I don't even want to think about the derby.
Why I prefer attractive football over winning at all costs
- Thread starter gerdm07
- Start date
For the team I support I prefer winning over all else. Obviously I'm more happy if we win all games 5-0 with dazzling play, but winning all games with offside goals in the dying minutes of the game is totally acceptable.
Totally and utterly agree.
If we play the best football we will win, and in the meantime I get to watch entertaining, exciting football. If we play reactionary, conservative football we might win (it entirely depends on how well the other teams play that particular season), and in the meantime I'm bored watching us play.
We're swimming against the tide trying to win trophies with defensive football - we might win something, but we'll quickly be swept back to where we are, there'll be no lasting victories. Play the right way and there will always be the chance of winning.
If we play the best football we will win, and in the meantime I get to watch entertaining, exciting football. If we play reactionary, conservative football we might win (it entirely depends on how well the other teams play that particular season), and in the meantime I'm bored watching us play.
We're swimming against the tide trying to win trophies with defensive football - we might win something, but we'll quickly be swept back to where we are, there'll be no lasting victories. Play the right way and there will always be the chance of winning.
Only offensive/attractive teams/nts are winning in the last 08 years.
And there are Atletico Madrid and Leicester as exceptions.
And there are Atletico Madrid and Leicester as exceptions.
I know it's been said before but it's important to remember.
I don't think the 'tumescent' football against the top teams would've been employed if we hadn't lost Pogba, surely he would've trusted us to go toe to toe being at full strength. If it carries on when he's back through out the season then that would be a worry but I can't see it.
What worries me is his reluctance to play our most deadly attacker (Martial) even against the minnows because he can't 'do a job' defensively. Why only ever play one of Rash/Tony at a time but Mkhi can have a free ride to perform as crap as he pleases. You think any other top manager in the league would leave Martial on the bench consistently?
He just needs to loosen up a bit.
I don't think the 'tumescent' football against the top teams would've been employed if we hadn't lost Pogba, surely he would've trusted us to go toe to toe being at full strength. If it carries on when he's back through out the season then that would be a worry but I can't see it.
What worries me is his reluctance to play our most deadly attacker (Martial) even against the minnows because he can't 'do a job' defensively. Why only ever play one of Rash/Tony at a time but Mkhi can have a free ride to perform as crap as he pleases. You think any other top manager in the league would leave Martial on the bench consistently?
He just needs to loosen up a bit.
Last edited:
You're so adamant about it because the memories you have of attractive football are associated with a period of dominance in the Premier League (United in Europe is a different story). If that wasn't the case, you'd probably think a bit differently. You believe that these two always go hand in hand and that if we start turning every game into an end to end contest, we'll eventually enter another era of dominance in English football. The truth of it is that the club that "leads the line" by playing expansive football is almost always the one that has the best players and the best creative/attacking options. We spent a good quarter of the century trying to play entertaining football while our arch rivals were making a name for themselves as the "best team in the world" with Hansen playing backpasses to Clemence and Grobbelaar. Thank God there weren't internet forums back then.
If you're not that club (and we clearly aren't at the moment), you try to make the best of what you have to work with. If this set of players was good enough to play on the front foot, they would have done it under LvG. There's a reason why most renown managers turned down the job when it was offered to them (according to SAF himself). Think about it a bit, there's a lot of work to be done here. One of my favorite sides in the history of football, AC Milan, steamrolled the Serie A in 92/93 and reached the EC final with their magnificent Dutch trio. When they lost them in the following season (especially Gullit and the injured van Basten) they won the league by scoring 36 goals in 34 games and they went all the way in Europe. Capello managed them in the best possible way in order for the team, the best team in the world at that time, to meet the standards that were set for them.
United can't afford to have one of the best attacks in the league and one of the worst defenses. You're basically asking for a season similar to the one the two Merseyside side clubs had in 15/16. You may say that you might be ok with it but Niall would probably have to lock this place down for a couple of hours after each of our games. And the best talents in the world want to be in the place where the trophies will have better chances of going. That's why Bayern, Juventus and PSG are draining their rivals of all the native talent.
