Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

This is a good read and I would subscribe to the ideas. One thing though - I don't know if we really can be sure that the level of fluidity is the problem or if what we are seeing are to some degree teething issues. I mean, at least I didn't expect our team to transition to a more refined way of playing football without some pain coming along with it. What you call fluidity, I named lack of synchronization. And I think, a bit problematic workrate in the wrong areas is also not helping the issue.

So yes, I think your observation of the issue is pretty plausible I just think that some of the adaptation errors are inevitable, no matter who the manager is or would have been. Some of the players we have certain have not the roundest skillsets to perform in the modern system. One question could or should be - are we looking for a guy who maximize the output of the current crop of players or are we better off updating the way we play and change some of the players?

Honestly at this point I don’t know how any footballing decision maker can come in and go “yeah let’s run it back with Rashford, Bruno, and the rest they just haven’t had the right players/manager around them”. It’s like the definition of insanity if we just keep the same popular names around and expect a different result.

 

[AneRu]

I think he's also lucky there's little obvious quality in the managerial market at the minute.

Honestly I am leaning towards doing a Barca style appointment, don't concern yourself with reputations but just look at the style, tactical adaptability to different situations and mentality. If we have have the bag to spend on transfers to raise the bottom level of the team and we have sorted the recruitment by removing the manager from the centre I'd give it to Mckena or Carrick - that's how Pep started after all.

There is no obvious candidate who would come in as a consensus candidate, the likes of Flick or Nagelsmann all have recent sackings behind them. In fact the reason we now know about Flick is that someone took a chance on him. We have a couple of coaches with a strong connection to us doing well, I think we should just take a chance on one of them and if it doesn't work then so be it we were likely going to fail, as we have before, with the more experienced guy anyway.

 

[Irwin99]

Glad people are fighting back on the idea that he has no game plan when he clearly does, it's just not a very good one, at least on the evidence so far.

I'm puzzled when people bring up his Ajax legacy and say it's why he's struggling in the league though- i thought he pretty much admitted that he's not looking to play anything like the Ajax brand of football here because "you have to play direct here" and "transitions and United DNA" and all that crap. That's been the biggest disappointment for me as I thought we were getting a manager who valued possession football and good technique. We played some decent stuff at times last season too, it wasn't entirely like this.

 

[tjb]

This is a good read and I would subscribe to the ideas. One thing though - I don't know if we really can be sure that the level of fluidity is the problem or if what we are seeing are to some degree teething issues. I mean, at least I didn't expect our team to transition to a more refined way of playing football without some pain coming along with it. What you call fluidity, I named lack of synchronization. And I think, a bit problematic workrate in the wrong areas is also not helping the issue.

So yes, I think your observation of the issue is pretty plausible I just think that some of the adaptation errors are inevitable, no matter who the manager is or would have been. Some of the players we have certain have not the roundest skillsets to perform in the modern system. One question could or should be - are we looking for a guy who maximize the output of the current crop of players or are we better off updating the way we play and change some of the players?

That is what I initially believed as well. Then I realized that no English team, or even a La Liga team, has ever been as daring with their defending as Ten Haag was at Ajax. Blind, Lisandro, Timber, and Mazraoui were continually in positions that defenders do not often play in. They played an important role in the team's ability to move the ball and create opportunities. This was also a little concern I had about Ten Haag, given his methods in his previous season were extremely distinctive. Alvarez, Gravenberch, and Berghuis were not very active. Blind, Lisandro, and Timber were averaging over 70 passes per game, over 30 more than the midfielders, who were virtually runners. His Ajax team could afford to overload their flanks with four players, push a very high defensive line, and have defensive players settle further up the pitch since their opponents lacked the quality to consistently exploit their highly offensive style. In England, any team can take advantage of that with pure physicality.

The issue he has at United is that, even at its finest, his tactic is still too open to succeed most of the time. As we've seen, the tactic requires defenders with the technical and athletic ability to maintain and move the ball, as well as close gaps in midfield or behind them. It needs these players to be technically superior to the attackers they face, and when even one member of that defensive line fails to do so, the buildup play collapses. In Ten Haag's opinion, regaining Shaw, Casemiro, and Licha implies that we can get closer to his aspirations. However, I don't see the tactic being strong enough to have us pinning teams back sufficiently to have a four-man overload down the flanks, and I also see us being readily exploited on counters, meaning that even improvements in build-up and possession are unlikely to constantly lead to wins/improved results. Ten Haag understands the complexity of what he's seeking to implement, which is why he hasn't attempted to build up play since November. This is why Onana has been kicking so much.

This is why Ten Haag irritates me at this point. He knows the problems but isn't even willing to take the risk of finding new solutions, while still stubbornly sticking to the formation. We haven't seen him try a 3 at the back formation, work more on the diamond, or even refrain from having the full backs move around. Yet he's expecting us to wait for him to employ a tactic he's not even sure would work. For me, it shows how limited he is, but also how dour he is creatively. He doesn't have a plan b and lacks the urgency to succeed, which is why he has dallied without even trying to look for corrections or solutions.

