Because it's associated with the Ole era, but the big difference is our counter-attacks are more structured under ETH whereas under Ole it was just get it to Rashford or Greenwood as quickly as possible and hope they can do something.
ETH: "We want to be the best transition team in the world"
- Thread starter sullydnl
- Start date
Big source of confusion here is people thinking 'transition ' = 'sitting deep and counter attacking'.
Fecking insane right? The majority of our football under Fergie was counter.
The problem I can see us having this season with this transition football is that as soon as we get the ball we would try to release it as quick as possible with the likes of Bruno that would result us losing the possession again and again and with the other team having it and keeping the ball then we would again try to get the ball and again releasing it quickly. Rinse and repeat resulting in a ping pong football with no control of the match.
If we had a lethal experienced forward line which could kill the other teams even with half chances this transition football would be amazing but as things stand our forwards are young and goal shy other than Marcus and I’m afraid with us not being clinical teams will us cut us open alot if we are pushing players further field and are out of shape. I am really skeptical of this kind of football.
If we had a lethal experienced forward line which could kill the other teams even with half chances this transition football would be amazing but as things stand our forwards are young and goal shy other than Marcus and I’m afraid with us not being clinical teams will us cut us open alot if we are pushing players further field and are out of shape. I am really skeptical of this kind of football.
It's similar to how Ten Hag played at Ajax though, and in his last season there, they had just 19 goals against. The Eredivisie isn't the EPL of course, and Ten Hag doesn't necessarily have his ideal squad yet; but even so, United's squad overall is already better than Ajax's.
In any case, I'm just trying to point out that this very vertical football has been Ten Hag's approach for years, and has not yet resulted in his teams leaking goals. So on that basis, I think I would hold back a bit with comments about suicidal and naive (not you, others) tactics, and see how things actually play out in the league first. (And give the team a few games to really gel in the new approach.)
Ole's team scored more goals, so it must have worked.
Yeah because of Greenwood and Martial having that incredible 19/20 season.
EtH's quotes sound as many pointed out already like we're heading in the direction of Liverpool or even Dortmung under Klopp and Tuchel. Things like keeping possession and insisting on positional discipline are taken for granted with such prominent managers from the past 15 years or so. They all want their team to be pro active and force the game to the opposition by playing in their half. This is both a defensive and offensive strategy as it just increases your odds to score and to not concede. The difference comes in which phase of play they prioritise and how the rest of these phases are there to supplement it. Whereas Pep's Barcelona put a heavy focus on keeping the ball and trusted their silky players to find those intricate passes to open a defence instead of taking a risky one after gaining back possession, a Klopp team will probably go for that risky pass more often than not trusting the element of surprise and an out of shape opponent's defence.
A lot of modern coaches exist somewhere inbetween these two, even Pep's City last year moved somewhere in the middle of this spectrum. EtH seems to be going the same direction, partly because he just seems to prefer a quicker, more vertical play style but also out of pragmatism and utilising his resources with us. This isn't really comparable to how we played under Fergie or how anyone played at the time as there just wasn't as much micro coaching for every phase of the play at the time. Fergie also in theory had a pro active mindset, he wanted to take the game to the opposition and play in their half. The difference is he could rely on individual quality more to make a difference as 1) the difference in that area with other PL teams was much bigger than it is now and 2) opponents were not as micro coached to block you from playing as they are nowadays with the likes of Wolves and Aston Villa being coached by elite coaches from the continent.
If the theory is we will take the game to you and pin you back, you naturally have to focus more on the details on how to do it, the more your opponents are equipped to stop you and exploit the space you leave behind which is what happened in the past decade or so. This is why Ole is a mediocre moden coach because he copy pasted what he saw under Fergie without having the skills to coach it to the necessary levels it is today. When that happens, your team will naturally have to drop deeper in order to avoid being picked up by counters which leads to a playing style that looks reactive and over reliant on hopeful counter attacks. That is what we had to revert to as well under Fergie when we came up against well drilled European opponents, especially in his later years when we just didn't have the tactical nous to play higher up the field and were forced to cover for it with by far the least complicated strategy; defending with bodies behind the ball. Basically what only the likes of Barcelona could do to us under Fergie back in the day, even a mid table team can do now, hence, it is becoming more and more necessary to really focus on the detail if you want to play higher up the field. Mourinho, Conte, Simeone and Allegri are probably the only active big name managers working today who don't even attempt to be pro active and choose the deeper line from the get go which manisfests usually in what looks like and is called counter attacking football.
