Criticism is fine (and encouraged) but there are some criticisms thrown at Ole that don't make any sense

Ole seems to be a nice guy overall and has changed the atmosphere at the club after the misery that Maureen brought to the club, but if you take a close look at the stuff he is being praised for, he has not done that great a job. Clearing out the trash from the club? not not really. He got rid of Fellaini, yes he did, but he also gave long-term contracts to Smalling and Jones. He then weakened the team short term.

He got rid of Smalling and Lukaku and proceeded to play Lindelof. There is no way anyone can tell me that Lindelof is a better defender than Smalling. Lukaku is a goal scorer pure and simple. If chances are created, he puts them away.

As for giving youth a chance, again, only Greenwood is a regular player for the first team. Any manager worth his salt would put him into the squad and play him. There are no other youngsters being a regular chance. Maybe the players are not ready, or they are but not being given a decent enough chance.

As for the football being played on the pitch, it's still shit on a stick football played by LVG and Maureen, just different variations of it. We can't break down a team that defends, neither can we string a few passes together in the attacking third of the pitch. We don't create chances for the strikers, but if we do, there is never more than one player in the box. This is the most surprising considering Ole was a striker. He should be drilling this stuff into the strikers in training, to get into the box to finish off chances.
 
ghagua said:
Ole seems to be a nice guy overall and has changed the atmosphere at the club after the misery that Maureen brought to the club, but if you take a close look at the stuff he is being praised for, he has not done that great a job. Clearing out the trash from the club? not not really. He got rid of Fellaini, yes he did, but he also gave long-term contracts to Smalling and Jones. He then weakened the team short term.

He got rid of Smalling and Lukaku and proceeded to play Lindelof. There is no way anyone can tell me that Lindelof is a better defender than Smalling. Lukaku is a goal scorer pure and simple. If chances are created, he puts them away.

As for giving youth a chance, again, only Greenwood is a regular player for the first team. Any manager worth his salt would put him into the squad and play him. There are no other youngsters being a regular chance. Maybe the players are not ready, or they are but not being given a decent enough chance.

As for the football being played on the pitch, it's still shit on a stick football played by LVG and Maureen, just different variations of it. We can't break down a team that defends, neither can we string a few passes together in the attacking third of the pitch. We don't create chances for the strikers, but if we do, there is never more than one player in the box. This is the most surprising considering Ole was a striker. He should be drilling this stuff into the strikers in training, to get into the box to finish off chances.
Click to expand...

Lindelof is a better defender than Smalling. I disagree with most of the rest you write too, but can't face getting into all of that one more time.
 
largelyworried said:
I guess we agree on the plan just not the destination. I think when SAF was manager, we had a manager who not only had an incredible eye for a player, but also who could get the best out of them. He also had a magical ability to build a team spirit that was unrivaled in football. That was a large part of why United were clearly ahead of the pack for so long. However, I don't think those are advantages for United anymore. Its very difficult to sign outright better players than the opposition these days, given advances in scouting and the leveling of the playing field in terms of finances. Likewise, I don't think that Ole will be able to build an environment that is appreciably better for players to thrive than our rivals. I really don't think that Ole will be significantly better than, say, Klopp at pumping up the team and inspiring high level performances. He could match him, but to be so much better that it translates into a winning advantage? Not convinced of that.

The fact is that the Big 4 clubs (as its become again) are very evenly matched right now. I don't think we can do any more than match each other in terms of the quality of our squad and a positive environment. I think other factors will make the difference. Coaching is only one factor, but its a crucial one.
Click to expand...

I see your point and I agree that the obvious advantages of a team spirit are smaller than in the past, but I do still maintain my own opinion that the 'coaching' gap between Ole and the rest is a lot smaller than most seem to think.

For me, the goalposts have continually been moved when it comes to Ole. He's been judged very severely on everything from squad management, transfers & what are considered to be reasonable achievements all the way down to his bloody press conference presence. People have always looked pretty hard for opportunities to criticise him, and every time he ticks one of those boxes the expectations tighten again. I realise that this is somewhat understandable as manager of this club, but I think we too easily put aside exactly how many obstacles he has cleared to get us to where we are today.

I'm honestly not concerned about how well our teams will be set up when we play our biggest matches. Those questions have been answered for me adequately up to now. He obviously has to get us into the CL knockouts, but I think people are being a little too reactive at the moment to two fairly poor performances which for me are a lot to do with another fractured pre-season and not at all reflective of the type of team this squad are going to be once the season really gets going, and when it comes down to those tight games that ultimately decide a season we've just signed arguably the best player on the planet capable of turning some of those in our favour. That for me is more likely to be single biggest factor in our fortunes than any perceived coaching gap would be.
 