The biggest issue with his tactic, even if it were successful, is that it requires specially skilled defenders to function properly. How many defenders in the world are you going to find that can be as technically gifted as a midfielder or attacker? That means, by nature, given the size of the club and the amount of competition we play in, we are bound to fail. There will always be a drop off in quality from starters to the bench, and this tactic is ill-suited for that change. Yet Ten Haag is stubbornly persisting with it because he doesn't have anything else in his locker. A decent manager would have tried to find other tactical solutions and shapes when they initially saw these flaws. Outside of 90 minutes against Brighton, Ten Haag hasn't even attempted to deviate from the shape. He's not even experimenting tactically. Just giving the same trash every week and expecting change.

 

[Ludens the Red]

You're right there is a playing pattern.

However, it's actually what's killing this team and I'm surprised fans and the media have been so blind to the tactics. It's putting our players in impossible situations, yet their getting roasted for lacking quality. Ten Haag's tactics have actually been setting them up for failure this season.

Firstly, it's too fluid. Players are always trying to move into positions that leave them completely vulnerable on the counter. It also leaves them in poor positions to counter attack as well, as players are poorly positioned consistently. This is why there are so many gaps and why the spaces between players can be so wide. It's an issue of fluidity. In fact, our midfield and defence have looked so horrible as a result of fluidity in these zones. Centre backs moving to full back zones when on the ball, full backs moving into centre midfield and noone covering them. It makes it difficult to recover the ball from counterattacking situations when players are positioned that way, because it always leaves us disorganized out of possession. City and Arsenal have far more structure in these zones. Stones still pretty much stays central and plays as an extra DM, whilst the full backs tuck in so that they are still solid at the back. In addition, Pep is much better at employing machination of this manner than ETH, so he can make that work in England. Its not an easy tactic to employ. It may have worked for Ten Haag in a much slower and less physical Eredivisie, but its leaving our defence exposed in England.

Secondly, our current midfield shape is ridiculous. 4141 worked for City because they knew how to properly employ inverted full backs. Zinchenko was essentially a midfielder, as was Delph. They could support Rodri/Fernandinho when required. In addition, they were still more compact and much better at covering positions. City were also playing at a slower pace with keeping the ball being imperative. There were always enough players behind the ball to cover in case of the counter, as they were both compact and deliberate....the exact opposite of what we are.

Thirdly, Our pressing is ridiculous, particularly for the shape of our team. There isn't enough cover to press that highly and not win back the ball. In addition, we don't play as high a line as we should, which leaves the opposition with loads of space to attack us when we don't recover on the initial press.

Fourthly, our shape leaves our DM completely isolated. It also presents a gap between Defence and attack as in possession, the DM is not able to make up the gap in midfield on his own. Out of possession, it leave the DM completely exposed.

Hence we can't progress the ball forward because players aren't in great positions in the build up, our attackers are too far away from our defenders who have the ball and there are too many gaps in the shape, leaving our players constantly surrounded. However, fans will ask " why can't we play well in possession...Bruno". It's not Bruno, it's the tactics.

We have massive gaps due to too much fluidity, being far too wide and having a massive gap between our DM's his midfield partners. Again, this is put on players like Casemiro, when it's actually a tactical flaw. It worked in Holland because Ajax always had the physical and technical advantage to either win the first press or recover. However in England, the levels are far higher and the pace as far more.

We don't create chances because we don't have a sustainable plan of attack. Yes our wingers are selfish, but for our manager to not have a route to Hojlund is ridiculous.

We don't score goals....because we don't create chances. Yet people here talked about Hojlund and how having Kane would change everything. It would not. Ronaldo was the sign of what would happen to Kane. Fans would complain about his lack of pressing and blame him for our inability to gain possession, whilst expecting him to score every chance he gets.

Some of our players have technical flaws, but at the moment we suck because our manager sucks. It's there in the games, but noone wants to call it out because they think the Ajax connection makes Ten Haag much better than he is.

Spot on.

 

[DSG]

Again no one said there is no fault on coaching. Also what is this about tactics? I made a comment specific to the defending in the game. Our defending was also much better last season when we had a settled back line. Its no going to be as good when we have the injuries this does not just apply to United it applies to all the teams in the league.

I have no interest in a conversation about blaming the manager for everything. At the end of the day if the manager gets sacked and a new one comes in fair enough its not really a big deal for me.

What is clear though is that we need a better squad irrespective of any of that we are especially exposed when we have injuries because our squad is unbalanced and lacks quality even in the 11 in some positions let alone the depth. This is an undeniable fact and you should refrain from trying to deny it just because you want to make a case against the manager

Look mate, it’s hard to say that coaching is not an issue on set piece defending. You’ve said so yourself. If you look back at my posts, you’ll see that I’ve called for more quality in the squad as well. But you can’t absolve ETH of responsibility in coaching and results, despite the lack of quality in the side.

Frankly, I think the Caf narrative on Casemiro is actually a bit blasphemous… He was amazing for us last season. I feel the criticism is more on Ten Hag’s tactics vs his own performances. When Casemiro made his bones as maybe the best DM in the world, neither Kroos nor Modric were as far forward as Bruno and Mount.Too me, he was left on an island and in today’s modern football, it’s tough to have just one DM to break the high press.

