ETHs System & Tactics 2023/24

[Lentwood]

Like last season, United have started disastrously. We've already lost three games and have been somewhat fortunate in the two games we did win. Wolves in particular was very concerning, as a very mediocre side, who struggle to score goals, picked us apart at will.

As we all know, ETH quickly abandoned whatever 'tactic' or 'system' he had intended to implement last year, and for the majority of the season we mainly lined-up in a pretty simple 4-2-3-1 formation.

After this shift, results improved dramatically, and although many posters now deride our form from February onwards, we still qualified fairly easily for the Champions League and won a trophy. Lest we forget, we had several significant injuries/suspensions after Christmas, played the most games in Europe, had Wout Weghorst as our only option at CF and a GK who looked like he'd bet against us every week. So all told, I'd argue ETH overachieved.

So, back to this season...again, we seem to be attempting to implement a new style...but it's not clear to me what it is.

With the signings of Mount, Hojlund and Onana, I expected it to be an ultra high-line with Onana playing as sweeper-keeper, Martinez/Shaw stepping into midfield besides Casemiro, Mount, Antony, Fernandes and Rashford swarming all over the opposition as high as possible and Hojlund providing the focal point.

This hasn't materialised at all, for whatever reason. Instead, Onana has been largely glued to his line, we don't appear to be overly concerned about having a tonne of possession, we don't seem particularly interested in pressing high, and we have the same old problems with our midfield being bypassed completely, leaving our defence constantly backpeddaling as the opposition pour forward into huge spaces - which as I have maintained for many years, largely as a defence of Maguire and Lindelof initially, makes their job absolutely impossible.

So, to the point of this thread - what is it that ETH is trying to do and why? For me, it looks ridiculously complicated and it's not clear what type of team we are. ETH has talked about transitions, and in some games we've looked to win the ball high...but in others we've seen this weird middle press...again...I don't understand quite what the thinking is at times.

What does seem particularly strange about this "style" is that players often appear in odd positions that don't suit them. We see Bruno picking the ball up at CB or on the wing. We see Casemiro playing like a rampaging #10. We see wingers defending and full backs attacking. We see huge gaps at full back. We see one midfielders manning 40 yards of space. We see inverted full backs completely bypassed with balls into the channels.

To be clear, this is not a moaning thread. I'd give ETH this season at least to get it right. What I would like though, is for someone to explain to me - what is this supposed to look like? What is the idea? Why are we trying to do whatever 'it' is?

Also, I will add...I don't just want to see pages and pages of people criticising the players. These are not "bad" players. They may not be world class, they may have weaknesses...but they are all international footballers. How many Wolves footballers would you swap for ours? How many from the Brighton XI at the weekend? The players aren't perfect, but it's clear to me that the problems are, first and foremost, down to the system/tactics.

 

[theballisround]

So, to the point of this thread - what is it that ETH is trying to do and why? For me, it looks ridiculously complicated and it's not clear what type of team we are. ETH has talked about transitions, and in some games we've looked to win the ball high...but in others we've seen this weird middle press...again...I don't understand quite what the thinking is at times.

What does seem particularly strange about this "style" is that players often appear in odd positions that don't suit them. We see Bruno picking the ball up at CB or on the wing. We see Casemiro playing like a rampaging #10. We see wingers defending and full backs attacking. We see huge gaps at full back. We see one midfielders manning 40 yards of space. We see inverted full backs completely bypassed with balls into the channels.

He isn't sure what his best team is, doesn't have the balls to bench a few people and play the youngsters and doesn't have the balls to play his own way game after game, he seems to adapt too much to the opposition.

Also, the players are mostly average. I mean you can look at the squad and really say, we have 0 world class players or even talent. But, the most important thing, the players are not fit to run the necessary amount for his style of play.