We just need to wait. Ole has no excuses for this season. Even without a DM, he should challenge for title, reach atleast CL quarter and have a very good cup run. Arguments about him, his tactics, coaching etc will be settled in coming months..
 
justsomebloke said:
Lindelof is a better defender than Smalling. I disagree with most of the rest you write too, but can't face getting into all of that one more time.
Click to expand...

Hehehe, Lindelof a better defender than Smalling? Now I've heard it all.
 
Ultimately managers are judged on trophies. I would like Ole to do well but he might be Stanley Ipkiss. He hasn't won anything at all. Do nice guys really finish last? I will hold out for him for 2 more seasons (including this one). If he has not won a trophy in that time then I will just laugh.
 
This has probably been said, but I'm not reading 11 pages worth unfortunately!

Ole also has the second highest win percentage of any Man Utd manager in history over the first 100 games. This is surely incredibly good considering how bad our squad was and how tough the competition is at the moment? There's always been a few teams who we thought were considerably better than us over the last few years.

Ole just has to deliver trophies starting now, we can't have this Spurs or Arsenal mentality of top 4 being enough without actually winning anything. I know Arsenal won a few FA Cups, but they didn't finish in the top 4 since 2016 now... It needs to be trophies and top 4 for us (and not just top 4 but looking like we could actually win the title).
 
Bilbo said:
I see your point and I agree that the obvious advantages of a team spirit are smaller than in the past, but I do still maintain my own opinion that the 'coaching' gap between Ole and the rest is a lot smaller than most seem to think.

For me, the goalposts have continually been moved when it comes to Ole. He's been judged very severely on everything from squad management, transfers & what are considered to be reasonable achievements all the way down to his bloody press conference presence. People have always looked pretty hard for opportunities to criticise him, and every time he ticks one of those boxes the expectations tighten again. I realise that this is somewhat understandable as manager of this club, but I think we too easily put aside exactly how many obstacles he has cleared to get us to where we are today.

I'm honestly not concerned about how well our teams will be set up when we play our biggest matches. Those questions have been answered for me adequately up to now. He obviously has to get us into the CL knockouts, but I think people are being a little too reactive at the moment to two fairly poor performances which for me are a lot to do with another fractured pre-season and not at all reflective of the type of team this squad are going to be once the season really gets going, and when it comes down to those tight games that ultimately decide a season we've just signed arguably the best player on the planet capable of turning some of those in our favour. That for me is more likely to be single biggest factor in our fortunes than any perceived coaching gap would be.
Click to expand...

Sure, its tempting to see a pattern when there may not be one. The games against Southampton & Wolves had the same look and feel as all those games last season where we dropped points and fell out of the title race before it really began. But that may not mean its a continuation of whatever problem that was necessarily, it may just appear similar when in fact the cause is very different - fractured preseason or whatever.

That said, while I don't like setting arbitrary targets, I think the next 8 league games will be instructive. Basically, 5 games against decent but beatable teams followed by Liverpool at home, Spurs away, and City at home. Our target this season is to probably drop no more than 20 points all season, and we've dropped two already. So we really don't want to drop more than 5 or 6 points across all that run & we definitely have to avoid defeat against City and Liverpool. Its a classic case of "You can't win the title before Christmas, but you can lose it". If we get through that run of games still on course for a high points total, I for one will have more faith than I can feel now.
 
Havak said:
This has probably been said, but I'm not reading 11 pages worth unfortunately!

Ole also has the second highest win percentage of any Man Utd manager in history over the first 100 games. This is surely incredibly good considering how bad our squad was and how tough the competition is at the moment? There's always been a few teams who we thought were considerably better than us over the last few years.

Ole just has to deliver trophies starting now, we can't have this Spurs or Arsenal mentality of top 4 being enough without actually winning anything. I know Arsenal won a few FA Cups, but they didn't finish in the top 4 since 2016 now... It needs to be trophies and top 4 for us (and not just top 4 but looking like we could actually win the title).
Click to expand...
Firstly, I think he was actually third behind Mangnall and Mou.

Secondly, if you're talking about the PL era then he's basically being compared to Mou and LVG, all three of him, Mou and LVG also have their stats bumped by multiple EL seasons. I personally don't think any of them have done/did well enough when you look at spending and tenure but obviously Mourinho and LVG can point to some minor silverware. You can't really compare him to SAF because of how different the clubs were when they each took over.