EtH's so far looks like a very pro active manager who has clear principles but is very pragmatist when it comes to how to integrate their details and being flexible depending on the requirements and resources of the here and now. The ultimate balance of keeping the ball and still looking dangerous is the dream of any such coach but they have to be realistic as only one team in recent history reached that kind of perfection and even its manager Pep had to be flexible and evolve with the times. EtH is starting from a lower point and is also managing a club that demands a more vertical play style because of the players we have now and also our traditions as a club. It seems to me like a perfect marriage if this manager can mould his principles and superior coaching skills to the likes of Ole, to implement the closest version to how we used to play in respect to modern tactical requirements.
A lot of modern coaches exist somewhere inbetween these two, even Pep's City last year moved somewhere in the middle of this spectrum. EtH seems to be going the same direction, partly because he just seems to prefer a quicker, more vertical play style but also out of pragmatism and utilising his resources with us. This isn't really comparable to how we played under Fergie or how anyone played at the time as there just wasn't as much micro coaching for every phase of the play at the time. Fergie also in theory had a pro active mindset, he wanted to take the game to the opposition and play in their half. The difference is he could rely on individual quality more to make a difference as 1) the difference in that area with other PL teams was much bigger than it is now and 2) opponents were not as micro coached to block you from playing as they are nowadays with the likes of Wolves and Aston Villa being coached by elite coaches from the continent.
If the theory is we will take the game to you and pin you back, you naturally have to focus more on the details on how to do it, the more your opponents are equipped to stop you and exploit the space you leave behind which is what happened in the past decade or so. This is why Ole is a mediocre moden coach because he copy pasted what he saw under Fergie without having the skills to coach it to the necessary levels it is today. When that happens, your team will naturally have to drop deeper in order to avoid being picked up by counters which leads to a playing style that looks reactive and over reliant on hopeful counter attacks. That is what we had to revert to as well under Fergie when we came up against well drilled European opponents, especially in his later years when we just didn't have the tactical nous to play higher up the field and were forced to cover for it with by far the least complicated strategy; defending with bodies behind the ball. Basically what only the likes of Barcelona could do to us under Fergie back in the day, even a mid table team can do now, hence, it is becoming more and more necessary to really focus on the detail if you want to play higher up the field. Mourinho, Conte, Simeone and Allegri are probably the only active big name managers working today who don't even attempt to be pro active and choose the deeper line from the get go which manisfests usually in what looks like and is called counter attacking football.
EtH's so far looks like a very pro active manager who has clear principles but is very pragmatist when it comes to how to integrate their details and being flexible depending on the requirements and resources of the here and now. The ultimate balance of keeping the ball and still looking dangerous is the dream of any such coach but they have to be realistic as only one team in recent history reached that kind of perfection and even its manager Pep had to be flexible and evolve with the times. EtH is starting from a lower point and is also managing a club that demands a more vertical play style because of the players we have now and also our traditions as a club. It seems to me like a perfect marriage if this manager can mould his principles and superior coaching skills to the likes of Ole, to implement the closest version to how we used to play in respect to modern tactical requirements.
I certainly didn't take those quotes as "we're a counter-attacking underdog team". More of a relentless approach. And we play with a very high line so the idea is obviously to try to suffocate teams high up the pitch and if we manage to start hitting the net we can finish games off early, which is what SAF used to routinely do.
Makes one think how Eriksen will fare in the team as his out of possession qualities are minimal and he looks quite rusty so far in pre-season. Maguire is obviously an atrocious fit, while Lindelof has better technical ability though he's not a great fit either.
All the attackers are suited to this style of play as long as their off the ball work is of the required standard. Sancho can still salvage his career here, but he'll need to completely turn things around in terms of work ethic.