We showed more patience with LvG than any other fanbase would have, we can at least offer the same thing to Mourinho. Let's see how we'll end this season. We say we want a team for the future and we have assembled some very promising players in Lukaku-Rash-Tony-Pogba-Bailly and others (even Lindelof shouldn't be written off) but they need more time to develop. We could have splashed money at the likes of Lewandowski-Hummels-Bale-Neymar etc. and we would probably have a much better team by now. We've chosen a different path.
And stop looking at what Pep does, seriously. The man is a one-off, the only manager in the world of football right now who can assemble a starting xi with 7 or 8 creative players in it (the FBs, the three up-front, the seemingly extra-light midfield and one of the CBs) and challenge for every big prize that's there to win. There's no one else out there who can create a team whose focus will be to be the greatest creative force in the league while also being one of the best defensive units (via pressing and possession). He did it last season too when this forum was laughing at him, his side created the best chances, quality wise, and the defensive setup let little gaps for exploitation (again quality wise). It was the comical individual errors that cost them a better finish and now that these are minimized, we see how strong they are. The other three best sides in the league, Chelsea-Tottenham and United, all depend, more or less, on solid defensive performances to win football matches. Given the fact that Chelsea have a team set in the last decade to excel in this type of football and that Spurs are blessed with some exceptional talents and have Poch for quite some time at the helm, these two teams look more fluid than us atm. But we're not far behind them.
If you're not that club (and we clearly aren't at the moment), you try to make the best of what you have to work with. If this set of players was good enough to play on the front foot, they would have done it under LvG. There's a reason why most renown managers turned down the job when it was offered to them (according to SAF himself). Think about it a bit, there's a lot of work to be done here. One of my favorite sides in the history of football, AC Milan, steamrolled the Serie A in 92/93 and reached the EC final with their magnificent Dutch trio. When they lost them in the following season (especially Gullit and the injured van Basten) they won the league by scoring 36 goals in 34 games and they went all the way in Europe. Capello managed them in the best possible way in order for the team, the best team in the world at that time, to meet the standards that were set for them.
United can't afford to have one of the best attacks in the league and one of the worst defenses. You're basically asking for a season similar to the one the two Merseyside side clubs had in 15/16. You may say that you might be ok with it but Niall would probably have to lock this place down for a couple of hours after each of our games. And the best talents in the world want to be in the place where the trophies will have better chances of going. That's why Bayern, Juventus and PSG are draining their rivals of all the native talent.
We showed more patience with LvG than any other fanbase would have, we can at least offer the same thing to Mourinho. Let's see how we'll end this season. We say we want a team for the future and we have assembled some very promising players in Lukaku-Rash-Tony-Pogba-Bailly and others (even Lindelof shouldn't be written off) but they need more time to develop. We could have splashed money at the likes of Lewandowski-Hummels-Bale-Neymar etc. and we would probably have a much better team by now. We've chosen a different path.
And stop looking at what Pep does, seriously. The man is a one-off, the only manager in the world of football right now who can assemble a starting xi with 7 or 8 creative players in it (the FBs, the three up-front, the seemingly extra-light midfield and one of the CBs) and challenge for every big prize that's there to win. There's no one else out there who can create a team whose focus will be to be the greatest creative force in the league while also being one of the best defensive units (via pressing and possession). He did it last season too when this forum was laughing at him, his side created the best chances, quality wise, and the defensive setup let little gaps for exploitation (again quality wise). It was the comical individual errors that cost them a better finish and now that these are minimized, we see how strong they are. The other three best sides in the league, Chelsea-Tottenham and United, all depend, more or less, on solid defensive performances to win football matches. Given the fact that Chelsea have a team set in the last decade to excel in this type of football and that Spurs are blessed with some exceptional talents and have Poch for quite some time at the helm, these two teams look more fluid than us atm. But we're not far behind them.
Mostly because A) the managers have not been good enough and B) we have no continuity in our decision making. It's fine to sack managers on merit but there has to be a larger plan/system/ in place within which all of it happens. We just do stuff on the fly. No wonder, then, that our football also often appears to be rather ad-hoc and aimless.
With Jose, it is to early to say the above though. We started the season well. It's a fear with Jose that it may apply whereas with the other two it definitely did.