Agree though a major trophy must be delivered (or we lose in a final against a top team/finish very close to the PL winners at worst) this season. If we drop into EL again, which would be impressively bad looking at our group, I'd expect him to walk.
 
smi11ie said:
Ultimately managers are judged on trophies. I would like Ole to do well but he might be Stanley Ipkiss. He hasn't won anything at all. Do nice guys really finish last? I will hold out for him for 2 more seasons (including this one). If he has not won a trophy in that time then I will just laugh.
Click to expand...

You support a new club in Rangers so trophies are a new thing for you right now. But answer me this. Who do you think is making more progress. Solskjaers United or Artetas Arsenal?
 
largelyworried said:
Sure, its tempting to see a pattern when there may not be one. The games against Southampton & Wolves had the same look and feel as all those games last season where we dropped points and fell out of the title race before it really began. But that may not mean its a continuation of whatever problem that was necessarily, it may just appear similar when in fact the cause is very different - fractured preseason or whatever.

That said, while I don't like setting arbitrary targets, I think the next 8 league games will be instructive. Basically, 5 games against decent but beatable teams followed by Liverpool at home, Spurs away, and City at home. Our target this season is to probably drop no more than 20 points all season, and we've dropped two already. So we really don't want to drop more than 5 or 6 points across all that run & we definitely have to avoid defeat against City and Liverpool. Its a classic case of "You can't win the title before Christmas, but you can lose it". If we get through that run of games still on course for a high points total, I for one will have more faith than I can feel now.
Click to expand...

I reckon the champions will finish on the high 80's in points this season. You're absolutely right that the early run of games could be decisive though. If we can get in front again at some point we'll be better equipped to stay there this time around.
 
The fact of the matter is people just didnt want Ole to get the job either at all or full time and they hang on to the nonsense notion that Jose was good for the club. Look at the team Ole is building ( would have been built fully by now if it wasnt for the Glazers)
look how much better the academy is doing. The football is exciting when the team is in full flow. Trophies will come but people dont really care because he isnt Poch and he isnt Jose.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
Firstly, I think he was actually third behind Mangnall and Mou.

Secondly, if you're talking about the PL era then he's basically being compared to Mou and LVG, all three of him, Mou and LVG also have their stats bumped by multiple EL seasons. I personally don't think any of them have done/did well enough when you look at spending and tenure but obviously Mourinho and LVG can point to some minor silverware. You can't really compare him to SAF because of how different the clubs were when they each took over.

Agree though a major trophy must be delivered (or we lose in a final against a top team/finish very close to the PL winners at worst) this season. If we drop into EL again, which would be impressively bad looking at our group, I'd expect him to walk.
Click to expand...

One hundred percent, but it seems a lot of people (see: guy directly above me, Neville with his utterly ridiculous "we tried getting world class managers in and that didn't work, so now it's Solskjaer or bust" take) can't take any criticism of any of the post-Fergie managers without drawing up battle lines.
 
ghagua said:
Hehehe, Lindelof a better defender than Smalling? Now I've heard it all.
Click to expand...
If you look a pure defending Smalling was maybe better a few years ago, but if we compare Smalling last season he was several levels below any of our defenders imo. And now I’m looking purely at defending, not contribution to our overall play. It also seems as injuries have started to become an issue for Smalling, and I lost count how many times he was out for injuries last season. He also starts this season injured. We let him go at the very last minute, simple as that.
 
Ramshock said:
You support a new club in Rangers so trophies are a new thing for you right now. But answer me this. Who do you think is making more progress. Solskjaers United or Artetas Arsenal?
Click to expand...
Can't be bothered.
 
I think the problem Ole has is the system is flawed due to the players we have. Having thought about why we don't have a functioning style of play.

If you look at Chelsea, City, Liverpool they all know what the roles are. Even when players are rotated, the players coming in know their roles.

With United no one knows because one week we are starting James on the wing who is a winger, then the next we have Greenwood who is a inside forward.

One week we have a LW who is a winger, the next we have Pogba who is a midfielder, so the team shape is different on a weekly basis.

It makes it hard to train patterns of play because you have to account for so many different variations of play.
 
romufc said:
I think the problem Ole has is the system is flawed due to the players we have. Having thought about why we don't have a functioning style of play.

If you look at Chelsea, City, Liverpool they all know what the roles are. Even when players are rotated, the players coming in know their roles.

With United no one knows because one week we are starting James on the wing who is a winger, then the next we have Greenwood who is a inside forward.

One week we have a LW who is a winger, the next we have Pogba who is a midfielder, so the team shape is different on a weekly basis.

It makes it hard to train patterns of play because you have to account for so many different variations of play.
Click to expand...
Fergie had the same problem. I think that's why we were so unsuccessful under him.
 