Makes one think how Eriksen will fare in the team as his out of possession qualities are minimal and he looks quite rusty so far in pre-season. Maguire is obviously an atrocious fit, while Lindelof has better technical ability though he's not a great fit either.
All the attackers are suited to this style of play as long as their off the ball work is of the required standard. Sancho can still salvage his career here, but he'll need to completely turn things around in terms of work ethic.
They might not perfectly fit but I think a team can adapt. I recall Liverpool finding some use for Thiago whose off the ball contribution is not the best I'd say and they still came close to a quadruple. I don't think Lindelöf is less mobile or skilled than some of their CBs either. Maguire on the other is another issue.
That's based on the assumption that we'll play exactly like Liverpool when we haven't really got the same profile of a team to that Liverpool team 3-4 years ago. I'd argue that that team at the time had 5-6 world class players, two great full backs, an attacking trio that all carried a goal threat and a work horse and energetic midfield. Our first XI has progressed to a backline that can play a high line and capably build play from the back while we have a rather limited goal threat up front and we're a bit too predictable, i.e. our attackers. The midfield is still the issue for me though as we have two energetic players in Bruno and Mount but neither really carries the ball through the pitch. Martinez is absolutely crucial to our team, if he's not pulling the strings our tempo drops (would love to see the difference in passing tempo with and without him).
That Liverpool side had one glaring weakness and that was the 2nd centre back. We've seen this pre-season that Lindelof is less comfortable with the buildup phase than the two first choice centre backs, though he performed way above my expectations when he stepped in in the last third of last season. Fine as a squad player though, but I would worry about things if Varane picks up an injury that keeps him out for a stretch of games. I think we must surely be looking for a young centre back option in case we manage to offload Maguire.
This thread reveals so much about the way people make their minds up about narratives on day 1.
With Ole, it was that he was a clueless PE teacher with no footballing knowledge. With EtH it's that he's a modern manager who plays a high line and likes to keep possession.
Regardless of the reality, people will stick with these ideas because they've already posted their predictions on the internet and don't want to admit they were wrong. They also like the idea of having a manager with who has a fashionable style they can namecheck without actually understanding, like tiki-taka or heavy metal football. And now that he's used the word "transition" many of those same people have thrown the dummy out of the pram.
EtH may be looking to eventually make United a possession team. And Onana will help us be a high defensive line team. But let's not rewrite history or gaslight ourselves into believing something that patently didn't happen.
The team is a work in progress. We've taken a backward step and will hopefully now take two steps forward. But it remains to be seen. As of our last competitive game, we were still more of a low block side and low possession than we were under Ole.
With Ole, it was that he was a clueless PE teacher with no footballing knowledge. With EtH it's that he's a modern manager who plays a high line and likes to keep possession.
Regardless of the reality, people will stick with these ideas because they've already posted their predictions on the internet and don't want to admit they were wrong. They also like the idea of having a manager with who has a fashionable style they can namecheck without actually understanding, like tiki-taka or heavy metal football. And now that he's used the word "transition" many of those same people have thrown the dummy out of the pram.
| Season | Manager | Possession | Goals scored | Height of defensive line |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19/20 | Ole | 54.6% | 66 | 45.07m (5th highest in the league) |
| 20/21 | Ole | 54.5% | 73 | 46.16m (4th highest in the league) |
| 21/22 | Mostly Rangnick | 52.1% | 57 | 42.82m (14th highest in the league) |
| 22/23 | EtH | 53.8% | 58 | 42.92m (14th highest in the league) |
EtH may be looking to eventually make United a possession team. And Onana will help us be a high defensive line team. But let's not rewrite history or gaslight ourselves into believing something that patently didn't happen.
The team is a work in progress. We've taken a backward step and will hopefully now take two steps forward. But it remains to be seen. As of our last competitive game, we were still more of a low block side and low possession than we were under Ole.
nah it wasn’t?
he utilised counter-attack really well and towards the end of his reign it was used more in the big games… but most of his teams wanted to dominate the ball
I agree that we're yet to have the potency of that Liverpool side but my point is they still could find a role for someone of a different profile than most of their midfielders. We are missing goals and more control which are probably the two most difficult things to develop but Eriksen being there is not necessarily a handicap to achieving either, he might even be a help in certain scenarios.
I rarely advocate too many signings but in the case of an extra centre back, I definitely agree as Varane simply can't be trusted with his fitness. I'd be surprised if he would be playing twice a week also so our backup defenders will probably play a lot of football this season and whereas we can do with a decent if not a perfect fit one in Lindelöf, it would be a handicap with two.
I think this ignores our striker problem last season along with the fact that ETH changed his approach after 2 matches because of how low in confidence the squad was as a whole. It's not like ETH was trying to use his preferred tactics every match and that average is a reflection of exactly how he wants to play. That average is the average of everything last season, of which as I said, included ETH abandoning playing out from the back for large periods of the season.
The big difference is how structured everything is now. Did Ole have United press? Yes. However, was it as structured/organized as the way ETH wants us to press? No it was not. That's one key example.
I will always credit Ole for making our counter attacks better compared to Mourinho. That was one of my biggest criticisms of Mourinho.
As I wrote in my previous post, I think Ole is also a pro active coach in principle and like Fergie, did aim to play on the front foot, hence how he tried to position his team. His problem was that he lacked the coaching ability to marry that with solidity. We looked fragile and even mid table opponents could pass through our midfield because our high positioning and front foot approach was not competently coached by the standards of the past decade. EtH is working towards playing how Ole wanted to but understands that it's hard to just go out and ask the players to do this relying on attitude and mentality which meant we saw glimpses of a coherent front approaches mixed with the short cut that is a low block when the games came every three days and the team wasn't coached properly.
We're still a counter attack team first and foremost
From how we played vs Real Madrid, Arsenal and Dortmund, I'm not sure how you got that conclusion.
We didn't sit back in a low block vs any of them.
Ole was never a training ground coach, he was a dressing room manager. Building team spirit and managing in-game tactics was what he was good at, so he delegated every else to the team that had built around him.
The coaching was left to McKenna, Carrick and Phelan, much like Fergie did towards the end of his career.
I think Solskjaer and the coaching team wanted to change our style in 2021/22 but Ronaldo came in and undermined his authority with the backing of Woodward. You can pretty much draw an exact correlation between our bad times and Ronaldo across the tenures of Ole, Rangnick and EtH.
We're more counter attacking now than we have been at any time since Jose.
With Mount I think signing him for where we want to get, I think he's a good player with the right attitude and work ethic, but as a guaranteed starter (#7 shirt) I'm on the fence. If by next season he's a rotational player (quality depth, versatile) that would be logical to me, but he's burdened by that shirt number.
I'm more than happy to observe him have an outstanding season and become some sort of a cult figure at the club, but I'd be very surprised.
Maybe my biggest issue here is giving him that shirt number, but it does carry a lot of weight. Maybe I read too much into ETH's decision there.
Ole also had a striker problem with Lukaku. The problem was that he had to contend with Woodward's slow motion transfer dealings, constant contract extensions to preserve player value and stubborness when selling players to free up squad places.
Ole's 2020/21 team actually regained the ball equally as quickly as EtH's. We had plenty of structure to our pressing, it's just that it was never acknowledged because people didn't want to credit Solskjaer with doing anything trendy. Like I said, the narrative was that Ole was an old fashioned British (!) manager, even if the reality didn't bear that out.
To his credit, EtH's team is quicker to take shots after regaining possession. But that point is different from the pressing one and illustrates his preference for quick transitions that lead to quick counter attacks.
Fergie gave the number to Owen after Ronaldo. It's not a big deal honestly.
I don't think Mount will be a game changer for us or anyone really. He seems like the sort of player who will be blamed for our failures as he doesn't do anything obvious for lack of better word. But he is also the type of player who will be credited for being an essential cog in a well oiled machine. He is a bit like a Carrick in that regard, who I am sure if we didn't do well between 2007 and 2013 would have been slaughtered for being a sorry excuse of a replacement for Keane. I don't care about the number to be honest especially since we don't have any obvious candidates there and I don't think Mount has the profile where fans would expect from him what we did from Cantona, Beckham and Ronaldo.