What people fail to understand is, implementing a "style of play" like Pep/Klopp/etc did requires massive change in the club, from fitness, to nutrition, facilities and so on, change the ownership does not want to do, or can not be convinced by the project leader to do so(manager). He has 0 chance of succeeding here as long as we have no DoF, we don't invest in facilities and hiring the best physios, nutritionists, etc.

So, in terms of his tactics, we will never know not everything is lined up in terms of structure, in and outside the pitch. We just seem to hoof it quickly to anyone who can make a run and hope for the best.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

The man who tried to keep the tactics as simple as possible lost his job and the day he stepped down he was in tears and looked that he had aged a decade in just three years. It's always looking promising until the time comes to make the final push and become a team that can challenge City and Liverpool. Maybe there's a lesson in that.

Onana will prove useful if the team is allowed to settle and gel together and we don't revert to route one football (again) out of sheer necessity. With him as part of the build-up in that diamond shape, we can eventually use rotations that keep both Rashford and Bruno higher up the pitch. On the left side, Martinez covers the side and allows Shaw to push higher, which is important because Rashford wants to start on the left, but he doesn't want to do any of the work a wide midfielder is burdened with until the ball gets into the final third. It also offers your main creator the opportunity to stay behind the press during the build-up, where he can receive the ball in spaces and during moments when he can cause maximum damage. That is, if he can actually occupy the designated spaces where the triangles are supposed to be formed instead of moving all around the pitch to find pockets of space because he feels the need to make something happen. But that's a discussion for another time. It also allows for the interchanging of positions between the DM and one of the CMs that can prove quite useful, if we can make the most of it with quick and purposeful passing.

But to the main point. Is it completely bulletproof? No, it isn't. Like most plans in their embryonic stage, it comes with teething pains and a series of misspells. One is that there are no ball-carriers, neither in the centre-half nor the defensive midfield position. Which, kind of, creates the need to have Shaw more centrally in the rotations, but that would demand of Rashford to operate like Martinelli does for Arsenal, but we don't do that at United. In fact, the player who actually does that on the other side pretty well is being shat on (i'm talking ONLY about ON PITCH matters) daily on this forum since the day he arrived. Which brings us to the most glaring weakness. Both our RB options can't be trusted, for different reasons, to be inverted FBs in the first two phases of the build-up. They become more active in the final third, but that doesn't solve the problem. The first idea was to push Varane into those spaces and it hasn't worked quite well. We need calmness there. If you think back, it's one of the reasons why LvG jettisoned Rafael out of the club in the first opportunity, but rated Valencia highly. That's also why (someone like) Pavard actually made sense, even as a short-term solution. Perhaps we'll see Amrabat dropping into these spaces with a different RW and Bruno in a slightly different role.

I haven't seen much of Hojlund to make definite judgements, but i think his main job will be to use his body to harass centre halves by using his dynamism and physicality to open up spaces either in behind or in the half-spaces. Unlike Martial, he's not afraid of physical contact and he has some bite in him. In which spaces he can pose a greater threat, when he is not trying to stretch defences, we'll have to wait until a bigger sample becomes available. For example, RvP's ability to occupy the left half-space to start and finish moves helped us turn an extremely one-footed and one-dimensional right flank into a potent weapon. Which is probably why (for clear footballing reasons) ETH wouldn't mind the reintroduction of the one who will not be named to the side. It's one of those times when doing the right thing might leave you handicapped in here and the now. Back to Hojlund, i maintain that his main job will be to open up pockets of space for him and the others. Meaning, he may not score a gazillion of goals (doesn't mean, like Antony, that he shouldn't be getting decent numbers), but he still may provide the team with a great service. Who will be occupying these spaces, especially in the half-spaces, it remains to be seen. I'm not holding my breath.