Dante said:
Fergie had the same problem. I think that's why we were so unsuccessful under him.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah I recall Fergie having the same problem. I remember we used to have Carrick, Scholes in 08 who were good CM's then having Fletcher who was good for big games.

Under Fergie we had Ronaldo, Nani as wingers but ofcourse you might think we played Carrick at LW.

Managers change for one off games, not every game.

Also does that mean you are comparing Fergie and Ole as coaches / managers, you must be the most deluded fan I have seen.
 
romufc said:
Oh yeah I recall Fergie having the same problem. I remember we used to have Carrick, Scholes in 08 who were good CM's then having Fletcher who was good for big games.

Under Fergie we had Ronaldo, Nani as wingers but ofcourse you might think we played Carrick at LW.

Managers change for one off games, not every game.

Also does that mean you are comparing Fergie and Ole as coaches / managers, you must be the most deluded fan I have seen.
Click to expand...
What point are you making? Is it about first team quality? Or is it about changing lineups regularly? Because you seem to be shifting the goalposts of your argument.

In any case, Fergie chopped and changed a lot more than Ole does.
 
romufc said:
Oh yeah I recall Fergie having the same problem. I remember we used to have Carrick, Scholes in 08 who were good CM's then having Fletcher who was good for big games.

Under Fergie we had Ronaldo, Nani as wingers but ofcourse you might think we played Carrick at LW.

Managers change for one off games, not every game.

Also does that mean you are comparing Fergie and Ole as coaches / managers, you must be the most deluded fan I have seen.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry there were absolutely many positional and formation changes under Fergie with players like O'shea playing all across the back and even in midfield. Remember the Da silva twins as wingers game? Or playing Wes Brown/Hargreaves at RB? Or Park playing anywhere from midfield to wings to wingback? Or whatever position Rooney played in any given day? You say Ronaldo was a winger but he played an awful lot of games as a striker that season. And even Carrick was often maligned in those days as well. And he played in many different roles ranging from B2B, CDM and CB. We had massive criticisms under Fergie on this very forum that sounded very much like what the criticisms of playstyle Ole gets. "What are we trying to do?", "zombie football", "we have no midfield", "Fletcher is Fergie's son" (remember that one?), "we have no style of play", etc.

Ole absolutely tries to implement what he experienced and learnt under Fergie when he was a player and then later a coach. Thats how football knowledge flows. There are coaches of the Cruyff, Rangnick, Sacchi school of management, so why should Manchester United managers not try to follow in SAF's footsteps? Ole follows Sir Alex's example of management and he's not shy about saying it, and its obvious to anyone who followed United during Fergie days and now. If he's as good at it as SAF was, it remains to be seen, but probably not. But he's done no worse at the start than SAF did.
 
Dante said:
What point are you making? Is it about first team quality? Or is it about changing lineups regularly? Because you seem to be shifting the goalposts of your argument.

In any case, Fergie chopped and changed a lot more than Ole does.
Click to expand...

I have no issue about chopping and changing. Tuchel, pep do it all the time. The issue I have seen is we seem to change styles every game.

First 3 games, 3 different styles.

1st game McFred, Pogba left, James right
2nd game Matic, Fred, Pogba left, Greenwood right
3rd game Pogba, Fred, Sancho and James wing

When Fergie rotated, the players knew what they were doing, the wingers were wingers, crossing the ball in, the strikers knew their roles.

At the moment we are not just changing personell, we are changing the type of player. Its hard for a team to get consistent way of playing when the type of player changes.

For example, Martial / Rashford would be a similar LW/ST
Cavani and Ronaldo will be similar
 
Ole's screen said:
I'm sorry there were absolutely many positional and formation changes under Fergie with players like O'shea playing all across the back and even in midfield. Remember the Da silva twins as wingers game? Or playing Wes Brown/Hargreaves at RB? Or Park playing anywhere from midfield to wings to wingback? Or whatever position Rooney played in any given day? You say Ronaldo was a winger but he played an awful lot of games as a striker that season. And even Carrick was often maligned in those days as well. And he played in many different roles ranging from B2B, CDM and CB. We had massive criticisms under Fergie on this very forum that sounded very much like what the criticisms of playstyle Ole gets. "What are we trying to do?", "zombie football", "we have no midfield", "Fletcher is Fergie's son" (remember that one?), "we have no style of play", etc.