Of course we should build on counter attack play. It’s basically the main strength of our current squad and our key players - Bruno (best on providing final ball), Rashford (best on counter with pace), Antony (good at press resistance and progressive carries) and adding to that Mount (good quick one touch transitional pass) and Hojlund too (best at breaking def line with pace to receive progressive pass)
True. And the fact that Fergie exploited the pace of our forwards back then means that counter attack wasn't seen as something bad. Contrary to popular opinion these days where counter attack = bad strat, bad manager.
It's bad when it's your main go-to strategy and also if it means your team is committing too many men behind the ball requiring more individual quality to pull off the counters. But if it's one extra weapon and done in a way that maximises its chances of success by winning the ball back from less deep positions and having the luxuary of utilising more players on the counter, that's a completely different thing. That's pro active countering rather than we'll defend for our lives with as many as possible and hopefully one of the front players can pull off something from a hopeful long ball.
I agree. Fergie's counter attack wasn't like Jose shite ball where he parked the bus. It did happen when our midfield were outclassed by the opponents (in tough away games & CL) but that's being smart rather than shooting ourselves in the foot. Turns out, fundamentally football has never really changed. It's how you maximize the potential of your squad and be flexible than being allergic to a certain pattern. I know there were plenty of posters who expected Ten Hag to be more like Pep (more control and possession based), without realizing Pep's city also scored a lot of counter attacks. And that's why when they saw this quote from Ten Hag they see it as a regression. Personally I'm happy United have a manager who is not a one trick pony.
I like watching counter attacking football, and we have the pace in the team to do it really well. There's nothing wrong with it.
There's no golden rule that says we need 70% possession, what you do with the ball is much more important that how long you have it for.
There's no golden rule that says we need 70% possession, what you do with the ball is much more important that how long you have it for.
What structure do we have now exactly? If anything, our counter attack was pretty shit. Well, that is true for the whole front attacking play in general anyway. It included giving Rashford the ball to see if he could dribble and score or Antony shooting from the same angle about 10 times a game.
You hope we improve that this season but to say we had a (better) structure with our attacking play last season was taking a piss.
No I mean our goals are generally on the break
Scored 121 goals one season.
I know it's popular to just thoughtlessly meme but we were brilliant on the break under ole before the wheels came off early the following season
ETH wants to be the best in the world and we were not that. But we don't need to batter the good parts of oles team here to protect ETH.
Because they automatically assume it involves you sitting deep and playing negative football.
Ole did actually quite well with what he had at his disposal. He had a poor defensive line and midfield, but for a period of time excellent attack in Martial, Greenwood (both outscored their xG at least two seasons in a row) + Bruno and Rashford always a threat on the counter. People are not happy to admit that, but our best setup was with Fred and McTominay doing the dirty work and simply passing it quickly to attacking formation to do the magic. The problem was he never improved his squad. ETH did just that and that's where most improvement came from.
It's interesting because current ETH side is significantly better in defense and midfield, but the attack is nowhere near prime MMM days. We could easily play more possession based football with this squad so for me it's a bit strange ETH is pushing so much for the "transition" football. It's one thing saying this to the public, but we do seem extremely direct most of the time so there is something in it.
No he didn't.
Yes, those 3 were great at countering, but Ferguson's great teams were way more than counter attacking teams, they were also dominant in using the ball to overwhelm teams in possession.
Have you all forgotten his teams "throwing the kitchen sink" at opponents?
Fergie did choose counter attack as one of his many weapons. So he was not allergic to it regardless of his forwards quality. What he didnt chose was mindlessly keeping triangles and maintaining 60%+ posession for the sake of philosophy.
What do you mean by counter attacking structure though?
Because to me last season was still all about the long ball to Rashford.
Last edited:
Lots of people in this thread equating the idea of transitions with counter attacking, and therefore totally misunderstanding what transitions are, and what the manager is actually talking about.
Champagne stuff
This is the idea when building out from the back. Suck the opponent in then hit them fast. Very similar play to the Antony goal against Arsenal last season. I think we'll do this when building from the back.
When the opponent are in possession I expect counter pressing. Set traps, win the ball and quick attacks. That's why he wanted Mount and Hojlund both pressing monsters.