Are pundits and fans exaggerating how bad we've been?

Sadly no. But some of them are loving it and they can’t wait to talk more shit. Annoying as feck.
 
Well, it really depends what you mean....

I agree that we shouldn't be labelled 'terrible' because we've been battered a couple of times by City and Liverpool, that can happen, especially when confidence is low.

I would also tend to agree we've been quite harshly treated based on our performances against our main rivals this season. We have drawn twice with Chelsea, beaten Spurs twice and have a won one, lost one record against Arsenal.

However, the biggest issue we have is that we look terrible. We don't look like a football team. There are huge gaps everywhere on the pitch and it's bizarre to watch. Tactically it's just an absolute shambles.

I think that's the reason we get so much criticism. We've spent over £1BN net and we should be competing at the top of the table, but the gulf in class when we play a genuinely top side is obvious and we don't even look good against the poorer sides. It's just a disjointed mess.
 
kouroux said:
Apart from the top 2, the PL is very low quality tbh
Click to expand...

I'd say it is the complete opposite of this, the PL is strong all the way down and anyone can take points off anyone else on a good day, look at us (Brighton) coming back from 2-0 down and drawing at Anfield. The premiership is stronger than ever.

As far as the OP's question goes, United have been bad, but it won't take nearly as much to turn it around as many fans seem to think.
 
We’re quite bad, but we’re even worse considering the money that’s been spent. There have been no positives from this season whatsoever besides the glimmer of light in ETH coming on board.
 
I think we might be the most underperforming team in the history of sports concidering the cost of this team. So no.
 
Idxomer said:
Specifically, the last two games against two settled teams who're supposedly doing much better than United?

Yeah, Liverpool and City are much better but that's literally the case with every other team on the planet.

The gap to the likes of Chelsea and Arsenal didn't seem to be as big as these commentators and ex-players like to portray and that's with half of our starters out for different reasons.
Click to expand...

Of course they are, it’s their job to.

The last few weeks our wheels have come off, clearly a massive rift between the players and the interim manager, confidence is shattered from absolutely everyone.

We’ve been poor, and currently on a run where we look very poor (albeit we totally outplayed Arsenal and just lacked cutting edge/luck of decisions), but seeing people say relegation material and “worst sports team in history” and other stuff is just nonsense, if it were the case we wouldn’t be sat in 6th position in the top division of English football.

There’s lots of reasons to be optimistic for maybe not next season, at least the start of it, but after that. Including as you say, the sheer fact that those around us right now clearly aren’t unassailably better than us, they all have their issues.
 
The Boy said:
I'd say it is the complete opposite of this, the PL is strong all the way down and anyone can take points off anyone else on a good day, look at us (Brighton) coming back from 2-0 down and drawing at Anfield. The premiership is stronger than ever.

As far as the OP's question goes, United have been bad, but it won't take nearly as much to turn it around as many fans seem to think.
Click to expand...
Stronger than ever ? I can't say I agree, the football played is boring, every team try to force a football they don't have the players for.
The gap between the top 2 and the rest in terms of tactics and application is ridiculous, Brighton is a good team tbh, credit to their manager but those freak results can happen every year.
Man City has always lost 1 or 2 games in season that no one expected them to.
West Ham is doing well in the EL but the rest ? Very average to me.
 
No but they are exaggerating how long it will take to get better. The right manager, a couple signings and this team would instantly be 10x better. For what it worth only City and Liverpool are good. The rest are largely average.
 
No, not realy we've played well in some games, but most struggled, had some rotten VAR calls, hope that changes, so far off Chelsea last and they are way off City and scum.

ETH needs young hungry players who want it. We will see improvements then. This season Bar Ronny and DDG, the rest have flattered to decieve.
 
I agree OP. It's all about these 2 games. One of the top spenders in Europe and now we may even topple the mighty West ham and snag the covetted Conference league spot. We're doing great.
 
Idxomer said:
Specifically, the last two games against two settled teams who're supposedly doing much better than United?

Yeah, Liverpool and City are much better but that's literally the case with every other team on the planet.

The gap to the likes of Chelsea and Arsenal didn't seem to be as big as these commentators and ex-players like to portray and that's with half of our starters out for different reasons.
Click to expand...

You have unwittingly included two questions in one.