Ole absolutely tries to implement what he experienced and learnt under Fergie when he was a player and then later a coach. Thats how football knowledge flows. There are coaches of the Cruyff, Rangnick, Sacchi school of management, so why should Manchester United managers not try to follow in SAF's footsteps? Ole follows Sir Alex's example of management and he's not shy about saying it, and its obvious to anyone who followed United during Fergie days and now. If he's as good at it as SAF was, it remains to be seen, but probably not. But he's done no worse at the start than SAF did.
Click to expand...

Yes, there are positional changes however; there is a difference between changing players for one off game than anything else.

How many times did Da Silva twins play as wingers in PL / CL?
Wes Brown was the RB for the whole season, it wasnt chopped and changed, he actually played because of injuries to Neville and loss of form.

Again, Carrick only played CB when we had no CB, show me a game where Carrick played CB when we had fit CB's.

What Ole is doing now is not the same as Fergie, if you recall, under Fergie we used to cross the ball in, when have you see Manutd cross the ball?

I think this comparison of how Fergie did to Ole is doing is completely flawed. Ole has had almost 400m to spend, compare that to Fergie. Fergie had actually shown what he can do at Abereden, so this logic is nonsense.
 
romufc said:
Yes, there are positional changes however; there is a difference between changing players for one off game than anything else.

How many times did Da Silva twins play as wingers in PL / CL?
Wes Brown was the RB for the whole season, it wasnt chopped and changed, he actually played because of injuries to Neville and loss of form.

Again, Carrick only played CB when we had no CB, show me a game where Carrick played CB when we had fit CB's.

What Ole is doing now is not the same as Fergie, if you recall, under Fergie we used to cross the ball in, when have you see Manutd cross the ball?

I think this comparison of how Fergie did to Ole is doing is completely flawed. Ole has had almost 400m to spend, compare that to Fergie. Fergie had actually shown what he can do at Abereden, so this logic is nonsense.
Click to expand...

You keep extrapolating "Ole is trying to follow Fergie's example and his management style is similar" into "Ole is as good as Fergie and does the exact same things on the pitch". The specifics have to change because football has changed. And the personnel matter too. We crossed the ball a lot when Cavani's on the pitch and we'll cross the ball a lot when Ronaldo is. We didn't cross a lot when Rashford and Martial were playing up top.

Carrick however did play as a B2B in a midfield two and a CDM and as an emergency CB. Hargreaves did rotate between a CDM and a RB that year too. We had a record under Fergie for not naming an unchanged side for literally years.
 
Ole's screen said:
You keep extrapolating "Ole is trying to follow Fergie's example and his management style is similar" into "Ole is as good as Fergie and does the exact same things on the pitch". The specifics have to change because football has changed. And the personnel matter too. We crossed the ball a lot when Cavani's on the pitch and we'll cross the ball a lot when Ronaldo is. We didn't cross a lot when Rashford and Martial were playing up top.

Carrick however did play as a B2B in a midfield two and a CDM and as an emergency CB. Hargreaves did rotate between a CDM and a RB that year too. We had a record under Fergie for not naming an unchanged side for literally years.
Click to expand...


There is a BIG difference between rotating players to rotating a style of play. Fergie rotated players, they all knew their roles. Park came in to give extra defensive cover, going forward his role was still similar to other wingers, play wide and cross.

We go from Dan James who is a winger to Greenwood who is an inside forward.

Also, emergency CB does not mean rotating btw. he played there because he had to.

Let me also tell you that in 07/08 Hargreaves played a total of 3 times as RB, so don't make it out as if it was rotational RB.
 
romufc said:
There is a BIG difference between rotating players to rotating a style of play. Fergie rotated players, they all knew their roles. Park came in to give extra defensive cover, going forward his role was still similar to other wingers, play wide and cross.

We go from Dan James who is a winger to Greenwood who is an inside forward.

Also, emergency CB does not mean rotating btw. he played there because he had to.

Let me also tell you that in 07/08 Hargreaves played a total of 3 times as RB, so don't make it out as if it was rotational RB.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry that's just not true. Our style of play changed heavily over the Fergie years and even within a season. You're picking 08 but that was probably the most consistent play style we had over the course of the season but generally under SAF we changed heavily between being a sit deep and counterattack team and bossing possession, often in the space of 10 minutes. We were a very streaky team that had a hunger to win and had the ability for it all to click into place and lead to a flurry of goals. I remember the start of the 08 season itself was littered with fairly unconvincing 1-0 wins where we had very little control and we finally got into our stride when the CL group stages began.
 
romufc said:
Yes, there are positional changes however; there is a difference between changing players for one off game than anything else.

How many times did Da Silva twins play as wingers in PL / CL?
Wes Brown was the RB for the whole season, it wasnt chopped and changed, he actually played because of injuries to Neville and loss of form.