I guess where we differ is the line where we think ETH is an issue or not. I think despite his challenges with club structure and leadership, he’s been sub par. I don’t think he’ll win us the league with a perfect club structure and recruitment. Maybe you do? I dunno. Anyhow, agree to disagree

 

[chocolate cloud]

Can someone in the media ask him why the switch to 4141 this season? We saw it in the first game vs Wolves. Absolutely baffling.

 

[chocolate cloud]

Is everyone in the club banking on Martinez, Shaw and Casemiro suddenly reforming us? Mount ain't gonna do anything. I don't see anyone else of note coming back from injury to magically make us play 4141 any better. He's sending out everyone possible on loan including Amad. Will be nice to see Onana gone for a while. Even if Bayindir plays great instead, he's gonna be replaced immediately when Onana returns. The club is on a freefall. This is Manchester United we're talking about. Why wait till summer. Act now for goodness sake and get someone in that actually wants to play with a midfield.

 

[DRJosh]

I agree with the previous posts on our fluidity and its implications when our players aren’t able to cover the gaps they leave. I think the overall issue with ETH is that he isn’t as adaptive as people make him out to be. the irony is that there is an element of misplaced rigidness to how he sets us up despite his emphasis on fluid positioning etc.

 

[kouroux]

Glad people are fighting back on the idea that he has no game plan when he clearly does, it's just not a very good one, at least on the evidence so far.

I'm puzzled when people bring up his Ajax legacy and say it's why he's struggling in the league though- i thought he pretty much admitted that he's not looking to play anything like the Ajax brand of football here because "you have to play direct here" and "transitions and United DNA" and all that crap. That's been the biggest disappointment for me as I thought we were getting a manager who valued possession football and good technique. We played some decent stuff at times last season too, it wasn't entirely like this.

I've always considered those as an excuse for his failure. There are indeed other teams who have no issue playing a possession based style football in the PL.

 

[Borys]

You're right there is a playing pattern.

However, it's actually what's killing this team and I'm surprised fans and the media have been so blind to the tactics. It's putting our players in impossible situations, yet their getting roasted for lacking quality. Ten Haag's tactics have actually been setting them up for failure this season.

Firstly, it's too fluid. Players are always trying to move into positions that leave them completely vulnerable on the counter. It also leaves them in poor positions to counter attack as well, as players are poorly positioned consistently. This is why there are so many gaps and why the spaces between players can be so wide. It's an issue of fluidity. In fact, our midfield and defence have looked so horrible as a result of fluidity in these zones. Centre backs moving to full back zones when on the ball, full backs moving into centre midfield and noone covering them. It makes it difficult to recover the ball from counterattacking situations when players are positioned that way, because it always leaves us disorganized out of possession. City and Arsenal have far more structure in these zones. Stones still pretty much stays central and plays as an extra DM, whilst the full backs tuck in so that they are still solid at the back. In addition, Pep is much better at employing machination of this manner than ETH, so he can make that work in England. Its not an easy tactic to employ. It may have worked for Ten Haag in a much slower and less physical Eredivisie, but its leaving our defence exposed in England.

Secondly, our current midfield shape is ridiculous. 4141 worked for City because they knew how to properly employ inverted full backs. Zinchenko was essentially a midfielder, as was Delph. They could support Rodri/Fernandinho when required. In addition, they were still more compact and much better at covering positions. City were also playing at a slower pace with keeping the ball being imperative. There were always enough players behind the ball to cover in case of the counter, as they were both compact and deliberate....the exact opposite of what we are.

Thirdly, Our pressing is ridiculous, particularly for the shape of our team. There isn't enough cover to press that highly and not win back the ball. In addition, we don't play as high a line as we should, which leaves the opposition with loads of space to attack us when we don't recover on the initial press.

Fourthly, our shape leaves our DM completely isolated. It also presents a gap between Defence and attack as in possession, the DM is not able to make up the gap in midfield on his own. Out of possession, it leave the DM completely exposed.

Hence we can't progress the ball forward because players aren't in great positions in the build up, our attackers are too far away from our defenders who have the ball and there are too many gaps in the shape, leaving our players constantly surrounded. However, fans will ask " why can't we play well in possession...Bruno". It's not Bruno, it's the tactics.

We have massive gaps due to too much fluidity, being far too wide and having a massive gap between our DM's his midfield partners. Again, this is put on players like Casemiro, when it's actually a tactical flaw. It worked in Holland because Ajax always had the physical and technical advantage to either win the first press or recover. However in England, the levels are far higher and the pace as far more.

We don't create chances because we don't have a sustainable plan of attack. Yes our wingers are selfish, but for our manager to not have a route to Hojlund is ridiculous.

We don't score goals....because we don't create chances. Yet people here talked about Hojlund and how having Kane would change everything. It would not. Ronaldo was the sign of what would happen to Kane. Fans would complain about his lack of pressing and blame him for our inability to gain possession, whilst expecting him to score every chance he gets.

Some of our players have technical flaws, but at the moment we suck because our manager sucks. It's there in the games, but noone wants to call it out because they think the Ajax connection makes Ten Haag much better than he is.

