Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
romufc said:
Who said Ronaldo was forced to do things?

Ronaldo was not United's best player. So if the manager wants to press and a player is unwilling to press, he benches him and the said player throws a fit, it is the managers fault?

It was also in an interview somewhere where he agreed with Ole that he couldn't play every week and the one game he got rested, threw a bitch fit then too
Click to expand...
I’m not sure if anything you’ve said is really addressing anything that I’ve said

But yes the top managers will get the best out of their best players. Making him press is obviously not something he excelled at during his career, even at his peak
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
Sir Alex himself said we need to give managers time. Since then we have had Moyes, Van Gaal, Mourinho, Ole, Rangnick and now Ten Hag. That is 6 managers in 11 years.
Click to expand...
That's not what he actually said, and he quickly distanced himself from the whole Moyes fiasco.

The managerial merry go round as you call it is not the reason we are where we are today, no. In the same time frame many big clubs have changed as many or even more managers and yet have still been successful. You can not make a case for a single manager post SAF being more successful if given more time.
 
Rista said:
That's not what he actually said, and he quickly distanced himself from the whole Moyes fiasco.

The managerial merry go round as you call it is not the reason we are where we are today, no. In the same time frame many big clubs have changed as many or even more managers and yet have still been successful. You can not make a case for a single manager post SAF being more successful if given more time.
Click to expand...

Look at the league positions the club was in under Sir Alex in his first 5 years.

11th, 2nd, 12th, 13th, 6th. He wouldn't have achieved everything he did if the club went ahead and sacked him after his third or fourth season. It would have been hard to make a case for him after finishing 12th then 13th back to back.

It is impossible to say none of them would have been successful if given more time, it's hard to predict how improvement would be made with any manager if they had several bad seasons in a row.

Let ETH have more time, and if it doesn't work out then at least the club gave him good support with a new proper football set up.
 
romufc said:
People instantly think, slow is the reason. Maguire struggles because he is a low block penalty area defender. He doesnt like getting tight to players like Lisandro does, which means teams can get out easier.
Click to expand...

To be fair I'm replying to a post that said him being slow is one of the reasons.

VP89 said:
It's not just slow. He's ponderous on the ball and fails to show conviction frequently enough. Maguire is strong, comfortable in the air and good at intercepting. But he's uncomfortable in a sea of space because unlike Licha he's not quick on a half turn, he's not nearly as good a passer and not streetwise in winning 50/50 decisions. He is more likely to be in compromised positions as a result.
Click to expand...

While I don't disagree with your assessment of Maguires strengths and weaknesses, it still doesn't mean he can't play in a high defensive line. Players can adapt and coaching can come into play. Would he ever be great or even good at it? Who knows.

But I just find it strange that we are theorising that Ten Hag wanted to play with a very high defensive line last season. But we went into the season with 4 of our 5 centre backs apparently being unsuited to playing it.

So what was Ten Hag's plan to combat this?
 
Valencia Shin Crosses said:
It generally doesn't help, especially when you need to defend wide spaces and turn like a battleship. It puts so much pressure on that defenders ability to anticipate and read the game inch perfect to compensate.
Click to expand...

It doesn't I agree, it's definitely preferable to have pace. But it doesn't mean you can't play in a high defensive line. Loads of slow defenders manage to play in high defensive lines.

And even if he isn't ideal to play in that system he along with Lindelof, Evans and Martinez aren't quick either. So if we were going to commit to changing system and pressing high we should have just did that with the defenders we have regardless of the downsides. It's not like the front 5/6 pressing high and the back 4 sitting didn't lead to all sorts of different problem anyway.
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
Look at the league positions the club was in under Sir Alex in his first 5 years.

11th, 2nd, 12th, 13th, 6th. He wouldn't have achieved everything he did if the club went ahead and sacked him after his third or fourth season. It would have been hard to make a case for him after finishing 12th then 13th back to back.

It is impossible to say none of them would have been successful if given more time, it's hard to predict how improvement would be made with any manager if they had several bad seasons in a row.

Let ETH have more time, and if it doesn't work out then at least the club gave him good support with a new proper football set up.
Click to expand...
It's the worst argument ever, honestly. And by the same logic SAF should never have had the chance to join the club in the first place.

We are where we are because we've been run terribly, recruited mostly badly and also made poor managerial appointments. Not because we didn't give managers time. If anything, we kept some of them longer than we should have.
 