Again, Carrick only played CB when we had no CB, show me a game where Carrick played CB when we had fit CB's.

What Ole is doing now is not the same as Fergie, if you recall, under Fergie we used to cross the ball in, when have you see Manutd cross the ball?

I think this comparison of how Fergie did to Ole is doing is completely flawed. Ole has had almost 400m to spend, compare that to Fergie. Fergie had actually shown what he can do at Abereden, so this logic is nonsense.
Click to expand...

48 times so far this season, to be exact. This is much fewer than f.e. Burnley (who's had 75), but more to the point, why exactly should this be a measure of how well the team is doing? And surely no one is seriously arguing that we are playing or should play the same style as we did under SAF?

What certainly is flawed is a comparison noting that Ole's had "400 million to spend", in contrast with Fergie. Firstly, Ole hasn't had a 400m net spend. Secondly, I'm sure I don't have to remind you what elite footballers used to cost 10-20 years ago. You can hardly say that SAF wasn't backed to the hilt with transfer funds (save perhaps for the final few years). For much of his reign, when we wanted someone, we got him. United sat at or very close to the top of the list in PL transfer spending then, just as we do now. In fact, I'd bet good money we had a significantly bigger share of PL transfer spending under SAF than we've had under OGS.

Also, for most of that time we were simply doing maintenance. Ole's had to build up a new team.
 
Last edited:
Ole's screen said:
I'm sorry that's just not true. Our style of play changed heavily over the Fergie years and even within a season. You're picking 08 but that was probably the most consistent play style we had over the course of the season but generally under SAF we changed heavily between being a sit deep and counterattack team and bossing possession, often in the space of 10 minutes. We were a very streaky team that had a hunger to win and had the ability for it all to click into place and lead to a flurry of goals. I remember the start of the 08 season itself was littered with fairly unconvincing 1-0 wins where we had very little control and we finally got into our stride when the CL group stages began.
Click to expand...

That was how Fergie went on about it. If I recall under SAF, we only started playing after the November International break.

Well, you have proven my point exactly, we went on to win 1-0 showing a consistent way of playing. We are going from 5-0 to 1-1 to 1-0 in games we could have lost 4-0 against Wolves.
 
romufc said:
That was how Fergie went on about it. If I recall under SAF, we only started playing after the November International break.

Well, you have proven my point exactly, we went on to win 1-0 showing a consistent way of playing. We are going from 5-0 to 1-1 to 1-0 in games we could have lost 4-0 against Wolves.
Click to expand...

There were games in those 1-0 that we should have lost. And we didn't have a set style for a lot of it as Ronnie was out for some of them and new players Nani and Anderson were finding their feet. In the same way as we won 1-0 against Wolves. That's a point towards making my argument that we under Ole also tend to start slowly and build into the season.

Anyways this is going in circles. The point is that comparing Ole with Sir Alex is not unreasonable and its not unreasonable for United fans to want our manager to follow some Fergusonian principles. Management is about more than just being a head coach. If its our coaching that's lacking I'd trust Ole to get the right people in to fix that rather than Woodward or Murtough.
 
justsomebloke said:
48 times so far this season, to be exact. This is much fewer than f.e. Burnley (who's had 75), but more to the point, why exactly should this be a measure of how well the team is doing? And surely no one is seriously arguing that we are playing or should play the same style as we did under SAF?

What certainly is flawed is a comparison noting that Ole's had "400 million to spend", in contrast with Fergie. Firstly, Ole hasn't had a 400m net spend. Secondly, I'm sure I don't have to remind you what elite footballers used to cost 10-20 years ago. You can hardly say that SAF wasn't backed to the hilt with transfer funds (save perhaps for the final few years). For much of his reign, when we wanted someone, we got him. Also, for most of that time we were simply doing maintenance. Ole's had to build up a new team.
Click to expand...


Well, some people think Ole is following Fergies management and coaching style which means that football.

So Ole having x amount to spend is flawed but comparing Ole and SAF tenure is totally justified? I also don't have to remind you football back then is alot different than now, you have to adapt.

So you are only allowed to use how much elite players cost, but if one says managers were given more time back then its a flawed argument? yep makes alot of sense.
 
justsomebloke said:
48 times so far this season, to be exact. This is much fewer than f.e. Burnley (who's had 75), but more to the point, why exactly should this be a measure of how well the team is doing? And surely no one is seriously arguing that we are playing or should play the same style as we did under SAF?