I agree with pretty much all you wrote here but the bit about Kane/Hojlund is not accurate.
Kane biggest strength (apart from scoring goals) is bringing the others into play and assisting in progressing the ball. This is what current United team is lacking, especially if we play with too many forwards rather than wingers. So it made sense to go Kane type of striker rather than a guy who can finish, but doesn't bring much else into play.

On the bolded part, I always thought this is the definition of pattern of play, meaning a clear way to progress the ball from defence to attack. We don't have one unless you count in Bruno hitting diagonal ball for Rashford to chase.

 

[Phil Osophy]

You're right there is a playing pattern.

However, it's actually what's killing this team and I'm surprised fans and the media have been so blind to the tactics. It's putting our players in impossible situations, yet their getting roasted for lacking quality. Ten Haag's tactics have actually been setting them up for failure this season.

Firstly, it's too fluid. Players are always trying to move into positions that leave them completely vulnerable on the counter. It also leaves them in poor positions to counter attack as well, as players are poorly positioned consistently. This is why there are so many gaps and why the spaces between players can be so wide. It's an issue of fluidity. In fact, our midfield and defence have looked so horrible as a result of fluidity in these zones. Centre backs moving to full back zones when on the ball, full backs moving into centre midfield and noone covering them. It makes it difficult to recover the ball from counterattacking situations when players are positioned that way, because it always leaves us disorganized out of possession. City and Arsenal have far more structure in these zones. Stones still pretty much stays central and plays as an extra DM, whilst the full backs tuck in so that they are still solid at the back. In addition, Pep is much better at employing machination of this manner than ETH, so he can make that work in England. Its not an easy tactic to employ. It may have worked for Ten Haag in a much slower and less physical Eredivisie, but its leaving our defence exposed in England.

Secondly, our current midfield shape is ridiculous. 4141 worked for City because they knew how to properly employ inverted full backs. Zinchenko was essentially a midfielder, as was Delph. They could support Rodri/Fernandinho when required. In addition, they were still more compact and much better at covering positions. City were also playing at a slower pace with keeping the ball being imperative. There were always enough players behind the ball to cover in case of the counter, as they were both compact and deliberate....the exact opposite of what we are.

Thirdly, Our pressing is ridiculous, particularly for the shape of our team. There isn't enough cover to press that highly and not win back the ball. In addition, we don't play as high a line as we should, which leaves the opposition with loads of space to attack us when we don't recover on the initial press.

Fourthly, our shape leaves our DM completely isolated. It also presents a gap between Defence and attack as in possession, the DM is not able to make up the gap in midfield on his own. Out of possession, it leave the DM completely exposed.

Hence we can't progress the ball forward because players aren't in great positions in the build up, our attackers are too far away from our defenders who have the ball and there are too many gaps in the shape, leaving our players constantly surrounded. However, fans will ask " why can't we play well in possession...Bruno". It's not Bruno, it's the tactics.

We have massive gaps due to too much fluidity, being far too wide and having a massive gap between our DM's his midfield partners. Again, this is put on players like Casemiro, when it's actually a tactical flaw. It worked in Holland because Ajax always had the physical and technical advantage to either win the first press or recover. However in England, the levels are far higher and the pace as far more.

We don't create chances because we don't have a sustainable plan of attack. Yes our wingers are selfish, but for our manager to not have a route to Hojlund is ridiculous.

We don't score goals....because we don't create chances. Yet people here talked about Hojlund and how having Kane would change everything. It would not. Ronaldo was the sign of what would happen to Kane. Fans would complain about his lack of pressing and blame him for our inability to gain possession, whilst expecting him to score every chance he gets.

Some of our players have technical flaws, but at the moment we suck because our manager sucks. It's there in the games, but noone wants to call it out because they think the Ajax connection makes Ten Haag much better than he is.

Very good analysis. No matter from which angle you look at our performances, it's a royal mess from top to bottom. I've never seen a United team as chaotic and poorly organized as this one.

With our previous managers it's relatively easy to identify what they developed and what we were missing. With this clown I can't see what he's providing when the attacking phase is a such mess, the pressing game is the equivalent of a crazy horse, midfield is unbalanced and defense are left exposed. 13th in xG, 15th in xG against. We're throwing all the wood there without getting any fire.

And the worst part is that he keeps insisting on the same weird things, despite the team getting worse each time as the confidence levels keep getting eroded progressively as the players are being set up to fail. He's either stupid or he wants to get the sack, I don't see any other option at this point.

 

[Scorpy]

Glad people are fighting back on the idea that he has no game plan when he clearly does, it's just not a very good one, at least on the evidence so far.

I'm puzzled when people bring up his Ajax legacy and say it's why he's struggling in the league though- i thought he pretty much admitted that he's not looking to play anything like the Ajax brand of football here because "you have to play direct here" and "transitions and United DNA" and all that crap. That's been the biggest disappointment for me as I thought we were getting a manager who valued possession football and good technique. We played some decent stuff at times last season too, it wasn't entirely like this.

That's what makes him a fraud and an utter failure here. One Carabao Cup changes feck all in that regard.