I actually do not believe that we are that bad. It is a descent into complete madness to say that we finished with 74 points last season and added Cristiano Ronaldo, Jordan Sancho and Rafael Varane to our roster and got worse. What I think has happened is that a combination of management ineptitude and player power has torpedoed our season. The players that we have, if they performed to their fullest potential, should be doing far better than they are and we should definitely have been able to improve on last season's points tally.

That said, 'yes' we really have been that bad because the league table does not lie. Our tally is 55 points after 35 games.
 
Before the Liverpool/United game they had a combined first 11 that was just the Liverpool team.

I understand why they did it but if we're (I'm) being really honest here Ronaldo should've been in that first 11, considering that the striker role was given to Mane who's scored and assisted less goals than Ronaldo despite playing more.

But other than that it was difficult to argue with their choices. We're poor at the moment and Liverpool/City are far beyond us in terms of performances it's not even funny. I don't care if their teams are phenomenal at the moment, we should have at least a couple of players that can compete with them for positions when arguing with your mates who's better.

We don't have that. 9 years on from winning the league and competing in Europe we have become this, and it's due to years of making the same mistakes over and over. I think the massive gap in quality against the current league contenders amplifies how bad we are now which feeds into the narrative when comparing us to teams like Chelsea and Arsenal.
 
No team ever performing these bad attitude wise. I've seen relegated teams put on more fight than us, and we're supposed to be fighting for top 4.

Even then sunderland wasnt as lethargic as us. God knows where we were without Ronaldo
 
Sad fact is, we could potentially finish level on points with Newcastle who were bottom when RR took over without a win I believe.
 
No, the criticism has been mostly proportionate.

Everton did a better job against Liverpool than we did, and they're in the thick of relegation scrap. We made hard work of Norwich at home, and they are statistically the worst team in the league. Things are bad, that much is clear.
 
The criticism is accurate but it just gets harder and harder to listen to.

I do have an issue though with Gary Neville saying general comments about all the team being overpaid wasters but wont call out individuals, specifically those who came through the academy.
 
No, we are actually worst.

If not for Ronaldo carrying us we would be lower down the table for sure.
 
Idxomer said:
The gap to the likes of Chelsea and Arsenal didn't seem to be as big as these commentators and ex-players like to portray and that's with half of our starters out for different reasons.
Click to expand...

We were lucky to get a draw against CFC.
We got pummelled 3-1 against the AFC 'B' Team.
Standards are now so low that unless we get beat 5-0, some fans are arguing that we didn't do too badly.

This man speaks the truth...

RedRonaldo said:
No, we are actually worst.

If not for Ronaldo carrying us we would be lower down the table for sure.
Click to expand...
 
I don’t think they exaggerate how bad we play, but I think many are guilty of sensationalising our troubles because a Utd story sells/gets clicks and a negative Utd story twice so.
That said, with all that’s gone on this season, and with all the leaks and rumours it’s an easy goal for most journos.
 
Absolutely, been saying this for a while.

Before this season, we’ve finished in the PL top 3 3 times in the last 4 years. You would never have guessed that based on the coverage. Of course, we get it, we would like to win the league. As would every team that doesn’t win it. If not for a anomalous Cup victory - we have been better, or at least par with Chelsea, for example in the PL over the last 4 years. Again, the coverage with them is massively different.

This season has been depressing. However, I was in bed last night thinking, how can any team worse than us this season be seen to have had a good season? Because it feels like we never win any games. Yet we could quite feasibly finish ahead of say, West Ham or Wolves - who are considered to have had good seasons, and yet been worse than us. I don’t need anyone to tell me that different teams have different expectations, however, aside from teams doing well to survive etc - for traditional top half teams like West Ham, ‘good’ is surely ‘good’? To me, unless you were a team expecting a relegation fight, you should not be able to do worse than this United team and be unanimously praised. That doesn’t seem right.
 
Idxomer said:
Specifically, the last two games against two settled teams who're supposedly doing much better than United?

Yeah, Liverpool and City are much better but that's literally the case with every other team on the planet.

The gap to the likes of Chelsea and Arsenal didn't seem to be as big as these commentators and ex-players like to portray and that's with half of our starters out for different reasons.
Click to expand...

It's not exaggerated by fans and pundits but by poor results on the pitch which I am starting to think that if we had a decent manager it wouldn't look as bad as it does.
 