What certainly is flawed is a comparison noting that Ole's had "400 million to spend", in contrast with Fergie. Firstly, Ole hasn't had a 400m net spend. Secondly, I'm sure I don't have to remind you what elite footballers used to cost 10-20 years ago. You can hardly say that SAF wasn't backed to the hilt with transfer funds (save perhaps for the final few years). For much of his reign, when we wanted someone, we got him. United sat at or very close to the top of the list in PL transfer spending then, just as we do now. In fact, I'd bet good money we had a significantly bigger share of PL transfer spending under SAF than we've had under OGS.

Also, for most of that time we were simply doing maintenance. Ole's had to build up a new team.
Click to expand...

I was wrong! Both our net and our gross transfer spend has been the highest in the league in OGS' period. And to my suprise, it was not in SAF's time, when we actually fourth over the whole span of his reign, by either measure. During Moyes/LvG/Mourinho as a whole (ie, 13/14 through 18/19), we were third in gross spend, second in net spend.

Point about having to build up a new team stands though (although so of course did SAF, at one point, and LvG and Mourinho too).

And all of this is Tranfermarkt figures.
 
romufc said:
Well, some people think Ole is following Fergies management and coaching style which means that football.

So Ole having x amount to spend is flawed but comparing Ole and SAF tenure is totally justified? I also don't have to remind you football back then is alot different than now, you have to adapt.

So you are only allowed to use how much elite players cost, but if one says managers were given more time back then its a flawed argument? yep makes alot of sense.
Click to expand...

Er, the point is that players who would have cost 20 million in 2000 costs 100m now, so there's no point comparing the amounts spent in different eras. You need to look at it relatively, ie how high your spending was compared to other clubs at different points in time. But see above post.

All of which has nothing whatsoever to do with comparisons of other things such as playing style or patience.
 
Last edited:
justsomebloke said:
Er, the point is that players who would have cost 20 million in 2000 costs 100m now, so there's no point comparing the amounts spent in different eras. You need to look at it relatively, ie how high your spending was compared to other clubs at different points in time. See above post.

All of which has nothing whatsoever to do with comparisons of other things such as playing style or patience.
Click to expand...

Er.. the point is football then and now has changed. Just because one manager then was given time and has success after a few years doesn't mean the same will happen now.

The poster was saying Ole is doing well because his track record is the same as SAF back then. That is a flawed logic because there is alot more pressure to deliver success now.

More managerial choices from Europe, this was not the case

More teams with Money now, this was again not the case then.

So if you want to put money into relative, you need to do the same with football and expectations.
 
romufc said:
Er.. the point is football then and now has changed. Just because one manager then was given time and has success after a few years doesn't mean the same will happen now.

The poster was saying Ole is doing well because his track record is the same as SAF back then. That is a flawed logic because there is alot more pressure to deliver success now.

More managerial choices from Europe, this was not the case

More teams with Money now, this was again not the case then.

So if you want to put money into relative, you need to do the same with football and expectations.
Click to expand...

That money has to be put into relative is self-evident and obvious (and in any case as the figures show there were more teams outspending us back in SAFs time than there is now, so a relative look at money actually supports your point in that part of the argument). The other aspects are debatable. In any event, they have nothing to do with each other.
 
romufc said:
I think the problem Ole has is the system is flawed due to the players we have. Having thought about why we don't have a functioning style of play.

If you look at Chelsea, City, Liverpool they all know what the roles are. Even when players are rotated, the players coming in know their roles.

With United no one knows because one week we are starting James on the wing who is a winger, then the next we have Greenwood who is a inside forward.

One week we have a LW who is a winger, the next we have Pogba who is a midfielder, so the team shape is different on a weekly basis.

It makes it hard to train patterns of play because you have to account for so many different variations of play.
Click to expand...
I think, that is an interesting take on it. Depending on your own stance though, it can appear as the chicken-egg-situation, wouldn't you agree? Because there are no absolute dependencies, it is a complex issue.

The team shape, formation and game plan for a specific match are not locked on the players you have as a law of nature. It makes sense, to choose a shape, formation and game plan that emphasizes your players strengths or your opponents weaknesses but the manager isn't forced to do it. Also there isn't one right way for a manager to make his decisions: do I create a plan based on the best available players to me or do I create a plan and choose the best fitting players for it? The question is also answered differently if you look at it on the base of a "one-game"-timeframe or over a full season, potentially even longer.

I don't know, if I understand you correctly, but I think, using the set of available players as a reason that we play the way we play is faulty for two reasons:
a) players follow instructions on how to play so James and Greenwood absolutely can do the same role theoretically (even if a certain task might suit one of them better or worse) and
b) Ole is (at least heavily) involved in recruitment so he should have identified the players needed to fill the roles he wants to play with and/or should be aware which roles cannot be filled with certain players (for example Greenwood will not give a lot of cover for his RB most of the time so having him there will ask for compensations potentially)

When roles are always defined newly based on the available personel, it can block the maximization of output long term (not just in football, this is also a big thing in start ups btw) which very well might be, what we are seeing with United these days, but what we, on a certain level encourage and want, when you look how many on here try to put for example Pogba and Rashford in the same lineup at all costs.

I would agree with the observation, the back and forth in personnel might have an decelerating effect on the natural development of patterns of play. But on the other side, these patterns of play could also be instilled in other ways than just on match days if such patterns would be identified and defined. That they are not (not obviously at least), indicates to me, that our management teams focusses on different aspects than this (admittedly to good success).

All in all I think, the players aren't the root cause for what we are seeing, it is that our coaching teams tries to maximize output of the team by giving them mostly freedom to express themselves (which is great if most players are on song) and I would also agree, that this is a bit reminiscent of the Fergie-days. That isn't a bad approach per se and the results of the last 2 seasons support that.
I think, where this approach falls short though, is that such an approach isn't the norm these days so while some players thrive in it (for example Bruno) other players may find it difficult to get going (for example VDB) because they are used to more rigid systems and fixed roles that can make it easier to bed-in new individuals. This would explain two things: why we sometimes do not look like a team that plays football together 12 times a week and why the drop off was as big during the last seasons as soon as "the fringe players" had to play only to be bailed out by 1st teams offensive players in many situations.
 
Wumminator said:
I've been meaning to make this thread for a while. There seems to be some people who think that there are fervent Ole inners who can't take any criticism of the club. That is simply not true. What I (and others evidently) on this forum can't stand are illogical and stupid arguments. Here are some of them:

1) Ole is inept tactically
The fact Manchester United have just set a record for the longest unbeaten record is evidence of this. You simply can not go that long in the most competitive league unbeaten if you don't have a clue what you are doing. The fact that Ole has the best record against Pep of anyone who has ever played against him (as far as I am aware) should also go to dismissing that fallacy. If you want to argue that tactics can be improved, then I would love to read your posts. I don't really understand a lot about football myself. But the idea that he's completely useless is thrown around here a lot and it doesn't follow.

2) Ole is poor at changing the game
The simple fact that we have come from behind to win so often is proof that this is also nonsense. We gained thirty-one points from being behind at different points last year. That is insane. The idea that follows that Ole doesn't react quick enough or is poor at making subs is therefore silly as well. Are there instances where Ole didn't make the exact decision you would have done? Sure. Is Ole clearly understanding the pattern of the games and adapting accordingly. Well obviously.

3.) Ole has ignored the midfield problem
Not at all. He just can't solve everything at once. We are now seeing Ole assembling the most exciting United team for almost a decade. But there probably is an issue with our midfield. The problem is before this window there was also a problem with our right wing and our CB. At centre back we've just signed a world class defender (as far as we can assume so far) and means we now have a great back up option in Lindelof to rotate. Otherwise we were one injury away from relying on Baily and Tuanzebe. Sancho will hopefully prove to be an exceptional talent in a role where we literally had Greenwood and Dan James. Now of all the pressing concerns we had, CB and RW seemed to be a massive priority. Effectively we've spent 90 million this summer and upgraded both significantly.

4.) Ole has kept the deadwood around/we are fleeced for our player sales.
Now this one I get but some people have both these views simultaneously. We know there are some players in the squad that are not up to our standard. However, you simply can not get rid of these players for nothing else you will have a weaker position in the transfer market next time. I've seen some people say we should just accept a couple of million for Lingard and get him to West Ham. If you do that, you won't get £25 million for James later in the window. Ole has absolutely turfed out around 15 first team players in his time at the club who weren't good enough and now we finally look to have a squad of players ready to contribute. Lest you forget that Young, Valencia, Rojo, Darmian, Fellaini, Sanchez, Smalling, Perreira were all around the first team when he arrived and have since been deemed no longer good enough.

Again, there are issues with the team. If you want to point out we often go behind in games and make it hard for ourselves, that is fair enough. If you want to argue that Ole should have strengthened midfield rather than CB that is also fair enough, it's just much more complicated than flat out saying he has ignored it.

No-one wants a forum where people can't complain. We just want reasonable posts and some of you have clearly decided Ole is not good enough and make up any old reason to justify your opinion.
Click to expand...
1 and 2 showcase once again why those criticism has been justified against Young Boys. It will be a consistent theme this season and we are barely 4 games in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.