Not all of us who think he should be gone think the same way and see the same reasons, so of course there will not be a single minded argument about why he should be sacked.
So I can only speak for me here when I answer to your post.
I do think he has a clear tactical direction, which is a change to his Ajax philosophy, and he sticks to this idea during the whole season. But I think he has no clue to fix the issues this results in as he changes nothing after committing to this idea how to become an amazing transition team. And I personally don't think that this tactical approach will ever work consistently.
Which is the difference to Ange, I get how this system is supposed to work and I think its strength and weaknesses are balanced in a reasonable way. I don't see this reasonable way with EtH's tactics.
Winning games by riding your luck is unsustainable, playing well but failing to score is unsustainable as well. But a team that plays well is more likely to pick up results again. A win is a win and in hindsight I don't care, but looking forward I do care about how the matches looked.
Rashford is a case in point that I don't see how his tactics should work - he looks terrible, but it also looks like he is forced to play so far out wide that it just doesn't suit him, so it would be reasonable to try a different player if he wants to keep his tactics, or vice versa keep Rashford and adjust the tactics. Sancho just is a case that escalated far beyond what's reasonable but Sancho definitely played the bigger role in this escalation.
It's perfectly fine that other people have different reasons to dislike than me, just like those who want him to stay can have different reasons why the want that.
You're supposed to be a Hannover 96 fan.
I truly don't know why you care what happens to the Manchester United manager, but there we are.
To partially entertain you, if any of these people had focused on Ten Hag's tactics not working, that'd be fine. They clearly aren't.
However, they're not saying that. The tactics not working is not the focus of their criticism.
The tactics weren't working because they were shit tactics that didn't match his philosophy and he changed it to fit the players and/or "The United Way" and if he was a good coach he'd stick to his guns, but that was only true until they weren't working because he was sticking to his guns despite the players not being good enough and he was a good coach he'd adapt to suit them.
These things cannot both be true, and expose a vocal group of posters of having absolutely no good faith in their posts regarding the manager. If it's a stick to beat Ten Hag with they'll pick it up and claim to have been holding it all along.
I don't disagree with a lot of your specific analysis.
It's obviously a jump from the Eredivisie to the Premier League and what worked there might not work here.
From what I've seen, Ange-ball seems suicidal and very much not sustainable for long-term consistency. It reminds me of Rodgers' Liverpool and Bielsa at Leeds.
The current form and performances are obviously unsustainable. The optimist in me has hoped players returning from injury would see us turn things around, but the clock is very much ticking there and this next run of fixtures is absolutely crucial. A bad run of results will likely see us sink well out of the hunt for top four.
I'm beginning to think that I've vastly overrated Rashford's ability and potential. There's definitely a "square peg, round hole" argument to be made about some of his tactical suitability, but the fact is that he's spent much of the season quite blatantly not putting in the effort. Pressing and tracking back are not complicated skills, they're just a basic expectation, and he repeatedly fails to deliver on even that basic level.
