For all those who make unlimited excuses for ETH, I want to ask you a very simple question.
Just remove from the equation that Ajax 2018/19 season where Frenkie De Jong demonstrated that he is truly a generational talent and was within seconds of carrying Ajax to the Champions League final.
Let us also consider that after Frenkie’s departure to FC Barcelona, Ajax’s performances in Europe have been as follows:
-2019/20: 3rd in group stage and round of 16 exit in the Europa (Getafe).
-2020/21: 3rd in group stage and quarter final exit in the Europa (AS Roma).
-2021/22: 1st in the group stage (relatively easier group but 6 wins in 6 deserves credit) and round of 16 exit (Benfica).
Has Ten Hag done enough in his career to earn the role of Manchester United manager?
I ask this because when I was excited about Ten Hag’s hiring, I preferred him to Pochettino. I felt that Ten Hag was on an upward trajectory compared to Poch. This was due to a perception that he was over-performing with Ajax and pulling rabbits out of the hat.
But looking back on it, while his European feats may have been remarkable by the standards of Ajax and an Eredivisie club, they do not seem enough to get the job at a club like United.
Granted he may have been hired for the style of play implemented at Ajax (even though Ajax have a structure and tradition that is conducive to possession football). Perhaps the thinking was that, if he had access to the resources at United, he would get us over-achieving too.
But where are the giant killings during which he displayed the tactical nous that gives a team the edge following the sale of Frenkie? Getting eliminated from Europe by Getafe and Benfica isn’t a good look.
I started having these thoughts after the 7-0 at Anfield but this torrid start to the season has solidified them. The dysfunctional environment at United is a fair excuse, but I’ve seen Big Ange at Spurs already implement a style of play with far worse players and he inherited from Conte and Mourinho!
United’s squad is blamed for Ten Hag’s failures but I question his squad building also. For example, why did he sign Hojlund? He is a good player, but given Rashford’s contract and that he is an untouchable Carrington product, it would have made sense to sign a number 9 that plays to his strengths, perhaps the same profile as Martial. Someone who drops deep, connects the play and creates space for Rashford to run in behind. Instead we signed a strikers who’s strengths are also running in behind, which subsequently exposes Rashford’s weaknesses (he doesn’t cross often and he can’t create chances). Ironically enough, the perfect profile to bring out the best of our £72m signing is someone like Sancho but he has not even had a chance to play with him.
I could go on all day about Ten Hag’s confusing tactical choices:
- Bruno on the right-wing.
-Weghorst and Antony’s unlimited chances
The 3-1-6 build-up that leaves the 1 isolated on defensive transitions.
- Playing two number 10s but without one of the full-backs inverting to solidify the middle.
-The ‘minimum width’ principle whereby wingers do not stretch the opposition defensive which then creates congestion in-front of the opponents goal and lets them stay compact.
All of these things are making me view Ten Hag as more LvG than a future SAF. For the life of me I cannot understand the logic of these choices and I would really appreciate it if somebody explained to me their pros because all I can see is cons! Please feel free to enlighten me. I am willing to change my mind upon the receiving new information.
Perhaps the Ten Hag we wanted to envisage in our heads is not the same Ten Hag we have in front of us.