I'm not talking about #9s because apart from a small number of elite 9s, most of them need a great deal of support from the AMs behind them to be effective.
You say Pedro and Willian are 'meh' and I agree they aren't world class - but they are senior players who contribute on a regular basis. All of those teams I mentioned have a better AM unit than us and I completely forgot about Spurs who have Alli, Eriksen and Son!
Sort that AM unit out and I think we can put it up to City as our defensive unit and CM area (with Pogba) are great
It's important to remember that being negative/solid first/defensive isn't necessarily a more successful recipe than playing attacking football.
I can't help but feel that Jose's typical revert to "Let's first stop them from playing first, our forwards will create a couple of chances" has played a part in our attack going to pieces. Or maybe we just relied on individuals being in red hot form early on and not the team being great.
I can't help but feel that Jose's typical revert to "Let's first stop them from playing first, our forwards will create a couple of chances" has played a part in our attack going to pieces. Or maybe we just relied on individuals being in red hot form early on and not the team being great.
That is Pep's philosophy in a nut shell. He changes his plans for no one, everyone else has to adopt to him. If this wasn't happening at City it would have been a beautiful lesson on how to win the right way.
there need to be a balance, we went downward when pogba was injured, I am sure that when pogba returns we will be much more attacking, though as many said we still have hole sin our sqaud. After fergie moyes made a mess, LVG bought some good players and potential (Martial, shaw herrera) but also bought crappy ones. Mourinho had to sell or get rid of most of the squad (which he done) but still needs to get rid of ageing players and average ones (Valencia, young, blind), also he need to sell one of mhky and mata and then buy what is needed, which imo is LB and a RB, another cm for the first team and to cover for pogba and a rw....if we manage to bring in those 4 new players and get ''rid'' of the unwanted ones we will improve even in playing stlye.
Exactly. But the narrative will continue to blossom. For some reason, we've decided to pretend SAF was exactly like Jose in every area of Jose's weakness (subjective) - antics, style etc.
And whose been winning stuff in recent times? Real Madrid, Barcelona and Bayern Munich. All that fantastic attacking football. As do PSG and City. And I can't remember them parking the bus and playing negative football which was supposed to the "precursor" to the great football that everyone pretends we're doing.
I'm not saying he should be sacked (he shouldn't) but surely if PSG did come in for him it would be better for everyone. He's started turning on the fans and the players as individuals are not really improving. If Jardim was to come in at the end of the season then would it be a bad thing? I suspect what United really need though is a good Director of Football to support the coach.
And this is why the OP is not manager. It's far too outdated to be romantic about attacking, stylish, attractive football. The PL has made it so. It's all about winning at whatever cost. We have a pragmatic manager who tries to win by any means, even if by parking a bus and nicking a goal. Success (winning things) attracts the better players not playing attractive football. Kevin Keegan's entertaining Newcastle anyone?
Some crazy fool on another thread stated that Pep would get this set of players playing attractive football - utter nonsense. JM has picked his players to play his style. Like it or not, he's here for a while longer and he's won stuff already albeit neither of the big two trophies. History will show we've won trophies with him in charge.
Personally, we won't win anything with players like Herrera, Young, Valencia, Smalling and Jones in the starting XI. Spurs, Chelsea and City have a better DM and full/wing backs. My local Under 12s have better CBs!!!
Some crazy fool on another thread stated that Pep would get this set of players playing attractive football - utter nonsense. JM has picked his players to play his style. Like it or not, he's here for a while longer and he's won stuff already albeit neither of the big two trophies. History will show we've won trophies with him in charge.
Personally, we won't win anything with players like Herrera, Young, Valencia, Smalling and Jones in the starting XI. Spurs, Chelsea and City have a better DM and full/wing backs. My local Under 12s have better CBs!!!
I couldn't agree with @amolbhatia50k more here.
For me, going into games expecting to be bored isn't winning at all. People really forget what it was like to go to games hoping to see us to play well and at least put up a fight, all those years of winning has made a us entitled. I prefer being entertained. But, as always there's a balance, I think our biggest problem is the obvious lack of a plan B. That's the real area where the lazy comparisons to SAF are well off, we knew under him if we played defensive and went a goal down the game could be changed and not over. Sure we nearly always struggled at Chelsea and played some real shit games, but it wasn't expected week in and week out.