Which brings us to the much maligned Mount transfer. Are the raised eyebrows justified? In part, yes. Should someone have raised a hand to discuss the tactical problems and suggest a different profile? Probably. But we don't do that at United, either. I don't know why Mount has got so many people so worked up. He's a decent play-maker who can press and works hard on the pitch. He can do an adequate (or close enough) job in deeper positions, but that's not the main reason we went for him. It comes natural to him to move into the wide areas, he doesn't feel uncomfortable there. So, the idea wasn't exactly to play 433, but to move to a more fluid 442-ish/4222-ish system with Rashford tucking inside to play close to the forward and someone else providing the width. This, of course, requires time and all the participants to be in sync. Maybe it will pay dividends, or it won't. But keep in mind that a "system" manager like Tuchel rated what Mount could bring to the table. Anyway, does it leave us exposed when we are in full attacking shape (316/325 variations)? Of course, it does. The tradeoff should be Rashford increasing his end-product even more and the team getting more runners in the box. And to counter that, we need to press effectively as a team in defensive transitions. It's what most good sides do nowadays. But, it's OK. We can buy the next Fred, put him next to McT and sit in a mid/low block and wait to hit on the counter. It will offer better results now and may offer us a good chance to finish in the top-four. More or less, we did that last season. It also seems that the Solskajer days are being romanticized once more. It's fine by me. Just don't create any threads in the near future asking why we can't get past the 80-points barrier and we always seem to fall short when the push comes to shove.

Now, we can go on to explain why we are failing so badly, but it will take forever. Plus, there are videos and articles doing just that. But it's one thing to criticize someone whose plan seems to be falling to pieces because things both in and out of his control have suddenly all gone into "worst case scenario" mode, and it's a whole different thing to pile on someone because you think he's clueless. It's not fair now and it wasn't fair when Solskajer was at the helm. Talk about their ceiling as managers, fine by me. But don't underestimate the magnitude of the task at hand. When the whole design depends on the manager getting every call right, the design will always fail.

One last thing, if you read this far. It's not a question of having "bad" players. Let me rephrase that, it shouldn't be a question about "bad" players. There are a couple of culprits, mainly in the Bruno and Rashford threads, that can make you believe that (perhaps triggered by others or simply mad at the state of the club). For what it's worth, i believe that Rashford is a great footballer and excellent goalscorer. Similarly, Bruno is also a great footballer and a top-class creator. This should provide the base for all discussion. Thing is, and i'm paraphrasing one of the greatest managers of all time, there's a nuanced difference between being a great "footballer" and being a great "player". They can both be a magnet for the ball and lead their teams to glory, but the latter open up more solutions, while the former will always demand sacrifices. For me, it's a nuance that should have also ended the GOAT debate before it even started. Anyway, i believe it often gets lost in translation how taxing it can be for the manager and the team to create and implement a well-functioning set-up around these two. In Rashford, we have a forward who wants to start on the left and occupy a midfielder's position because he hates contact and wants to play only with his face on goal. In Bruno, we have a final-third creating machine who wants to play as a #10 while his movement has little to do with that of an advanced midfielder. Why aren't the others contributing? Some of them are shite and in certain areas the manager has fecked up. But it's also because the set-up expects of them to first sustain and then contribute. In other words, if it's not working perfectly, they are unlikely to contribute, at least as much as we need them to. It is a consuming effort, even when it gets the job done. Don't forget that, until the 21/22 season, for a lot of people Benzema was the lucky bastard who collected CL medals for free and had the best seat in the house for Ronnie's show. When he was actually one of the key components that allowed Ronaldo to be so effective. Oh, and he could definitely score goals and lead the line.

 

[Lentwood]

The man who tried to keep the tactics as simple as possible lost his job and the day he stepped down he was in tears and looked that he had aged a decade in just three years. It's always looking promising until the time comes to make the final push and become a team that can challenge City and Liverpool. Maybe there's a lesson in that.