- We're very impressed by the job you've done at Ajax - playing very entertaining football and dominating the biggest clubs in Europe in the Champions League with a distinct playing style. We'd be very excited to see you implement this philosophy at our club.
- Nah, I'm not feelin' it mate, I'll just freestyle everything without using what made me successful in the first place and we'll play nothing like Ajax. We'll still sign some players who made my system work at Ajax for vastly inflated fees and some other former players of mine, but will continue playing direct - the United way. Ye know, I need players who are already familiar with my playing style and methods from previous clubs so I can make them play differently here.
- You're hired!

 

[Zehner]

That's what makes him a fraud and an utter failure here. One Carabao Cup changes feck all in that regard.

- We're very impressed by the job you've done at Ajax - playing very entertaining football and dominating the biggest clubs in Europe in the Champions League with a distinct playing style. We'd be very excited to see you implement this philosophy at our club.
- Nah, I'm not feelin' it mate, I'll just freestyle everything without using what made me successful in the first place and we'll play nothing like Ajax. We'll still sign some players who made my system work at Ajax for vastly inflated fees and some other former players of mine, but will continue playing direct - the United way. Ye know, I need players who are already familiar with my playing style and methods from previous clubs so I can make them play differently here.
- You're hired!

I wonder if that is a 100% on Ten Hag or if the club officials demanded he give the system he played at Ajax a "United spin" or something along those lines as some sort of saving grave for him. Considering how much bargaining power he had duing the contract negotiations (veto right on transfers etc.), I don't think he would agree on a brand of football he's not fully on board with, though. So it seems he's not an idealist like Guardiola or Klopp but more opportunistic. As it stands, it seems to me he played possession oriented football at Ajax because it was in the club's DNA.

 

[Skills]

I wonder if that is a 100% on Ten Hag or if the club officials demanded he give the system he played at Ajax a "United spin" or something along those lines as some sort of saving grave for him. Considering how much bargaining power he had duing the contract negotiations (veto right on transfers etc.), I don't think he would agree on a brand of football he's not fully on board with, though. So it seems he's not an idealist like Guardiola or Klopp but more opportunistic. As it stands, it seems to me he played possession oriented football at Ajax because it was in the club's DNA.

That's unlikely and would be so out of character.

 

[UpWithRivers]

I wonder if that is a 100% on Ten Hag or if the club officials demanded he give the system he played at Ajax a "United spin" or something along those lines as some sort of saving grave for him. Considering how much bargaining power he had duing the contract negotiations (veto right on transfers etc.), I don't think he would agree on a brand of football he's not fully on board with, though. So it seems he's not an idealist like Guardiola or Klopp but more opportunistic. As it stands, it seems to me he played possession oriented football at Ajax because it was in the club's DNA.

This is 100 percent true. Replace 'United spin' with United way and there is the crux of the matter. It has been proven with every manager bar LVG. They play the same football. EtH will have been told that Rashford is the main guy. Build it around him. Play youth. Play direct. No DOF. Manager has major say in recruitment. And many more things that are old school and we refuse to change. That is the ethos of United.

 

[ColvaleGoa]

So with Bruno, Casemiro, Mount, Mainoo and Eriksen properly match fit.....
1. Who starts against top 6?
2. Who starts against the rest?

 

[Sarni]

This is 100 percent true. Replace 'United spin' with United way and there is the crux of the matter. It has been proven with every manager bar LVG. They play the same football. EtH will have been told that Rashford is the main guy. Build it around him. Play youth. Play direct. No DOF. Manager has major say in recruitment. And many more things that are old school and we refuse to change. That is the ethos of United.

He has been FORBIDDEN from employing his tactics which is why he’s struggling. Now I get it. Poor Erik.

 

[Cassidy]

Look mate, it’s hard to say that coaching is not an issue on set piece defending. You’ve said so yourself. If you look back at my posts, you’ll see that I’ve called for more quality in the squad as well. But you can’t absolve ETH of responsibility in coaching and results, despite the lack of quality in the side.

Frankly, I think the Caf narrative on Casemiro is actually a bit blasphemous… He was amazing for us last season. I feel the criticism is more on Ten Hag’s tactics vs his own performances. When Casemiro made his bones as maybe the best DM in the world, neither Kroos nor Modric were as far forward as Bruno and Mount.Too me, he was left on an island and in today’s modern football, it’s tough to have just one DM to break the high press.

I guess where we differ is the line where we think ETH is an issue or not. I think despite his challenges with club structure and leadership, he’s been sub par. I don’t think he’ll win us the league with a perfect club structure and recruitment. Maybe you do? I dunno. Anyhow, agree to disagree

Once again I did not absolve ETH of anything

 

[KiD MoYeS]

You know he's in trouble when Neville is concerned for him.

 

[UpWithRivers]

He has been FORBIDDEN from employing his tactics which is why he’s struggling. Now I get it. Poor Erik.

Now don't get me wrong I still blame ETH. I'm just saying there is a reason why all managers end up playing the same football and Utd do have traditions that no manager can change

 

[erikcred]

Now don't get me wrong I still blame ETH. I'm just saying there is a reason why all managers end up playing the same football and Utd do have traditions that no manager can change

Same? Moyes, LVG, Mourinho, Ole, ETH played the same football?

 

[el3mel]

This is 100 percent true. Replace 'United spin' with United way and there is the crux of the matter. It has been proven with every manager bar LVG. They play the same football. EtH will have been told that Rashford is the main guy. Build it around him. Play youth. Play direct. No DOF. Manager has major say in recruitment. And many more things that are old school and we refuse to change. That is the ethos of United.

Conspiracy theories are tiresome. The club didn't complain when Mourinho played defensive football with 10 men behind the ball and depending on old players mostly in the team. They didn't complain when LvG played boring possession football in his own half without building any sort of attacks.

Ten Hag is just playing direct because he's clueless and can't think of any other way than launching it on Scott McTominay's head.

 

[UpWithRivers]

Same? Moyes, LVG, Mourinho, Ole, ETH played the same football?

Conspiracy theories are tiresome. The club didn't complain when Mourinho played defensive football with 10 men behind the ball and depending on old players mostly in the team. They didn't complain when LvG played boring possession football in his own half without building any sort of attacks.

Ten Hag is just playing direct because he's clueless and can't think of any other way than launching it on Scott McTominay's head.

Why does everyone have to take everything so literally. Not exactly the same obviously but very similar bar LVG. Even Neville said it. It cant be identical because the players are different and yes the managers put a spin on it. But Mourinho's Chelsea was a very different beast to what he did at United. Ten Haags Ajax was a very different team. Managers come to United and they transform to something very different than their original principles. Why?

 

[erikcred]

Why does everyone have to take everything so literally.

I don't know, man. Words mean things.

Even Neville said it.

He probably just meant they're all shit. Not sure why you took him literally.

But Mourinho's Chelsea was a very different beast to what he did at United. Ten Haags Ajax was a very different team. Managers come to United and they transform to something very different than their original principles. Why?

Moyes didn't change.

Mourinho and Van Gaal were both old timers by the time we hired them. Neither was going to produce vintage stuff from 2005 or 1998.

We panicked into hiring Ole and ETH was hired for his potential. Both had zero track record in coping with the pressures of an actually competitive league.

The theories are getting a bit silly now. We've basically gone from "it's the Glazers" to "it's something in the water at Old Trafford".

 

[Irwin99]

I've always considered those as an excuse for his failure. There are indeed other teams who have no issue playing a possession based style football in the PL.

That's a fair point. I wonder if he just gave up too easily? I think fans were so sick of that Ole/Ralf season that we would have given him the benefit of any doubt and would had been fine with a crap season if it meant getting rid of some players and implementing a new system.

Lots of people remember the 5-3 game against Leicester under LvG as being a shock to the system under that management, I wonder if those first two defeats were similar for EtH? He chased De Jong all summer, bought in Antony who, whatever people think of him, is a player that can retain the ball very well and to me is the antithesis of a counter attacking player, and he bought Martinez, an absolute boss at passing the ball. To me that suggests he was thinking along the lines of possession dominance. Then came two early defeats and we reverted to type when we smashed Liverpool and Arsenal with some classic lightening quick breaks and 30% possession.

 

[JPRouve]

I wonder if that is a 100% on Ten Hag or if the club officials demanded he give the system he played at Ajax a "United spin" or something along those lines as some sort of saving grave for him. Considering how much bargaining power he had duing the contract negotiations (veto right on transfers etc.), I don't think he would agree on a brand of football he's not fully on board with, though. So it seems he's not an idealist like Guardiola or Klopp but more opportunistic. As it stands, it seems to me he played possession oriented football at Ajax because it was in the club's DNA.

The last part is obvious since Ajax style wasn't the one he used with Utrecht. Utrecht were a balanced team(possession wise) that was based on various 442 versions. To illustrate that point Utrecht had 51 and 52 percent of possession under ETH, while his Ajax teams were between 59 and 60 percent, which was a jump from Bosz team who is himself more of a fast transition fan and had them around 53%-54%, you probably know it since he did the same with Leverkusen.

The point being that ETH isn't a possession manager, he implimented it successfully at Ajax because that's what Ajax demanded and why I was very positive since I took it as the proof that he was flexible and able to adapt to his circumstances.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

So with Bruno, Casemiro, Mount, Mainoo and Eriksen properly match fit.....
1. Who starts against top 6?
2. Who starts against the rest?

Mainoo, Casemiro, one of Bruno or Mount as the 10 and on the flank to join Garnacho and Hoijlund upfront.

Casemiro, Mount, Bruno vs everyone else

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

I've always considered those as an excuse for his failure. There are indeed other teams who have no issue playing a possession based style football in the PL.

Let's be honest. How many are ACTUALLY being successful with it? Its well and good to play that way always without the added pressures a Manchester United job brings.

I personally don't trust most United fan claiming they'd 'be happy" with a possession based style even if results weren't going our way like has been the case this season. LVGs tenure debunks that comfortably....

 

[RedBanker]

When he is sacked it would be very interesting to see which club goes for him. Definitely no EPL club will.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

That's a fair point. I wonder if he just gave up too easily? I think fans were so sick of that Ole/Ralf season that we would have given him the benefit of any doubt and would had been fine with a crap season if it meant getting rid of some players and implementing a new system.

Lots of people remember the 5-3 game against Leicester under LvG as being a shock to the system under that management, I wonder if those first two defeats were similar for EtH? He chased De Jong all summer, bought in Antony who, whatever people think of him, is a player that can retain the ball very well and to me is the antithesis of a counter attacking player, and he bought Martinez, an absolute boss at passing the ball. To me that suggests he was thinking along the lines of possession dominance. Then came two early defeats and we reverted to type when we smashed Liverpool and Arsenal with some classic lightening quick breaks and 30% possession.

I believe you are right. Those early defeats made him try to change us long term into a transition based team that can use the ball well rather than be a posession based like he had at Ajax. Which would go a good way to explain his signings last summer.

 

[Zehner]

The last part is obvious since Ajax style wasn't the one he used with Utrecht. Utrecht were a balanced team(possession wise) that was based on various 442 versions. To illustrate that point Utrecht had 51 and 52 percent of possession under ETH, while his Ajax teams were between 59 and 60 percent, which was a jump from Bosz team who is himself more of a fast transition fan and had them around 53%-54%, you probably know it since he did the same with Leverkusen.

The point being that ETH isn't a possession manager, he implimented it successfully at Ajax because that's what Ajax demanded and why I was very positive since I took it as the proof that he was flexible and able to adapt to his circumstances.

Are you sure Bosz averaged so few possession at Ajax? He averaged more than 60% possession over his three years with us, then 58% at Lyon and right now 63% with Eindhoven. Sounds weird to me that the only club where he didn't set up this way was at Ajax which is probably the team most closely associated with that style of play. Anyway, I didn't know Ten Hag was already a transition oriented coach at Utrecht. But then it would make even more sense if Bosz implemented a possession oriented style at Ajax which Ten Hag simply inherited instead of having to build such a team on his own. I couldn't find any possession stats for the 16/17 Eredivise, unfortunately.

 

[flameinthesun]

You're right there is a playing pattern.

However, it's actually what's killing this team and I'm surprised fans and the media have been so blind to the tactics. It's putting our players in impossible situations, yet their getting roasted for lacking quality. Ten Haag's tactics have actually been setting them up for failure this season.

Firstly, it's too fluid. Players are always trying to move into positions that leave them completely vulnerable on the counter. It also leaves them in poor positions to counter attack as well, as players are poorly positioned consistently. This is why there are so many gaps and why the spaces between players can be so wide. It's an issue of fluidity. In fact, our midfield and defence have looked so horrible as a result of fluidity in these zones. Centre backs moving to full back zones when on the ball, full backs moving into centre midfield and noone covering them. It makes it difficult to recover the ball from counterattacking situations when players are positioned that way, because it always leaves us disorganized out of possession. City and Arsenal have far more structure in these zones. Stones still pretty much stays central and plays as an extra DM, whilst the full backs tuck in so that they are still solid at the back. In addition, Pep is much better at employing machination of this manner than ETH, so he can make that work in England. Its not an easy tactic to employ. It may have worked for Ten Haag in a much slower and less physical Eredivisie, but its leaving our defence exposed in England.

Secondly, our current midfield shape is ridiculous. 4141 worked for City because they knew how to properly employ inverted full backs. Zinchenko was essentially a midfielder, as was Delph. They could support Rodri/Fernandinho when required. In addition, they were still more compact and much better at covering positions. City were also playing at a slower pace with keeping the ball being imperative. There were always enough players behind the ball to cover in case of the counter, as they were both compact and deliberate....the exact opposite of what we are.

Thirdly, Our pressing is ridiculous, particularly for the shape of our team. There isn't enough cover to press that highly and not win back the ball. In addition, we don't play as high a line as we should, which leaves the opposition with loads of space to attack us when we don't recover on the initial press.

Fourthly, our shape leaves our DM completely isolated. It also presents a gap between Defence and attack as in possession, the DM is not able to make up the gap in midfield on his own. Out of possession, it leave the DM completely exposed.

Hence we can't progress the ball forward because players aren't in great positions in the build up, our attackers are too far away from our defenders who have the ball and there are too many gaps in the shape, leaving our players constantly surrounded. However, fans will ask " why can't we play well in possession...Bruno". It's not Bruno, it's the tactics.

We have massive gaps due to too much fluidity, being far too wide and having a massive gap between our DM's his midfield partners. Again, this is put on players like Casemiro, when it's actually a tactical flaw. It worked in Holland because Ajax always had the physical and technical advantage to either win the first press or recover. However in England, the levels are far higher and the pace as far more.

We don't create chances because we don't have a sustainable plan of attack. Yes our wingers are selfish, but for our manager to not have a route to Hojlund is ridiculous.

We don't score goals....because we don't create chances. Yet people here talked about Hojlund and how having Kane would change everything. It would not. Ronaldo was the sign of what would happen to Kane. Fans would complain about his lack of pressing and blame him for our inability to gain possession, whilst expecting him to score every chance he gets.

Some of our players have technical flaws, but at the moment we suck because our manager sucks. It's there in the games, but noone wants to call it out because they think the Ajax connection makes Ten Haag much better than he is.

Very good analysis. I think the point you make about ajax being better technically and physically than the rest of their league is key. Its no surprise that when you add in the likes of Martinez and Casemiro his tactics look better (although not perfect). I think the tactics require a lot from an individual both technically and physically, and in the premier league that requirement is even higher. Even Pep requires a certain caliber of player to implement his style. I feel its clear that a lot of this squad is just not capable of playing the way he wants and that's been exacerbated by some of the signings. Behind that I also agree with the pressing structure it's way too risky as once bypassed we are so open. I think the overall shape could be competitive in the prem but only with top players ideally for the positions e.g. this midfield desperately needs a De Jong style player who can thrive in the space in the midfield. However, unlike Pep I don't think Ten Hag will get time to cycle through signings and the club doesn't have the resources to do so anyway.

 

[JPRouve]

Are you sure Bosz averaged so few possession at Ajax? He averaged more than 60% possession over his three years with us, then 58% at Lyon and right now 63% with Eindhoven. Sounds weird to me that the only club where he didn't set up this way was at Ajax which is probably the team most closely associated with that style of play. Anyway, I didn't know Ten Hag was already a transition oriented coach at Utrecht. But then it would make even more sense if Bosz implemented a possession oriented style at Ajax which Ten Hag simply inherited instead of having to build such a team on his own. I couldn't find any possession stats for the 16/17 Eredivise, unfortunately.

My bad, I mixed up De Boer and Bosz, seasons.

 

[kouroux]

Let's be honest. How many are ACTUALLY being successful with it? Its well and good to play that way always without the added pressures a Manchester United job brings.

I personally don't trust most United fan claiming they'd 'be happy" with a possession based style even if results weren't going our way like has been the case this season. LVGs tenure debunks that comfortably....

Define success. Let's not even go to a full possession based philosophy, to have less possession at home vs so many teams is definitely unacceptable

 

[UpWithRivers]

I don't know, man. Words mean things.



He probably just meant they're all shit. Not sure why you took him literally.




Moyes didn't change.

Mourinho and Van Gaal were both old timers by the time we hired them. Neither was going to produce vintage stuff from 2005 or 1998.

We panicked into hiring Ole and ETH was hired for his potential. Both had zero track record in coping with the pressures of an actually competitive league.

The theories are getting a bit silly now. We've basically gone from "it's the Glazers" to "it's something in the water at Old Trafford".

Yeah me and Neville moved from the flat earthers and started our own cult believing that there is a tradition at Old Trafford that managers find hard to shift. Crazy sht. You must be the one with all the answers

 

[JPRouve]

Define success. Let's not even go to a full possession based philosophy, to have less possession at home vs so many teams is definitely unacceptable

Our possession stats are overall perfectly acceptable at 51.8%, if we were coached as an elite defensive team like prime Atletico. We are a poor transition team in both direction.

 

[PepG]

Peter Bosz is a classic case of a Cruyffian wannabe manager..Ajax played very brave and attacking but very naive football under him. United fans remember well that EL final when Mourinho schooled him in a very classical way also.. Ten Hag inherited the structure but built on it while bringing more balanced approach. Actually he reminded us very much of a certain LVG but in his younger self version so to speak.. What Ten Hag is doing at United now has absolutely nothing to do with his Ajax days unfortunately..

 

[el3mel]

Why does everyone have to take everything so literally. Not exactly the same obviously but very similar bar LVG. Even Neville said it. It cant be identical because the players are different and yes the managers put a spin on it. But Mourinho's Chelsea was a very different beast to what he did at United. Ten Haags Ajax was a very different team. Managers come to United and they transform to something very different than their original principles. Why?

Neville doesn't know anything.

Mourinho's Chelsea were different because they had better players more suited to his style than United. He was also a better manager back then.

Ten Hag himself said he's not gonna play Ajax style here and will build a transition team. Where's the club's fault here ?

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Define success. Let's not even go to a full possession based philosophy, to have less possession at home vs so many teams is definitely unacceptable

Success is being in the top 4 at the very least regularly, challenging for the league, and winning a trophy. 9/10 teams in the EPL praised for the possesion best style have done none of those things since then started.

I agree being dominated by most team possesion wise at hold is inacceptable, if mitigating circumstances don't exist.


For all the displeasure we may or may not feel towards ETHs coaching. It's a fact for most of the last 20 EpL rounds of football Mctominay (top scorer, but should a left this summer), fringe player Hannibal and Bruno have been his ONLY reliably fit midfielders for all those rounds. He has in turn been deprived of Casemiro, Mainoo, Mount and Eriksen for 2-3 months each due to injury. Plus had Amrabat arrive on loan injured then get injured on and off again. Not to mention the out of plans Van De beek who has ALSO been injured. Yet that is just cataloging injury to midfield alone. Not counting defence (over 12 cbs pairs used) and attack. I'm of the view is kinda hard to create a consistent possession based style with the quality that has been available week to week in our midfield department this term.



Its a marvel we aren't like two places below Pochetino's Chelsea.