Under our last few managers with both been boring and lacking any ideas how to change that when needed. Jose needs time and patience, sure I'm all for that. But my real concern is he has never been one to change his style or have any other plans than the one he starts the game with. There's no sign of that changing, if anything he is digging his heels in more.
For me, going into games expecting to be bored isn't winning at all. People really forget what it was like to go to games hoping to see us to play well and at least put up a fight, all those years of winning has made a us entitled. I prefer being entertained. But, as always there's a balance, I think our biggest problem is the obvious lack of a plan B. That's the real area where the lazy comparisons to SAF are well off, we knew under him if we played defensive and went a goal down the game could be changed and not over. Sure we nearly always struggled at Chelsea and played some real shit games, but it wasn't expected week in and week out.
Under our last few managers with both been boring and lacking any ideas how to change that when needed. Jose needs time and patience, sure I'm all for that. But my real concern is he has never been one to change his style or have any other plans than the one he starts the game with. There's no sign of that changing, if anything he is digging his heels in more.
While winning at all costs may be good short term, longer term it damages the club.
Obviously signing players late 20's and not giving youth a chance is all short-term and typical of Jose Mourihno. What people overlook though, is new fans, how many kids today in England or overseas will watch Manchester United and will feel they have a connection to this club and become a fan? I know i wouldn't with this team if i was just getting into football.
They will all support Manchester City/PSG/Real Madrid/Barcelona etc. Doesn't matter if they are glory supporters or not, glory supporters still put money into the club, 80% of Manchester United fans probably started out as 'glory supporters' if you grew up watching United in the 90's/00's.
But United bragging about having the largest fans base in the world (still living off the success of SAF with that) will be gone if poor quality football and having a reputation as a 'team you love to hate' (again typical of a Jose Mourihno side) doesn't improve!
We hear many young overseas players saying "Manchester United is the club i supported as a growing up" (Sir Alex's United) and it stays with them and United are still the dream club for some of these players. Kids watching Jose's United who will be professional-footballers in the next 10 years, United won't be a dream for them anymore, clubs like City will be.
That's what damage winning at all costs does for a football club long term over a team you look forward to watching.
Obviously signing players late 20's and not giving youth a chance is all short-term and typical of Jose Mourihno. What people overlook though, is new fans, how many kids today in England or overseas will watch Manchester United and will feel they have a connection to this club and become a fan? I know i wouldn't with this team if i was just getting into football.
They will all support Manchester City/PSG/Real Madrid/Barcelona etc. Doesn't matter if they are glory supporters or not, glory supporters still put money into the club, 80% of Manchester United fans probably started out as 'glory supporters' if you grew up watching United in the 90's/00's.
But United bragging about having the largest fans base in the world (still living off the success of SAF with that) will be gone if poor quality football and having a reputation as a 'team you love to hate' (again typical of a Jose Mourihno side) doesn't improve!
We hear many young overseas players saying "Manchester United is the club i supported as a growing up" (Sir Alex's United) and it stays with them and United are still the dream club for some of these players. Kids watching Jose's United who will be professional-footballers in the next 10 years, United won't be a dream for them anymore, clubs like City will be.
That's what damage winning at all costs does for a football club long term over a team you look forward to watching.
Last edited:
We're just a rich West Brom.
Just look at Liverpool. They are playing attractive Football but loosing so many games because of it. I think the mixture between attractive and boring Football is the key
Now i'm fecking depressed
Spot on, the hallmark of Pep's team this season is that they've added a bit more steel to their defence freeing up the attack. Last season they won nothing because he dogmatically stuck to attacking all the time....Klopp style
I hate predictability more than I care for attractiveness of play or winning matches.
I heard that on 606. It made Ian Wright chuckle.
Yes I would. Winning is the entertaining bit. It's a bit shit if you're losing every week.
The Dutch NT, Brazil 82, Liverpool 2014, Newcastle.Exactly, I'd be interested to know who all these teams are who play attractive football and never win anything.