SirScholes said:
So he’s just kept in the dark

not a single mention of “Eric they’re saying 80 mil, this is going to hammer further transfer windows, are you sure?”

do you seriously believe he had no clue on the final price
Click to expand...

Well that’s everything wrong with this club then isn’t it? Hense why recruitment has been so poor over the last 11 seasons. This isn’t new, we have been spunking money for years.
 
stevoc said:
It doesn't I agree, it's definitely preferable to have pace. But it doesn't mean you can't play in a high defensive line. Loads of slow defenders manage to play in high defensive lines.

And even if he isn't ideal to play in that system he along with Lindelof, Evans and Martinez aren't quick either. So if we were going to commit to changing system and pressing high we should have just did that with the defenders we have regardless of the downsides. It's not like the front 5/6 pressing high and the back 4 sitting didn't lead to all sorts of different problem anyway.
Click to expand...

You and I agree on that. It’s why I’ve said since December that bringing in a MINUMUM of 2 top CB prospects this summer has to be a priority. The lack of athleticism throughout our spine was embarrassing last year
 
ForeverRed1 said:
Well that’s everything wrong with this club then isn’t it? Hense why recruitment has been so poor over the last 11 seasons. This isn’t new, we have been spunking money for years.
Click to expand...
Include ten hag in part of it and I agree
Unless we get off to a flier we’ll be right back to being the media focus and we’ll waste yet another season
 
Rista said:
It's the worst argument ever, honestly. And by the same logic SAF should never have had the chance to join the club in the first place.

We are where we are because we've been run terribly, recruited mostly badly and also made poor managerial appointments. Not because we didn't give managers time. If anything, we kept some of them longer than we should have.
Click to expand...

Lets agree to disagree then.
 
Adnan said:
He said that he was playing to the strengths of the team by transitioning quickly because some of our best players in the final third, thrive in transition. But he would later say that he wants to play from the back and press high collectively but he didn't have those players due to injury.

If Man Utd want to challenge City and Arsenal domestically, we should not compromise on playing in a higher defensive line. Persevering with that approach will weed out the weak players for the system and enable us to move forward as a team.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. At some point we have to stick it out with the principals we intend to implement. Hopefully the teething problems are over (last season) and with a stronger squad we can forward.
 
flameinthesun said:
I agree with this. At some point we have to stick it out with the principals we intend to implement. Hopefully the teething problems are over (last season) and with a stronger squad we can forward.
Click to expand...
I also agree. Bit skeptical though whether last season was teething problems. I mean, it isn't like we managed to play "how we wanted" at any point of the season. I consider teething when things are there but not ultimately working out, inexperience, missing synchronisation at a higher level, clear understanding of roles. Last season wasn't that - it was unsuiting players in not ideal positions trying to play something not everybody on the pitch was really committed to. Not even speaking of bad form. Also there is big chance, we have to bring in two players for the centre (CB and DM) which will force another round of adjustments.
 
That Whitwell piece illustrates the points quite a few on here have been at pains at making: he was hired to transform the playing style of the team (and the small matter of the culture) and then he was not supported enough in getting rid of those who could not hack it tactically. That he was actively undermined by players on the pitch with such an injury list that he could not take them out of the team highlights perfectly how disastrous the season was.

Then when the club fails to sell the players who had been publicly hung out to dry last summer, he has to deal with the shit and when he persists with his long-term approach Fletcher and McClaren advocate a short-term pragmatic fix (which is what we've been doing ever since Fergie retired), which is focusing purely on the season at hand at the cost of future progression.

The gaping hole midfield is explained here by players undermining the manager's instructions. And when he wanted Rice, they bought him Casemiro, and the following summer he wanted him again and they got him Mount. Sure, he made a major mistake with Antony, but this club has been an utter disaster in how it's been run.

Anyone incapable of playing a high line defense should be off (bar Evans, as I think he has value in the dressing room, fully behind the manager, puts his body on the line, and will be paid quite a modest wage, eventually morphing into a coach I suspect), i.e. Maguire, Lindelof. Those not technically at the requisite level also need to be off, that's AWB, though McTominay may stay purely for the tactical plan C option (a good offer would be impossible to reject though). Those not willing to play their part in the high press also need scrapping, so that's Rashford. And then we have players who are clearly past it, like Eriksen, never going to fit, like Donny, likely past it and also not behind the manager, like Casemiro.

