Because decision makers are different?
Erik ten Hag - Manchester United manager
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Getting 9 more points in the league to finish ahead of Villa by playing defensive , pragmatic football would have done nothing for me. Wouldn’t suggest we are closer to anything other than squeezing into the CL, which is the best we have done since Ferguson left. It wouldn’t signal progress, would just signal same. I’d take the way we won the FA cup over that, cause finishing 4th is nothing to celebrate about.
Totally agree about tactics, they were bizarre. I’d love to know how he explained it to INEOs because if it didn’t make sense, hard to see how they’d keep him.
I don’t care what our manager says publicly on these sorts of things. They generally feed the media a story that is least likely to impact a dressing-room. Do you honestly think managers say exactly what their plans are and what they are doing to reporters\media ?.
If United had a decent season most wouldn’t care if he said that he was working with a psychic to help him pick his team. When a team is under performing or playing awful , it doesn’t really matter what a manager says, anything that can be used against them will be used against them.
It's what I've been saying for some time now. He wants to implement a positional game (possession) with high intensity and in a higher line. But you need the correct profile of CBs, and I have no doubt the spacing issues between the lines won't exist. Instead we should be talking about whether we can control or contain the space between the GK and the two CBs.
The EPL is being dominated by positional play coaches, so his idea is the correct idea as far as strategy is concerned. And as my quoted post alludes to, it won't be difficult to play more compact with a CB pairing that isn't afraid to step up.
You don't jump from 8th to challenging for the league, that's just unrealistic. Going from 8th to 3rd again shows vast improvement for the seasons after and builds a platform for the next season.
Also to you mentioning spending 150m to 200m this summer just to finish 3rd. Man City and Arsenal already have a better squad and will likely both spend 200m this summer, so spending 200m (which doesn't get you that much anymore) is not going to automatically bridge the gap on better teams that have also just spent that money.
Liverpool and Chelsea will be spending that amount as well. It's not just oh well he's spent money we should be challenging for the league even if the team just finished 8th.
3rd is realistic and something to move forward with.
I don't think 3rd is realistic at all to be honest.
I still find it outstanding that posters wanted to claim we had a seas gap between defence and midfield by design.
Well the alternative is that he couldn't get the players to follow his instructions. Either option is quite damning.
It's not damning. Maguire/AWB/Evans simply aren't capable of a high line even if they tried.
A reasonable gripe with ten hag is his stubbornness to move away from high lines and switch styles. He wanted to drill the plan A throughout and it's fair to criticise him for that.
He took until, what? The final four games of the season to stop drilling plan A when we had nothing to play for in the league. That's pretty damn stubborn.
He should have been sacked for going from 3rd to 8th though
now youre talking like going back to 3rd would be some crowning achievement and justification for keeping him when he already did that with a lesser squadYou really want to tell us that professional players are physically incapable of walking 5-10m forward? Come on, that's just not the case. Of course they are capable to play in a high line. What's also true is that they lack recovery speed if a fast attacker tries to overrun them, so you need solutions to mitigate that risk if you want to play a high line with those players. EtH obviously did not even try to do that and left Maguire and Evans scared of moving so far up.
If we have 50 mil to spend and need sales to increase that , I don’t think 4th is a realistic expected target either. You’ve 4 squads in city , pool , Chelsea and arsenal that already look stronger or more ready for a run. We are losing senior players on frees and over rely on youngsters.
Whoever was gonna be our manager , I don’t see next year as necessarily “we better make top 4”, not because we shouldn’t at least get it, but because I think next year is about getting the football infrastructure in check and the foundations of an actual proper league/CL challanging team together.
We can’t expect much from any manager if the clubs as hamstrung with finances as appear to be suggested. Maybe part of the reason ETH was kept is because in some way, INEOs are not looking at next season or even the next , they actually are targeting the top trophies and see “we need to finish 4th” as a distraction. A proper gutting and systematic plan to get us back to the top may need one or two seasons of what would normally be unacceptable outcomes.
SJR has targeted 2028 I think , maybe he’s playing the long game and it’s more important to have a manager who can work on that process then one who can squeeze us into 4th?
I don’t know, but my point is that I’d like to think whatever they are doing , it’s gonna take time , we accept there will be setbacks but it’s more likely to succeed over glazers/woodward moronic methods of throw sh*t and loads of money at a wall and hope it sticks
Yes. And thats a fair critique. A fair critique is not "he wanted to have a big gap between defence and midfield by design, he's a fraud". That was peddled many times during the season.
Tell me you dont play football without telling me you dont play football?
Players wont walk 5-10m forward if they know it exposes them on a transitional attack. They know they can defend their lines if they station themselves deeper and play to their skillsets. It takes away the likelihood of a big mistake or a disadvantageous position. I remember seeing quite a few games (even live) where we initially start out high but 2 players would sink back as the game went on and cause our line to retreat deeper as a result.
Generally the solution to a high line with slow players in the backline is to just not play a high line.
How many people in the first 11 did his tactics actually suit last season, I can't think of many
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.
Well... you did just perfectly explain why it's stupid from EtH to demand a high line and then field those two players, which was kind of my point
The huge gap that was created was by design as team selection and intented tactics contradict each other. At least EtH willingly accepted that it would happen.
You live in the past: top teams frequently lose points and have bad games against Palace, Bournemouth and the likes. The PL is nothing like it used to be.
Your moaning does no good and you do not take part in any meaningful discussion as far as I can tell.
After we got ‘schooled’ we got up and won three games in a row, no thanks to you.
The game play was not by design. Ten hag wanted his players to have a high line and they couldn't do it. That's well documented.Well... you did just perfectly explain why it's stupid from EtH to demand a high line and then field those two players, which was kind of my point
The huge gap that was created was by design as team selection and intented tactics contradict each other. At least EtH willingly accepted that it would happen.