After all, when United used to play attractive football all the time, we were rubbish.
Plenty of teams.
Our problem isn't a lack of attacking football. I just don't think we are good enough, yet.
It's the day after a bad defeat in a period of poor form.
With no club football for two weeks. It's only going to get worse from here on .
Someone else said Spurs, so, out of 20 teams in the league (assuming you are including Newcastle?) that's 2 out of 20 who play attractive football and never win anything, alright 19, as someone will win the league. You also forget taht we won plenty last season.
On 606 on Saturday evening, West Brom fans were complaining about Pulis and wanting him to go. The presenters said that Pulis had never been relegated and, somehow, their logic followed that West Brom had 2 choices. Keep Pulis and stay up, or replace him and get relegated. The option of replacing Pulis with a manager playing attractive football and staying up didn't even register.
It’s simple. Our players are not good enough to play the football you’re asking.
Herrera, Mkhitaryan, Smalling, Jones, Young and Lingard all need to be shipped out. They’re not United quality. They’re not even close to the quality of players SAF had in those positions and I’m not even talking about the legends of the club. Guys like Nani, Fletcher and Hernandez shit all over the current crop we have. They had the “United” mentality.
Herrera, Mkhitaryan, Smalling, Jones, Young and Lingard all need to be shipped out. They’re not United quality. They’re not even close to the quality of players SAF had in those positions and I’m not even talking about the legends of the club. Guys like Nani, Fletcher and Hernandez shit all over the current crop we have. They had the “United” mentality.
This
Not sure that is true tbh
I meant the Newcastle in 96.
I think our poor football and our injuries are interlinked heavily. Reminds me of the season Chelsea won the league with Jose. Sensational and easily the best team in the league for the first half of it. Then they had a run of injuries and got steamrolled by Spurs and suddenly went into a shell. Tended to grind out victories to win that title. We went to the Bridge that season and had 71% possession(and still lost).
My point is simple: for as long as Mourinho doesn't feel we have a squad that can compete he will tend to go defensive. We tried going attacking in the first 20 yesterday and you could see that we were struggling and easily opened up. Fpr most of our home games, we will go for it.
What Jose needs is more players to get him there. That will require a bit of patience.
Noone considers attacking football as klopp football. People arguing against the merits of attacking football are the only people making this mistake. Madrid Barca PSG Bayern City and many other teams play attacking football that doesn't come at this so called 'cost'.
Last 4 years screams otherwise.
I don't think we have tried to play attractive football much during the time.
We have.
Under Moyes we were just not good enough.
Under Van Gaal, he played own version of attacking football .
Under Jose, we have been attacking in the majority of our games. It's the big games that we have been very defensive and those tend to stick out massively. Even last season, our problem was not taking our chances because of woeful finishing. That seems to be conveniently forgotten.
Why does it ? have pogba, matic, mikhi, Bailey, zlatan, lukaku, lindelof been here that long ?
Under Moyes we were not good enough because his tactical approach wasn't good enough.
LVG didn't play the kind of attacking football the post was referring to. We played some great attacking football under LVG at the start but a bad result led him to completely change approach rather than tweaking to suit.
You make a point about Mourinho, when he allows us to play attacking football we show we can do so, however it comes with a caveat of being ultra conservative at times too, not just big games. He attacks in a certain way for instance, so again not exactly what the OP was talking about.
There actually isn't a lot of evidence to say the players we have cannot play that way.
I think there is far more evidence to suggest we're not equipped to try and attack teams with minimal numbers
Spurs finished 2nd last season. They scored more goals than anybody. Conceded less than everybody.Exactly, I'd be interested to know who all these teams are who play attractive football and never win anything.
After all, when United used to play attractive football all the time, we were rubbish.
They won nothing.
Say what you like about LVG, but before the LCFC result, he allowed our attackers to focus on attack and the football was actually very exciting and fun.
It almost seemed that every game we played, we could end up scoring 5 or more.
After the LCFC game however, we did a complete 180 and by the time we reached the next season, LVG was proud of us taking very few shots on goal and playing side/back passing.
care to pass whatever you guys are smoking?