I've felt this repeatedly over the last few summers, and I have the same stance now, I am more concerned with getting players out the door than whom we buy. It is the long-term approach that suffers when we carry all these ill-fitting (for different reasons) players and it is the #1 stumbling block to fixing the culture.
 
How on earth does anyone have such a personal grudge against this manager that everything the Glazers have done to this club suddenly vanishes into thin air? There’s no denying ETH has made some mistakes but he’s had one very good season and one very bad season (neither of those statements is up for debate) and not a single one of the names mentioned as his replacements would have allowed the previous structure, if you can call it that, dictate transfers. I just can’t wrap my head around completely ignoring a decade plus of those purely evil men slowly killing this club. The word standard shouldn’t even be uttered at present time as this club was PURPOSELY not even ran like a football club of the stature it had become. How do people not understand the implications of those crimes?!
 
flameinthesun said:
I agree with this. At some point we have to stick it out with the principals we intend to implement. Hopefully the teething problems are over (last season) and with a stronger squad we can forward.
Click to expand...
It's imperative we carry on building towards playing in a higher line if we want to be a more dominant team like Arsenal, City and Liverpool. Arsenal took the same approach and it's made them genuine title contenders with a bit of time and patience. It doesn't matter who the manager/head coach is, without recruiting the correct profile of players you just cannot succeed against the competition.
 
Bastian said:
That Whitwell piece illustrates the points quite a few on here have been at pains at making: he was hired to transform the playing style of the team (and the small matter of the culture) and then he was not supported enough in getting rid of those who could not hack it tactically. That he was actively undermined by players on the pitch with such an injury list that he could not take them out of the team highlights perfectly how disastrous the season was.

Then when the club fails to sell the players who had been publicly hung out to dry last summer, he has to deal with the shit and when he persists with his long-term approach Fletcher and McClaren advocate a short-term pragmatic fix (which is what we've been doing ever since Fergie retired), which is focusing purely on the season at hand at the cost of future progression.

The gaping hole midfield is explained here by players undermining the manager's instructions. And when he wanted Rice, they bought him Casemiro, and the following summer he wanted him again and they got him Mount. Sure, he made a major mistake with Antony, but this club has been an utter disaster in how it's been run.

Anyone incapable of playing a high line defense should be off (bar Evans, as I think he has value in the dressing room, fully behind the manager, puts his body on the line, and will be paid quite a modest wage, eventually morphing into a coach I suspect), i.e. Maguire, Lindelof. Those not technically at the requisite level also need to be off, that's AWB, though McTominay may stay purely for the tactical plan C option (a good offer would be impossible to reject though). Those not willing to play their part in the high press also need scrapping, so that's Rashford. And then we have players who are clearly past it, like Eriksen, never going to fit, like Donny, likely past it and also not behind the manager, like Casemiro.

I've felt this repeatedly over the last few summers, and I have the same stance now, I am more concerned with getting players out the door than whom we buy. It is the long-term approach that suffers when we carry all these ill-fitting (for different reasons) players and it is the #1 stumbling block to fixing the culture.
Click to expand...

Good post
 
stevoc said:
While I don't disagree with your assessment of Maguires strengths and weaknesses, it still doesn't mean he can't play in a high defensive line. Players can adapt and coaching can come into play. Would he ever be great or even good at it? Who knows.

But I just find it strange that we are theorising that Ten Hag wanted to play with a very high defensive line last season. But we went into the season with 4 of our 5 centre backs apparently being unsuited to playing it.

So what was Ten Hag's plan to combat this?
Click to expand...
This doesn't make any sense. I've given you a few reason why Maguire doesn't suit a high line and your line of reasoning is "well, we don't know". Really?

I guess we don't know how Firmino would be as a target man instead of a false 9. He might well have been very good at it, right? I mean, where do we draw a line at that logic?!

Also we aren't theorising anything. Ten hag wanted a high line and the squad players couldn't execute it. Read the latest brief from the Athletic.
 
Bastian said:
That Whitwell piece illustrates the points quite a few on here have been at pains at making: he was hired to transform the playing style of the team (and the small matter of the culture) and then he was not supported enough in getting rid of those who could not hack it tactically. That he was actively undermined by players on the pitch with such an injury list that he could not take them out of the team highlights perfectly how disastrous the season was.