Onana will prove useful if the team is allowed to settle and gel together and we don't revert to route one football (again) out of sheer necessity. With him as part of the build-up in that diamond shape, we can eventually use rotations that keep both Rashford and Bruno higher up the pitch. On the left side, Martinez covers the side and allows Shaw to push higher, which is important because Rashford wants to start on the left, but he doesn't want to do any of the work a wide midfielder is burdened with until the ball gets into the final third. It also offers your main creator the opportunity to stay behind the press during the build-up, where he can receive the ball in spaces and during moments when he can cause maximum damage. That is, if he can actually occupy the designated spaces where the triangles are supposed to be formed instead of moving all around the pitch to find pockets of space because he feels the need to make something happen. But that's a discussion for another time. It also allows for the interchanging of positions between the DM and one of the CMs that can prove quite useful, if we can make the most of it with quick and purposeful passing.

But to the main point. Is it completely bulletproof? No, it isn't. Like most plans in their embryonic stage, it comes with teething pains and a series of misspells. One is that there are no ball-carriers, neither in the centre-half nor the defensive midfield position. Which, kind of, creates the need to have Shaw more centrally in the rotations, but that would demand of Rashford to operate like Martinelli does for Arsenal, but we don't do that at United. In fact, the player who actually does that on the other side pretty well is being shat on (i'm talking ONLY about ON PITCH matters) daily on this forum since the day he arrived. Which brings us to the most glaring weakness. Both our RB options can't be trusted, for different reasons, to be inverted FBs in the first two phases of the build-up. They become more active in the final third, but that doesn't solve the problem. The first idea was to push Varane into those spaces and it hasn't worked quite well. We need calmness there. If you think back, it's one of the reasons why LvG jettisoned Rafael out of the club in the first opportunity, but rated Valencia highly. That's also why (someone like) Pavard actually made sense, even as a short-term solution. Perhaps we'll see Amrabat dropping into these spaces with a different RW and Bruno in a slightly different role.

I haven't seen much of Hojlund to make definite judgements, but i think his main job will be to use his body to harass centre halves by using his dynamism and physicality to open up spaces either in behind or in the half-spaces. Unlike Martial, he's not afraid of physical contact and he has some bite in him. In which spaces he can pose a greater threat, when he is not trying to stretch defences, we'll have to wait until a bigger sample becomes available. For example, RvP's ability to occupy the left half-space to start and finish moves helped us turn an extremely one-footed and one-dimensional right flank into a potent weapon. Which is probably why (for clear footballing reasons) ETH wouldn't mind the reintroduction of the one who will not be named to the side. It's one of those times when doing the right thing might leave you handicapped in here and the now. Back to Hojlund, i maintain that his main job will be to open up pockets of space for him and the others. Meaning, he may not score a gazillion of goals (doesn't mean, like Antony, that he shouldn't be getting decent numbers), but he still may provide the team with a great service. Who will be occupying these spaces, especially in the half-spaces, it remains to be seen. I'm not holding my breath.

Which brings us to the much maligned Mount transfer. Are the raised eyebrows justified? In part, yes. Should someone have raised a hand to discuss the tactical problems and suggest a different profile? Probably. But we don't do that at United, either. I don't know why Mount has got so many people so worked up. He's a decent play-maker who can press and works hard on the pitch. He can do an adequate (or close enough) job in deeper positions, but that's not the main reason we went for him. It comes natural to him to move into the wide areas, he doesn't feel uncomfortable there. So, the idea wasn't exactly to play 433, but to move to a more fluid 442-ish/4222-ish system with Rashford tucking inside to play close to the forward and someone else providing the width. This, of course, requires time and all the participants to be in sync. Maybe it will pay dividends, or it won't. But keep in mind that a "system" manager like Tuchel rated what Mount could bring to the table. Anyway, does it leave us exposed when we are in full attacking shape (316/325 variations)? Of course, it does. The tradeoff should be Rashford increasing his end-product even more and the team getting more runners in the box. And to counter that, we need to press effectively as a team in defensive transitions. It's what most good sides do nowadays. But, it's OK. We can buy the next Fred, put him next to McT and sit in a mid/low block and wait to hit on the counter. It will offer better results now and may offer us a good chance to finish in the top-four. More or less, we did that last season. It also seems that the Solskajer days are being romanticized once more. It's fine by me. Just don't create any threads in the near future asking why we can't get past the 80-points barrier and we always seem to fall short when the push comes to shove.

Now, we can go on to explain why we are failing so badly, but it will take forever. Plus, there are videos and articles doing just that. But it's one thing to criticize someone whose plan seems to be falling to pieces because things both in and out of his control have suddenly all gone into "worst case scenario" mode, and it's a whole different thing to pile on someone because you think he's clueless. It's not fair now and it wasn't fair when Solskajer was at the helm. Talk about their ceiling as managers, fine by me. But don't underestimate the magnitude of the task at hand. When the whole design depends on the manager getting every call right, the design will always fail.

One last thing, if you read this far. It's not a question of having "bad" players. Let me rephrase that, it shouldn't be a question about "bad" players. There are a couple of culprits, mainly in the Bruno and Rashford threads, that can make you believe that (perhaps triggered by others or simply mad at the state of the club). For what it's worth, i believe that Rashford is a great footballer and excellent goalscorer. Similarly, Bruno is also a great footballer and a top-class creator. This should provide the base for all discussion. Thing is, and i'm paraphrasing one of the greatest managers of all time, there's a nuanced difference between being a great "footballer" and being a great "player". They can both be a magnet for the ball and lead their teams to glory, but the latter open up more solutions, while the former will always demand sacrifices. For me, it's a nuance that should have also ended the GOAT debate before it even started. Anyway, i believe it often gets lost in translation how taxing it can be for the manager and the team to create and implement a well-functioning set-up around these two. In Rashford, we have a forward who wants to start on the left and occupy a midfielder's position because he hates contact and wants to play only with his face on goal. In Bruno, we have a final-third creating machine who wants to play as a #10 while his movement has little to do with that of an advanced midfielder. Why aren't the others contributing? Some of them are shite and in certain areas the manager has fecked up. But it's also because the set-up expects of them to first sustain and then contribute. In other words, if it's not working perfectly, they are unlikely to contribute, at least as much as we need them to. It is a consuming effort, even when it gets the job done. Don't forget that, until the 21/22 season, for a lot of people Benzema was the lucky bastard who collected CL medals for free and had the best seat in the house for Ronnie's show. When he was actually one of the key components that allowed Ronaldo to be so effective. Oh, and he could definitely score goals and lead the line.

I agree with your general point about Antony and Mount i.e. they are ETH system players, and many people on here have been slow to understand that they're different types of players that we've seen historically at United...but that doesn't necessarily mean they can't be very effective.

I also agree with your observations on Rashford, but disagree that he's a 'great' player overall. For me, a player who isn't capable of competing physically can never be a top player in the modern era. Minimum expectation is to be able to win duels, hold-off opponents, fight for loose balls and work hard to close down opponents. He can't do any of those things and he is also careless with the ball at times. Therefore in my opinion, his ceiling is to play for a team who sit deep and look to burst forward at pace - generally these teams are not elite teams.

The interesting thing about your explanation of the idea behind the tactics is that I read it as every player has very specific individual instructions - and I personally really don't like that. For example, I too have noticed that Shaw is supposed to tuck into CM and Martinez is supposed to cover behind...but on the right side, it's Lindelof/Varane stepping into midfield and AWB covering them. Personally, I don't like the idea that each player gets very specific instructions because it seems that our tactics/system changes too much from week to week depending on availability. Again, see Eriksen in CM. Has a completely different role for the one I assume we have in-mind for Mount. That to me seems like a recipe for disaster. For us to learn a new system and formation is going to be a big challenge. For each player to have to learn several variations on that, depending on who is playing, seems too much.

Lombardi famously dominating NFL by tearing up the massive playbook he inherited and focused on perfecting what was essentially six variations on one basic play. Likewise, it could be said that SAF and Brian Clough played very simple football, and were dead against filling players minds with overly complex specifics.

I know football (and sport) has changed, so a middle-ground must be found, but do we not think potentially part of the reason for our bad start is that with every injury, and with every subsequent change in personnel, we're having to tweak a tactic that we're actively still learning? How much has Shaw's injury impacted the team, given he's the one meant to be stepping into midfield? How much has Mount's, since he's the one meant to be playing/pressing higher, as compared with the less mobile Eriksen? How much has Varane's injury disrupted us, if he's meant to be the ball receiver on that side? How much has Antony suspension disrupted the plan for the AMRF position?

 

[Toshey]

The fact that we seem to be haunted by constant injuries shows us one thing Ronaldo was correct to call out.
We are behind. Our recovery team is shit, our nutritionists are shit, our fitness coaches are shit.

We don't have the foundation to keep players healthy and in ultimate shape. So we are set to fail, no matter what players play and what the coach is trying to do.

I think ETH's attacking plan largely works. In the last 3 games we keep getting screwed by Rashford being absolutely selfish and bad.
Also we seem to be completely out of luck. Arsenal game is a good show of that.

I'd love to see our team at full strength but this seems unlikely for now.

 

[Redplane]

The fact that we seem to be haunted by constant injuries shows us one thing Ronaldo was correct to call out.
We are behind. Our recovery team is shit, our nutritionists are shit, our fitness coaches are shit.

We don't have the foundation to keep players healthy and in ultimate shape. So we are set to fail, no matter what players play and what the coach is trying to do.

I think ETH's attacking plan largely works. In the last 3 games we keep getting screwed by Rashford being absolutely selfish and bad.
Also we seem to be completely out of luck. Arsenal game is a good show of that.

I'd love to see our team at full strength but this seems unlikely for now.

Wouldn't surprise me if we re being run more like a mom and pop business or a unit of government, with a lot of people who probably should have been moved on and are just coasting. Don't get me wrong, I think the fact United seems to have so many lifers is also a good thing - but it probably also means that a lot of them are just there to collect a paycheck and not the best in the business. As long as the money keeps rolling in too -like it seems to if the Qualcomm deal is anything to go by - even the the higher ups probably don't care as much about making sure the sportive side is back to being successful.

When you're a smaller club at least the players will still be a lot more self motivated to play themselves into the spotlight of a bigger club like ours. I have a sneaky suspicion City is probably keeping their supply line of staff a lot more "fresh" than us, let alone the added motivation they have from having constant investment in facilities.

 

[gaffs]

The fact that we seem to be haunted by constant injuries shows us one thing Ronaldo was correct to call out.
We are behind. Our recovery team is shit, our nutritionists are shit, our fitness coaches are shit.

We don't have the foundation to keep players healthy and in ultimate shape. So we are set to fail, no matter what players play and what the coach is trying to do.

I think ETH's attacking plan largely works. In the last 3 games we keep getting screwed by Rashford being absolutely selfish and bad.
Also we seem to be completely out of luck. Arsenal game is a good show of that.

I'd love to see our team at full strength but this seems unlikely for now.

Not sure if that is fair to say. We were not suffering from injuries like this last year. Beyond Varane and Martial, who have legs made of French baguettes.

 

[Cassidy]

He isn't sure what his best team is, doesn't have the balls to bench a few people and play the youngsters and doesn't have the balls to play his own way game after game, he seems to adapt too much to the opposition.

Also, the players are mostly average. I mean you can look at the squad and really say, we have 0 world class players or even talent. But, the most important thing, the players are not fit to run the necessary amount for his style of play.

What people fail to understand is, implementing a "style of play" like Pep/Klopp/etc did requires massive change in the club, from fitness, to nutrition, facilities and so on, change the ownership does not want to do, or can not be convinced by the project leader to do so(manager). He has 0 chance of succeeding here as long as we have no DoF, we don't invest in facilities and hiring the best physios, nutritionists, etc.

So, in terms of his tactics, we will never know not everything is lined up in terms of structure, in and outside the pitch. We just seem to hoof it quickly to anyone who can make a run and hope for the best.

I think its harsh to say he does not know what his best team is when he started the season with so many injuries.

Until the gets the players he brought in all into the team and also Mainoo who he was clearly attempting to integrate. This is an assertion that cannot be made in my opinion

I think we can safely say that he does not see McTominay, Lindelof, Dalot and possibly Eriksen as part of his best 11 and they all started on the weekend.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

I agree with your general point about Antony and Mount i.e. they are ETH system players, and many people on here have been slow to understand that they're different types of players that we've seen historically at United...but that doesn't necessarily mean they can't be very effective.

I also agree with your observations on Rashford, but disagree that he's a 'great' player overall. For me, a player who isn't capable of competing physically can never be a top player in the modern era. Minimum expectation is to be able to win duels, hold-off opponents, fight for loose balls and work hard to close down opponents. He can't do any of those things and he is also careless with the ball at times. Therefore in my opinion, his ceiling is to play for a team who sit deep and look to burst forward at pace - generally these teams are not elite teams.

The interesting thing about your explanation of the idea behind the tactics is that I read it as every player has very specific individual instructions - and I personally really don't like that. For example, I too have noticed that Shaw is supposed to tuck into CM and Martinez is supposed to cover behind...but on the right side, it's Lindelof/Varane stepping into midfield and AWB covering them. Personally, I don't like the idea that each player gets very specific instructions because it seems that our tactics/system changes too much from week to week depending on availability. Again, see Eriksen in CM. Has a completely different role for the one I assume we have in-mind for Mount. That to me seems like a recipe for disaster. For us to learn a new system and formation is going to be a big challenge. For each player to have to learn several variations on that, depending on who is playing, seems too much.

Lombardi famously dominating NFL by tearing up the massive playbook he inherited and focused on perfecting what was essentially six variations on one basic play. Likewise, it could be said that SAF and Brian Clough played very simple football, and were dead against filling players minds with overly complex specifics.

I know football (and sport) has changed, so a middle-ground must be found, but do we not think potentially part of the reason for our bad start is that with every injury, and with every subsequent change in personnel, we're having to tweak a tactic that we're actively still learning? How much has Shaw's injury impacted the team, given he's the one meant to be stepping into midfield? How much has Mount's, since he's the one meant to be playing/pressing higher, as compared with the less mobile Eriksen? How much has Varane's injury disrupted us, if he's meant to be the ball receiver on that side? How much has Antony suspension disrupted the plan for the AMRF position?

Rashford has a lot of good qualities in his game, he's a good mix of pace, dynamism and directness. He offers verticality, he can carry the ball into the box and he can finish while running at top speed. For some strange reason, he has convinced himself that he can apply his skills only when he starts from the left and comes inside. For some stranger reason, the whole organization at United looks beholden to indulge his every wish. Which, kind of, turns him into a rather limited forward option. It also creates a domino of "fixes" that have to put into place to accommodate him and get maximum product from him. I made the distinction between a great "footballer" and a great "player" because his idol fits the description perfectly. For him to reach unimaginable heights in Madrid, they had one of the best FBs (a proper wide-playmaker in the attacking half) in the history of the sport behind him, Kroos (who can create a triangle in a phone booth) as support in the midfield and, of course, Benzema who was willing to do most of the off the ball work in and around the box. Before that, Ancelotti struck gold with Di Maria's ability and sheer willingness to start as a midfielder and transform into a winger so that Ronaldo could do his thing unobstructed. The latter, if you think about it a bit, is similar to what we are trying to do with Mount. But it's a lot of work. Whether it's worth it or not, it remains to be seen. But Rashford can have a role in a title-winning side. You don't just throw away players like him.