It's interesting that we are bottom of the mini-league of big six clubs but no worse than that yet. I feel like we should be 12th or 13th based on performances

flappyjay said:
... I am starting to think that if we had a decent manager it wouldn't look as bad as it does.
Click to expand...

A competent manager that complimented the players would probably have got top four. But at the cost of abandoning any notion of footballing progress for another year. This is all part of the process or learning a new way of playing. Just accept it as necessary.
 
jesperjaap said:
Yes terrible, 3rd place side are currently CL holders, we have sides in the semi finals of all the European tournaments...seriously
Click to expand...
And yet couldn't beat us, got bounced by q very old Real Madrid team. Chelsea are closer to the top 2 but they are not that impressive tbh.
All the other sides are clearly very very far from the top 2 that the league seems broken. Anyway, I am fine if you don't agree
 
kouroux said:
And yet couldn't beat us, got bounced by q very old Real Madrid team. Chelsea are closer to the top 2 but they are not that impressive tbh.
All the other sides are clearly very very far from the top 2 that the league seems broken. Anyway, I am fine if you don't agree
Click to expand...

All of Europe are behind the top two. Chelsea should have beat us by 5/6 goals and should have beat Madrid, they are one of the best sides in Europe, utter nonsense
 
jesperjaap said:
All of Europe are behind the top two. Chelsea should have beat us by 5/6 goals and should have beat Madrid, they are one of the best sides in Europe, utter nonsense
Click to expand...
And yet they didn't, "should have" is an abstract concept. What matters is the actual results. Chelsea are one of the best sides in Europe sure but it still doesn't make the PL any better. If you don't like what I am saying then piss off
 
We've been embarassing on the pitch and barely putting in an effort waiting for the season to end. Beating a dead horse to make any new judgements on it though. Seasons been over since we lost to Atletico for everyone, was obvious it was going to happen, no point going on about it.
 
kouroux said:
And yet they didn't, "should have" is an abstract concept. What matters is the actual results. Chelsea are one of the best sides in Europe sure but it still doesn't make the PL any better. If you don't like what I am saying then piss off
Click to expand...

Anybody ever tell you that you have a lovely charming way about you haha. You have literally just contradicted your comment the premiership is weak below the top two and now saying Chelsea are one of the best sides in Europe, I will gladly exit your room, it is rather barren and has a strong stench of imbosil
 
jesperjaap said:
Anybody ever tell you that you have a lovely charming way about you haha. You have literally just contradicted your comment the premiership is weak below the top two and now saying Chelsea are one of the best sides in Europe, I will gladly exit your room, it is rather barren and has a strong stench of imbosil
Click to expand...
The PL is still weak below the top 2, no matter what Chelsea has done in Europe last season, it hasn't translated into league performances.
Kinda like Villareal being Europa League champions but still completely wank in the spanish league but to a lesser degre than Chelsea. No contradiction whatsoever, just "discussing" with a PL fan who obviously couldn't bear having it not worshipped.
 
We're three wins away from ensuring we're level with our worst points total in the Prem era. We scored 64 in '13-'14 and conceded 43. As is, we've scored 54 and conceded 52. This season has been absolutely unacceptable.
 
No, for once, all that negativity from the press and pundits are fair.
 
Clearly not. We are quite clearly one of the worst underperforming top teams in Europe, if not the worst.
 
Absolutely no. Chelsea had nothing to play for yesterday and they played us off the park at Old Trafford. Luckily, Havertz is shite at finishing & we came out with a point.
 
Nah, if you go by goal difference we're in Tier 4 with Leicester, West Ham and Wolves, behind City and Liverpool in tier 1, Chelsea in Tier 2 and Arsenal and Spurs in Tier 4. That's pretty ugly stuff. We lack the organization of those other tier 4 sides but we have much better attackers and a a top keeper (though Wolves might too). Wolves in particular were probably one random decent half season from a forward away from being ahead of us, they don't concede much for a reason.

We also have looked terrible in most big games.

On the other hand, we beat Villareal (4-1) and Atalanta (5-4) over the two ties, tough lost to Young Boys (2-1), though Villareal have gotten stronger. Probably most teams have because they have refined a clear style, whereas we're a mess.

And aesthetically, we've been terrible in big games, aside from Arsenal.
 
They are right in how they have criticized our players and performances.

However, I've always felt the the club as a whole has been bashed unfairly. There's new leadership at the club and pundits seem to lazy to actually acknowledge the change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.