Then when the club fails to sell the players who had been publicly hung out to dry last summer, he has to deal with the shit and when he persists with his long-term approach Fletcher and McClaren advocate a short-term pragmatic fix (which is what we've been doing ever since Fergie retired), which is focusing purely on the season at hand at the cost of future progression.

The gaping hole midfield is explained here by players undermining the manager's instructions. And when he wanted Rice, they bought him Casemiro, and the following summer he wanted him again and they got him Mount. Sure, he made a major mistake with Antony, but this club has been an utter disaster in how it's been run.

Anyone incapable of playing a high line defense should be off (bar Evans, as I think he has value in the dressing room, fully behind the manager, puts his body on the line, and will be paid quite a modest wage, eventually morphing into a coach I suspect), i.e. Maguire, Lindelof. Those not technically at the requisite level also need to be off, that's AWB, though McTominay may stay purely for the tactical plan C option (a good offer would be impossible to reject though). Those not willing to play their part in the high press also need scrapping, so that's Rashford. And then we have players who are clearly past it, like Eriksen, never going to fit, like Donny, likely past it and also not behind the manager, like Casemiro.

I've felt this repeatedly over the last few summers, and I have the same stance now, I am more concerned with getting players out the door than whom we buy. It is the long-term approach that suffers when we carry all these ill-fitting (for different reasons) players and it is the #1 stumbling block to fixing the culture.
Click to expand...
The back 4 was highly problematic but I can’t fault them. Playing a lower line is also an adjustment you can legitimately expect the manager to make. I think the problem was many players in front of them not defending, and when I say they weren’t defending I’m not even talking about tracking back, but defending further up the pitch, anticipating passing lanes and closing on the player with the ball quickly are particularly crucial aspects of this that require high levels of work ethic, but when you at best do one without the other you’re going to see gaps. Anyone that has coached at any level will tell you you’re playing a very dangerous game when you change what you’re asking of the players to mitigate a lack of work ethic.
 
Bastian said:
That Whitwell piece illustrates the points quite a few on here have been at pains at making: he was hired to transform the playing style of the team (and the small matter of the culture) and then he was not supported enough in getting rid of those who could not hack it tactically. That he was actively undermined by players on the pitch with such an injury list that he could not take them out of the team highlights perfectly how disastrous the season was.

Then when the club fails to sell the players who had been publicly hung out to dry last summer, he has to deal with the shit and when he persists with his long-term approach Fletcher and McClaren advocate a short-term pragmatic fix (which is what we've been doing ever since Fergie retired), which is focusing purely on the season at hand at the cost of future progression.

The gaping hole midfield is explained here by players undermining the manager's instructions. And when he wanted Rice, they bought him Casemiro, and the following summer he wanted him again and they got him Mount. Sure, he made a major mistake with Antony, but this club has been an utter disaster in how it's been run.

Anyone incapable of playing a high line defense should be off (bar Evans, as I think he has value in the dressing room, fully behind the manager, puts his body on the line, and will be paid quite a modest wage, eventually morphing into a coach I suspect), i.e. Maguire, Lindelof. Those not technically at the requisite level also need to be off, that's AWB, though McTominay may stay purely for the tactical plan C option (a good offer would be impossible to reject though). Those not willing to play their part in the high press also need scrapping, so that's Rashford. And then we have players who are clearly past it, like Eriksen, never going to fit, like Donny, likely past it and also not behind the manager, like Casemiro.

I've felt this repeatedly over the last few summers, and I have the same stance now, I am more concerned with getting players out the door than whom we buy. It is the long-term approach that suffers when we carry all these ill-fitting (for different reasons) players and it is the #1 stumbling block to fixing the culture.
Click to expand...
Well said
 
Bastian said:
That Whitwell piece illustrates the points quite a few on here have been at pains at making: he was hired to transform the playing style of the team (and the small matter of the culture) and then he was not supported enough in getting rid of those who could not hack it tactically. That he was actively undermined by players on the pitch with such an injury list that he could not take them out of the team highlights perfectly how disastrous the season was.

Then when the club fails to sell the players who had been publicly hung out to dry last summer, he has to deal with the shit and when he persists with his long-term approach Fletcher and McClaren advocate a short-term pragmatic fix (which is what we've been doing ever since Fergie retired), which is focusing purely on the season at hand at the cost of future progression.

