skills. They aren’t “distributors”. When we solely talk about these skills, I don’t think our CM quality is among top 6 in PL. So I understand why we focus so much on counterattacks. Isn’t efficient football and good coaching about playing on team’s strengths; take advantage of the squad quality and try to camouflage weaknesses?
We should stop dreaming and accept that our squad have some limitations when it comes to possession play. How can we expect Fred, McT, James and Greenwood to play City, Liverpool or Barcelona style of football? Shouldn’t we be happy when our team is able to fulfill it’s potential? We occupy the second place despite some limitations when it comes to technical skills and possession play.
Last edited: