David Moyes - The Tactician
- Thread starter amolbhatia50k
- Start date
Trying to understand Moyes attempt at tactics now is still a bit difficult. He's utilised deep midfielders, but I reckon that's down to the personal available rather than anything else. His lack of imagination regarding the final third and the attacking phase of play is evident for all to see. He has placed an over emphasis on width and crosses, which I feel is Moyes being overly cautious and wary of maintaining Manchester United's classic traditions. Essentially he hasn't the bollocks.
same from what i've read and seen i know moyes can employ better tactics than what we've been seeing but nope
Our last game against Olympiacos was awful, one of the worst performances i have ever seen from a Utd side. The bit that i cant work out was the way he set the team up after the previous 2 games where we saw a change of approach and some improvement. Will Moyes give the setup he used against Arsenal more chances?
Totally agree so lethargic and uninspired. I am not surprised though his team selection must sometimes astound the players. Valencia is so out of form and to play him and Young together is a joke, In all fairness I thought Young looked a little better when he went on the right. As for tactics and Moyes I don't think he has a clue at times and sadly performances like that make it look like he has lost the players. Off with his head I say lol
I said it in the post-match thread at the time, but the individual performances of the players in the Olympiakos game were so bad I don't think it's possible to speculate at what tactical instructions Moyes had given them.
People (me included) might have made different personnel choices if we were in charge, but that team should have been able to beat Olympiakos. The players were simply abysmal on the day and that's why we lost.
But surely player performance still comes under tactics, to an extent?
For instance, Kagawa was brought on to change the game and we still continued to play it wide at every given opportunity.
And to think part of me was excited thinking with a new manager we'd move away from the zombie static game we play. Its only gotten worse 
Moyes can't locate the solution because he can't even figure out what the problem is. He is blind to form and blind to any sort of improvement we make. He must be be scratching his vacant little head right now wondering why we can't win games.
you're better off separating the two. they are related but for analytical purposes it's easier to focus on them separately
I say it's easier because sometimes a player steps up and makes the difference even if the tactics were not good
True, the best players manage themselves, that's the plan with regards Moyes I think. Sign players of such quality that the goals will flow regardless of Moyes' inability to formulate imaginative attacking phases of play.
My early scepticism about high balls into the box (rather than cut-backs) wasn't misplaced...
To an extent yeah, but like @Gladiator said, it's perfectly possible for ineffective tactical plans to be negated by great individual performances or even moments. For example the City - Sunderland cup final, Sunderland played narrow and set-up to counter and Pelligrini ultimately had no answer to it and was bailed out by Toure and Nasri pulling magic out of nowhere. History will remember City securing a comfortable 3-1 victory.
By the same logic, it's equally possible for a sound tactical plan to be undone by poor performances. It's all very well telling your players to pass through congested areas but if they're not playing well those passes will get picked off easily and you'll have the opposition coming right back at you. In the Olympiakos game the only times we had the ball for a reasonable amount of time was when we passed the ball wide, simply because there was more space available there.
There's a common theme in the way teams setup against us. In about every game, the middle is congested leaving more space out wide which we are happy to navigate. Unfortunately, we dont do anything to combat this and our attacking in wide areas is just simply too predictable.
Well the thing with the Arsenal and CP game was that he changed the system. We didnt go wide and played more through the middle. There was also a clear emphasis on retaining possession and trying to work through central midfield more. So tactically he adapted and changed for 2 games and then strangely went back to the wide approach. So on one hand he was able to change the shape and system of the team and the tactical approach but then he went back to the previous approach which failed. Was it case of the Olympiacos game he got it the tactical approach wrong?.
I guess what Im trying to say is that he does have the ability to change his tactical approach and the teams system but the failing with olympiacos is he got it wrong.
Props to you for seeing something in his game. I just don't see it. Fellaini had a few games over the years where he was a man among boys, but his style just doesn't seem to suit what we should should be trying to do, which is to control possession of the ball in a quick passing game rather than the long crossing game. For a long crossing game you couldn't ask for a better target man than Fellaini, but he fancies himself a midfielder. A predicament.
I thought Moyes went some way to addressing how to break down teams who defended deep and narrow in the Palace game. We kept Januzaj wide on the left to worry their right back whilst Fellaini pushed into the box when we had possession. His general presence and threat drew players towards him which created space for Mata and Rooney to get on the ball in central areas.
Whilst I don't agree with his personnel choices I understand why he didn't seem to try the same in the Olympiakos game as against Palace. At home they were always going to press us high up the field rather than drop deep and cede territory like Fulham or Palace did. I suspect the rationale for our selection was that Carrick and Cleverley with Rooney helping out would be okay under pressure, and Olympiakos' high pressing would leave space for pacey players to receive the ball in between their midfield and defence (which would explain why Valencia played oddly centrally). In reality Carrick and Cleverley, as well as our defenders, dealt very poorly with the pressing, Valencia and Young got sucked deeper to look for the ball and our attacking players were generally very poor in possession when they did get it.
It's interesting actually if you compare this game to a lot of the EPL games we played last season where we were dominated in by lesser teams who pressed us but still won. The key difference between those games and this one is that last season we had an amazingly in-form Carrick dragging us through the midfield battle almost single handedly and Van Persie pulling goals out of nowhere despite the team not playing particularly well. Ultimately peoples' perceptions of games are affected by the outcome, which is fair enough, we're all fans and we're all passionate, but the level of criticism on here for Moyes is way over the top given the clearly sub-par performances we've seen from some of the players. For example when we were 2-0 down, Van Persie got a great chance but skied in over the bar. For all the talk of tactical ineptitude, Moyes has no control over world class players passing up that kind of chance..
Last edited:
Just signed a new deal with Atletico but Raul Garcia would be a great buy for Moyes in the summer if he failed to land his main midfield targets.....Garcia is a 6 footer and scores loads of goals and is good at the defensive work too......Exactly the kind of player we should have looked to buy last summer.....Atletico would surely do a deal for the right price.....I'm not too confident of our chances of landing Kroos or Gundogan over the summer
But we didnt really break them down until the penalty. Then Palace being the home team had to come out and attack more which opened the spaces in our favor. So for me, I didn't really learn much from that game because so far this season, we've been decent when the game is open and less so when it's restricted. With the players he picked for that game, it meant more ball retention and possession but once again, our tempo and rhythm still wasn't right but we looked better after the penalty AND that's the aspect of the game our fans, in general, will remember. So I'm still not sure if that was a step in the right direction or me overly looking for positives in what's been a disappointing season thus far. Because in my mind, signs of progress shouldn't be popping up once in a blue moon.
Think Valencia was central against Olympiakos was more for a defensive reason than attacking. Because if it was for attacking you would want him wider to take the ball down the flank. The reasoning behind this is that an Olympiakos player has to shift their attention to the onrushing Valencia. Plus, Valencia usually does better dribbling the ball into space. Since Olympiakos were pressing high, probably not the best idea to have him in a central position as a counterattacking outlet.
Nonetheless, since this would be ideally happening on the counterattack a runner from midfield would be in space for Valencia to play the ball in which case the player receiving the ball can either switch play, advance with the ball or find one of the attacking players who you would want to be higher up. Since Moyes wanted us to be compact, seeing Valencia central made sense but we lost our shape regardless.
I'm not sure if the criticsm for Moyes is over the top because that depends what you criticism you're talking about. He set us up to be compact more than to go at Olympiakos. If the players as a whole are underperforming, then most likely there will be criticism in the manager's direction. The blame shouldn't lay solely at his feet but he's certainly made mistakes and in this business when the results aren't coming you're going to get criticised.
Once again, on last season, the other players deserve credit. I believe we had 20 different scorers (14 league goals combined between our defenders) so you could surmise that our players had a telling impact at some point throughout the season. Carrick's form and Rvp's goals played a major part but it's revisionism to forget about the times where they were not at their best and someone else stepped up. One example is the away game to Villa where we went two down in the first half and then Sir Alex brought on Hernandez at half time who then sprung up with two goals and allegedly a third which ended being called as an own goal. In that scenario, Hernandez answered the call. Obviously other players played a part in that game but using Hernandez to make my point about players other than VP or Carrick stepping up.
That season epitomised our winning mentality under SAF as well as our determination to win the title back even if we weren't playing well. So to dum it down to VP and Carrick is imo wrong. How can you forget Hernandez's winner against Newcastle or Rooney's gamewinning goal against Fulham? You also have examples such as de Gea's saves in fulham,newcastle,city, everton games just to name some which were also vital as well.
Last edited:
I think you underrate his ability on the ball.
He must be scratching his head why everything went wrong
He got better players, he got mata, he got Januzaj, Rooney, RvP, why in the world his tactics that works at Everton can't work with United. His logic surely thinks that : I can get 6th with Everton playing this tactics, surely everything else the same but better player means 2nd or 3rd, and he's further scratching his head as to why in the world it doesn't work out with United, it worked with Everton, it's trusted over 10 season, why it doesn't work?
He practically left out all players with technical skill (rafael, kagawa) and persist with Young, Valencia, because they track back, and for Moyes, it's always defend first, and hope for goals somehow, somewhere
I bet he can organise the defence very well, but when it comes to what are our options in breaking the bus parked infront of the goal, he'll probably go smiling and smirkfully says "We cross more"
EDIT: Imo, he already lost the dressing room long before today, hence the players doesn't look that much bothered about improvising / creating a goal out of nothing (bar Januzaj, probably because he's given the license), something tells me that Moyes doesn't really like his players being creative and disturbing his rigid system, hence anyone with a graft of flair (kagawa) gets shifted into the bench. RvP and Rooney and almost everyone seems to just go with the motions, and just wait for his inevitable sacking, or their retirement / transfer, whichever comes first.
There's no goal, no project, no glory to play for, not even 4th, no manager to die for, nothing to prove, no wonder they never give a damn about the results and their performance.
It's all down to Moyes, For all the excuse we provide him, most people failed to answer one thing :
"Why do we owe Moyes all this? What makes him so special we bend all our expectations and go the extra miles to save his career? what has he given us that merits such perseverance? Is it our wishful thinking of he might come good and that alone?"
I can understand if Manchester United continues to give Fletcher / Cleverly even Anderson chance after chance to prove themselves in the past, because they have given something to us in the past, but Moyes... just fecking sack him, we're not charity, and if he succeeds one day, do you think he'll be grateful and won't ask for a raise? he'll probably milk us every penny he can for that.
He got better players, he got mata, he got Januzaj, Rooney, RvP, why in the world his tactics that works at Everton can't work with United. His logic surely thinks that : I can get 6th with Everton playing this tactics, surely everything else the same but better player means 2nd or 3rd, and he's further scratching his head as to why in the world it doesn't work out with United, it worked with Everton, it's trusted over 10 season, why it doesn't work?
He practically left out all players with technical skill (rafael, kagawa) and persist with Young, Valencia, because they track back, and for Moyes, it's always defend first, and hope for goals somehow, somewhere
I bet he can organise the defence very well, but when it comes to what are our options in breaking the bus parked infront of the goal, he'll probably go smiling and smirkfully says "We cross more"
EDIT: Imo, he already lost the dressing room long before today, hence the players doesn't look that much bothered about improvising / creating a goal out of nothing (bar Januzaj, probably because he's given the license), something tells me that Moyes doesn't really like his players being creative and disturbing his rigid system, hence anyone with a graft of flair (kagawa) gets shifted into the bench. RvP and Rooney and almost everyone seems to just go with the motions, and just wait for his inevitable sacking, or their retirement / transfer, whichever comes first.
There's no goal, no project, no glory to play for, not even 4th, no manager to die for, nothing to prove, no wonder they never give a damn about the results and their performance.
It's all down to Moyes, For all the excuse we provide him, most people failed to answer one thing :
"Why do we owe Moyes all this? What makes him so special we bend all our expectations and go the extra miles to save his career? what has he given us that merits such perseverance? Is it our wishful thinking of he might come good and that alone?"
I can understand if Manchester United continues to give Fletcher / Cleverly even Anderson chance after chance to prove themselves in the past, because they have given something to us in the past, but Moyes... just fecking sack him, we're not charity, and if he succeeds one day, do you think he'll be grateful and won't ask for a raise? he'll probably milk us every penny he can for that.
Last edited:
Using the Arsenal game as a positive as to how we set up isn't correct IMO. We had to play that way that day. It was always going to be sit back, soak up the pressure and hope we can get a goal on the break. We weren't going to take Arsenal head and especially not in our current predicament. It's the "normal" games that are the issue. So, I'd say the Palace game was the anomaly where we set up in an improved manner, but sadly that's what it was - an anomaly.
it's post like this which lend me to think we're overreaching for positive signs
It's going to happen, isn't it? It's a period of overwhelming negativity so there's always an inkling to hang on to any possible positives there may be.
That's why so many of us were feeling pretty great after the CP game despite it being an okay performance which could have gone either way.
I'm not even sure we played the way he wanted us to in the Arsenal game. His reaction when Cleverley passed it back said it all.
Yeah I mean based on some of the players we have in this team, there's definitely a good performance in there somewhere. Perhaps it's just the fact we've done so poorly this season that as you say, we want hang on to any positives we see. Question is whether or not that positive is a sign of progress or something else.
Anything under 80 crosses a game could be considered an improvement now...
The Palace game was nothing more than okay, like you said, and we still struggled to create chances before we were kindly handed a penalty. Wanting to implement a different system is step one, making it work is step two and it's not a given either. We're still not even at step one on a permanent basis.
But you also have posters who turn mute points into a massive negative just because they are panicking. Ultimately what's happening here is emotion is driving away logic and thought from opinions. You might have someone turn something into a very positive thing or a very negative thing when in actual fact it probably means nothing at all lol.
Although I think this squad is worthy title challenges/titles as of now, I wouldnt mind our current predicament nearly as much if we were actually overhauling our system completely. I think we need to move with the times and reinvent ourselves in a sense (although I do think we should be right up there regardless). But to be where we currently and not even going in any particular direction but backwards along our previously taken steps, is inexcusable.
Fergie's retirement was sad, of course, but there were positives. In terms of football style we have stalled, and I thought a new manager with a new approach would see us play a different brand of football. It needed to happen. Unfortunately out of all the progressive options out there we went for someone who has not shown that sort of approach with his team and might not have it in him to do so.
Yeah, I've no issues with a crappy year like this if we see progress. But we've seen nothing this season that we can build on for the next one. I firmly believe a quality manager would have had us in the mix for the title. Right now we've got the worst of all worlds. We're just trying to do the same thing. And now it appears our great new hope is the chequebook.
Absolutely.
I find it interesting that the journos never (or rarely if I'm not aware of when they did) seem to quiz Moyes about our playing style. It was okay not asking Fergie why his team was so dull as compared to the usual Fergie sides, but Moyes isn't succeding, he's failing in every way. I'd love to hear him talk about the game a bit more so we can get some insight into his vision, if there is one.
honest question here- do we have interview, serious analysis, anything concrete that would reveal what is Moyes' idea for football?
We hear bits and pieces on his tactics but it's nothing solid.
We hear bits and pieces on his tactics but it's nothing solid.
haha indeed. keep in mind emotion not always divorced from logic, hence the term "emotional logic" though in some circles defined as "partially a semantical theory".
It's when it's used as an appeal, that as you say is "driving away logic"
The nature of journalism in the UK doesnt really lend itself to gleaning a lot about tactics. Probably because they're not so knowledgeable about it themselves. Plus, most things they write is for an audience who on a general scale, doesnt really seem to have a vested interest in tactics.
It does annoy me that managers aren't quizzed more about their tactics because I feel that's a part of the game which provides a lot of insight but we usually have to hear about it from sources other than journalists unless you're a Michael Cox. For example I had to listen to an Evertonian podcast just to glean some sense of Martinez's tactical and philosophical ideas which are very refreshing by the way.
In italy, it's completely different. One of the first realisations Rafa Benitez had about Italian press is they ask more questions about tactics and for someone like him, I think it suits him perfectly. He's doing a decent job with Napoli and got them playing some good stuff too.
Yeah, this has been an odd one all season.
Now we're at the point where we're hearing club ambassadors talking about us "needing to clear out a lot of players", surely first it's imperative to know what it is he's actually trying to do, and why the players we've got somehow aren't capable of making this happen.
We set up for the Arsenal game the same way as the CP game.
Not at all.
@Stack i'm a bit confused by that, we had much more possession of the ball against CP. Against arsenal we looked to exploit the spaces they left behind
What Im talking about is the style of play and how and where we tried to move the ball when going forward. Defensively against Arsenal it was always going to be harder because of the quality of players they have. So of course there were going to be periods where we saw little of the ball, however when we got the ball we looked to work it in the same way we did against CP.
The point I was trying to get at was that I dont get why we headed down the path we did with the ball against Arsenal and CP but then reverted to the wide game against Olympiacos.
personnel. it still falls under the category of reactionary tactics which is why i dont really have a great idea of what moyes is playing at.
But despite the personnel in either of those games, we still used the wide areas quite heavily. It just didn't require a long diagonal switch