The gaping hole midfield is explained here by players undermining the manager's instructions. And when he wanted Rice, they bought him Casemiro, and the following summer he wanted him again and they got him Mount. Sure, he made a major mistake with Antony, but this club has been an utter disaster in how it's been run.

Anyone incapable of playing a high line defense should be off (bar Evans, as I think he has value in the dressing room, fully behind the manager, puts his body on the line, and will be paid quite a modest wage, eventually morphing into a coach I suspect), i.e. Maguire, Lindelof. Those not technically at the requisite level also need to be off, that's AWB, though McTominay may stay purely for the tactical plan C option (a good offer would be impossible to reject though). Those not willing to play their part in the high press also need scrapping, so that's Rashford. And then we have players who are clearly past it, like Eriksen, never going to fit, like Donny, likely past it and also not behind the manager, like Casemiro.

I've felt this repeatedly over the last few summers, and I have the same stance now, I am more concerned with getting players out the door than whom we buy. It is the long-term approach that suffers when we carry all these ill-fitting (for different reasons) players and it is the #1 stumbling block to fixing the culture.
Click to expand...
While I generally agree, it's up to ETH to communicate his message and make adjustments accordingly. He should take on more accountability than blaming the recruitment department and not having a squad who is fully behind him. He will likely never have a perfect squad and in most squads, there will be players that aren't fully bought in on the manager.

The gaping hole in the midfield could be that his instructions weren't clear or the players were not capable of doing what's required of them. That again is something all managers will have to deal with. It's over simplistic to blame the players ignoring him - in a one off game, fair enough but there was a trend, and that's something ETH was slow to fix.
 
saivet said:
While I generally agree, it's up to ETH to communicate his message and make adjustments accordingly. He should take on more accountability than blaming the recruitment department and not having a squad who is fully behind him. He will likely never have a perfect squad and in most squads, there will be players that aren't fully bought in on the manager.

The gaping hole in the midfield could be that his instructions weren't clear or the players were not capable of doing what's required of them. That again is something all managers will have to deal with. It's over simplistic to blame the players ignoring him - in a one off game, fair enough but there was a trend, and that's something ETH was slow to fix.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, however, when you have a true challenge to line up 11 players on the field, there isnt a lot of options to pick the players that will listen and execute your instructions to the fullest, especially when you are hit in probably the most crucial part of the pitch, where everything starts.

This was one of the reasons why I wanted for him to get another season, with addition to few new players, so that we can see if he is capable of this exactly that.

As much as I admire Varane and Casemiro's careers, they should not be suggesting to Ten Hag to play with more freedom like they did in Spain, as that will rarely work in the PL, plus it undermines the manager's position.
 
Vidooq said:
I agree with you, however, when you have a true challenge to line up 11 players on the field, there isnt a lot of options to pick the players that will listen and execute your instructions to the fullest, especially when you are hit in probably the most crucial part of the pitch, where everything starts.

This was one of the reasons why I wanted for him to get another season, with addition to few new players, so that we can see if he is capable of this exactly that.

As much as I admire Varane and Casemiro's careers, they should not be suggesting to Ten Hag to play with more freedom like they did in Spain, as that will rarely work in the PL, plus it undermines the manager's position.
Click to expand...
Given things were going wrong, I don't hold much against them for having such a perspective. It depends whether it is coming from a place of bad intentions. I think there will be a level of feedback requested / required from senior players like them.

It's a fine balance of undermining the managers position and wanting what is best for the team.
 
Bastian said:
That Whitwell piece illustrates the points quite a few on here have been at pains at making: he was hired to transform the playing style of the team (and the small matter of the culture) and then he was not supported enough in getting rid of those who could not hack it tactically. That he was actively undermined by players on the pitch with such an injury list that he could not take them out of the team highlights perfectly how disastrous the season was.

Then when the club fails to sell the players who had been publicly hung out to dry last summer, he has to deal with the shit and when he persists with his long-term approach Fletcher and McClaren advocate a short-term pragmatic fix (which is what we've been doing ever since Fergie retired), which is focusing purely on the season at hand at the cost of future progression.

The gaping hole midfield is explained here by players undermining the manager's instructions. And when he wanted Rice, they bought him Casemiro, and the following summer he wanted him again and they got him Mount. Sure, he made a major mistake with Antony, but this club has been an utter disaster in how it's been run.