It didn't work because it wasn't executed properly. The design was never to have a low block and a high press.
If he didn't set us up to mitigate it, which you seem to agree with elsewhere then yes it's by design. Their were other options so it was his chosen tactical design given available players, even if it isn't his long term strategy. No one is claiming that with his ideal players we'd have that gap still.
This is the thing with evaluating Ten Hag, I think most would say we don't yet know if he can get us performing utilising his ideal tactics. We only know he ballsed up being pragmatic. For me I don't really want a manager who needs ideal conditions and can't adapt but if we get the conditions right we might enjoy success for a time.
Those kind of managers are increasingly rare among the top teams. Im sure the players prefer it, but I don't see any shade on ETH for not being that kind of guy.
Ole was given loads of time and didn't deliver any trophies.
Mourinho delivered trophies in his first season, then went backwards while dragging the clubs name through the dirt.
LvG had 2 full seasons and although I thought there was something promising happening in the end part of his tenure, I can completely understand why the trigger was pulled even after the trophy win.
Moyes was a disaster. There was no argument for allowing him to continue.
Let me rehash what you said...
- EtH wanted to play with a high line (I think that's true)
- EtH selected Evans and Maguire to play (that's an undeniable fact)
- Evans and Maguire can't play in a high line (that's what you claim and I agree if no special measures are taken to cover for their lack of pace)
I therefore conclude selecting those players means accepting that the team doesn't play with a high line, even if it's not the preferred way to play.
And yes I think he wanted that gap - the alternative would have been to retreat all players deeper and he clearly didn't want that. It probably was the lesser evil in his opinion.
You're talking about two separate things so I'll re-explain my stance. I'm saying the design was not to have a low block - players available could not execute the high line instructions. At that stage he should have changed the style to something suitable to the players available - but this insinuation from posters that he wanted to play with a big gap between defence and midfield is nonsense.
Also, that kinda approach only works when you have the likes of Ronaldo, Modric, Kroos and Vini Jnr like Ancellotti and Zidane did.
Well at the end of the day INEOS is a business and businesses plan in reviews for the appropriate point in time and in the mean time collate qualitative and quantitative
data to feed into the review. So it sounds perfectly plausible and probable to me.
Well yeah semantics really but your ideal solution and a tactical solution are still both designs/tactics. You work within the constraints you have, every manager responsible for performance knows that.
The issue with saying it wasn't by design is it implies we went out week on week intending to play a high line. That isn't remotely true and if it was it would be a far bigger issue.
He sent the team out playing a deep line and high attack. I still don't think we got any progression from it, if the attack had looked like it learn swift and team based pressure I'd be more forgiving.
I doubt we have the budget to have a squad full of suitable players next season as we've wasted too much money. He'll need to be pragmatic at times, so let's see if he has learned that lesson.
That article reflects badly on the players and the people above ETH. Have sympathy for him.
What about the way we won FA Cup signals progress though? Genuine quesition. I don’t think our Liverpool and City wins were that different to how we’ve beaten big sides numerous times in the past.
It is true that we wanted to play a high line, that's what started this whole debate.
No he didn't.
Maybe they feel that when the team are behind him and know that he is the boss they can perform and are not so “injured” and so by backing him the onus is on the players to show up all the time or piss off
I'm not. I'm just saying people like you want to be right, so if he starts to do good you will never admit Ineos were right to keep him.He should have been sacked for going from 3rd to 8th though
Have a bit more sympathy for ETH after reading that. He came into a mess and was on his own under our previous hierarchy. Still there are a few worrying things:
- His push for signing Antony, a player he previously managed, who ended up showing such disobedience to ETH’s instructions. This seriously questions ETH’s judgement
- His inflexibility in adapting our tactics earlier in the season to make us more compact and leaving it to the last 2 games of the season
- Some interesting comments in there about Van der Gaag. Wonder if that will continue to prove an issue
Overall it sounds like with some structural changes, ETH could be successful but I still have some doubts.
It will either be injuries, or the players have downed tools.
Nice - creating a hypothetical for next season and then the hypothetical reactions to the hypothetical results. Keep it up.
What a mess! Sounds like a blend of players thinking they know better and failing to perform, questionable tactics and stubborness from the manager, and a ton of injures. But the players definitely come out looking worse from this than the coaching staff. And it sounds like the club left him entirely on his own, although the Antony transfer calamity is definitely on him.
I am somewhat more convinced now he deserves another season. But recruitment must be perfect now, and Ashworth and Berrada need to start working as soon as possible. Also, dispose of those that don't fit.
Damning that he couldn't get them to do it at all but still continued with the crazy tactics.
Yep I think a lot of fans will give ETH at least to Xmas, however he needs to abandon his stubborn nature and his ludicrous 4-1————2-3 system with wide open gaps and loads of shots on the goal, if this doesn’t change day one, he won’t last long, if he goes back to a 4231 system, gets 5 or 6 more players in and he starts to listen to Wilcox in particular, he’ll do ok but we need transfers in now and not his transfers, I don’t want to see any eredevise players this summer?
Hardly crazy tactics... looks shit when players don't follow instructions though granted
Reading that some senior players were unhappy with Erik's playing style but were basically told to shut up when they spoke up about it is quite concerning, its no wonder there was dissent in the dressing room if this was happening.
This thread is going to be so miserable this season no matter how results go.
The article from Whitwell was a decent read, and unsurprising all around. People will however pick what they want from it to suit their viewpoint.
The article from Whitwell was a decent read, and unsurprising all around. People will however pick what they want from it to suit their viewpoint.