Anyone incapable of playing a high line defense should be off (bar Evans, as I think he has value in the dressing room, fully behind the manager, puts his body on the line, and will be paid quite a modest wage, eventually morphing into a coach I suspect), i.e. Maguire, Lindelof. Those not technically at the requisite level also need to be off, that's AWB, though McTominay may stay purely for the tactical plan C option (a good offer would be impossible to reject though). Those not willing to play their part in the high press also need scrapping, so that's Rashford. And then we have players who are clearly past it, like Eriksen, never going to fit, like Donny, likely past it and also not behind the manager, like Casemiro.

I've felt this repeatedly over the last few summers, and I have the same stance now, I am more concerned with getting players out the door than whom we buy. It is the long-term approach that suffers when we carry all these ill-fitting (for different reasons) players and it is the #1 stumbling block to fixing the culture.
Click to expand...
Excellent post.

Just to add to it, I think in the past some of our top 4 finishes have perhaps made us think we were better than we were or that drastic changes weren't needed. We see a repeat over the years of a decent finish or two followed by a collapse and it's because we don't ever really build on the progress. The failure to get rid of Maguire and McTominay last season and raise funds, the pitiful reaction to Jose's 2nd place finish are a few examples. Long term strategy has to be the thinking going forward and not expecting the manager to just make do with whatever is available.
 
Last edited:
The holy trinity 68 said:
Look at the league positions the club was in under Sir Alex in his first 5 years.

11th, 2nd, 12th, 13th, 6th. He wouldn't have achieved everything he did if the club went ahead and sacked him after his third or fourth season. It would have been hard to make a case for him after finishing 12th then 13th back to back.

It is impossible to say none of them would have been successful if given more time, it's hard to predict how improvement would be made with any manager if they had several bad seasons in a row.

Let ETH have more time, and if it doesn't work out then at least the club gave him good support with a new proper football set up.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if we finish 13th next year, give ETH a new 3-year contract, he is obviously the new SAF!

Right?
 
The holy trinity 68 said:
at least the club gave him good support with a new proper football set up.
Click to expand...

Have we figured out what this actually means yet?

Is it still just not letting him anywhere near transfers? Or is it Wilcox continuing to force him to play a certain system?
 
UnofficialDevil said:
So basically when we are shit and get embarrassed by lesser teams, It's the player's fault, downed tools, aren't following ETH's instructions, but when we do actually win a game or a trophy it's thanks to ETH. What a load of bollocks. Typical caf logic.
Click to expand...
It takes everyone to do a good job to win a trophy.

Our next challenge is winning trophies while pressing high and with a high line, playing dominating football. That’s where we want to go and any players not able or willing to do it can go try their luck elsewhere.
 
After that Whitwell article do people think we are actively looking to appoint a Head of Recruitment separate to Ashworth
 
UnofficialDevil said:
So basically when we are shit and get embarrassed by lesser teams, It's the player's fault, downed tools, aren't following ETH's instructions, but when we do actually win a game or a trophy it's thanks to ETH. What a load of bollocks. Typical caf logic.
Click to expand...
It’s an incredible logic because the manager will never get the full accountability with that mindset. I wonder why none of our previous managers ever had that benefit of the doubt.
 
Amir said:
I'm not buying that. Had they joined a year earlier, I don't think they would have gone and talked to other managers at the end of 2022/23.
Click to expand...

You don't have to buy it, in fact if you have a few spare million I recommend you don't buy into any football club. Anyone who invests large sums of money into a football club or any other business is an idiot if they don't review the organisation and all of the existing management positions.
 
Amir said:
Again, superficial.

First, Villa dropped off in the last couple of matches after securing CL qualification and we won the last two, so the final margins became smaller - in garbage time.

Second, We were once second with Mourinho and we were second with Solskjaer, but people could see this was as far as it was going to go with them due to the way we played.

Two years into the ETH tenure, we've got no clear style of play or identity to build on. That's the big issue.

Did injuries affect performances and results? Absolutely. Are they a good enough reason for playing that badly for most of our matches and having no clear style? No.

I've no problem with ETH staying, but there's a limit to how blind we can be. There's a huge question mark over him.
Click to expand...

So are 18 different CB pairings for the season a good enough reason? For sure! No other team had more injuries. At one point in the season, we had a total of 11 players injured.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.