I agree that we need more options and better rotations in the build-up. But this has to do with personnel. Just today, ETH was asked about Amrabat and his reply was that he offers options as a) a central midfielder, b) a replacement for Casemiro (doesn't necessarily mean that Case will be pushed out of the team on all occasions, think about it) and c) as a right wing-back (which made me smile a bit because i mentioned him in the possible solutions to fix that horrible right side). ETH often does that when he talks about newcomers. I believe it's a sign of a manager who's currently starving for more and better options. It's true that we are hurting on that right side. It's a weak spot, it has been targeted since the preseason friendlies and it's still a huge issue for us. Not only that, but it also partially explains why he's hesitant to play a final third winger (Sancho) or a youngster (Pellistri) there. Contrary to popular belief, he wouldn't be doing them any favours. At this point, any injury matters. We are a team with few options as it is. We are struggling to find our footing and see what works for us and what doesn't, so that we can keep the good things and move forward. Being in a constant state of trying to plug holes, isn't helping anyone.

Eriksen is a weird one. If you look at his profile (wide play-maker at Spurs that can also operate as a midfielder), it follows a similar line of thinking. Help Rashford get closer to the box. He often does that. When Rashford tucks inside, he looks to occupy that left half-space (if it's not him, it's Bruno). When Rashford goes down the line, he tries to attack the box. Even last season, people were pointing to his position on the pitch being relatively high for a central midfielder. Then again, we think of him differently because the biggest impact he had on the side was in his early days when he was playing next to McT (and then Casemiro) and he was having an impact in a deeper role. What he can offer, that Mount simply can't, is the ability to operate as the left of the three players in the build-up. Which can be useful when Martinez is not available because it gives us a rotational option with Shaw in that area and/or it can allow Shaw to move higher to accommodate Rashford. He and Mount aren't the same players, but the thinking behind their purchases bears similarities. It also goes hand in hand with ETH's obsession with De Jong, who has the best qualities of both players and adds some of his own.

 

[Robindinho]

It's the midfield set-up for me. How is he not seeing the lack of legs/mobility in Eriksen and Casemiro? ...a diamond on the weekend and he expects Eriksen to cover the whole left channel?

Just stubbornness to not rectify it. Or he enjoys seeing us ran through at will.

 

[Cassidy]

It's the midfield set-up for me. How is he not seeing the lack of legs/mobility in Eriksen and Casemiro? ...a diamond on the weekend and he expects Eriksen to cover the whole left channel?

Just stubbornness to not rectify it. Or he enjoys seeing us ran through at will.

We didn't not have a fullback and we didn't have a LCB who shited over?

 

[(...)]

Looking from the outside, there are things in the last 2 games that should give you some hope.
Against Arsenal, ETH implemented a Brighton-like tactic to bypass our pressing and it worked pretty well. I think ETH wants to implement it against top 6 away teams to try to improve your awful away record last season, and I can see it being efficient once you get used to it.
At home, he wants a more direct approach, there was one passage of play that perfectly showcased what Eth tried to do : Eriksen got the ball next to your box, avoided pressure with skills, found a direct pass to Bruno, who instantly played Rashford in space who then crossed it early for Hojlund.
It takes time to implement these patterns, especially with so many injuries, but if ETH can be brave enough to endure bad results and stick to his tactics, you might be better off long term.

 

[Cassidy]

Looking from the outside, there are things in the last 2 games that should give you some hope.
Against Arsenal, ETH implemented a Brighton-like tactic to bypass our pressing and it worked pretty well. I think ETH wants to implement it against top 6 away teams to try to improve your awful away record last season, and I can see it being efficient once you get used to it.
At home, he wants a more direct approach, there was one passage of play that perfectly showcased what Eth tried to do : Eriksen got the ball next to your box, avoided pressure with skills, found a direct pass to Bruno, who instantly played Rashford in space who then crossed it early for Hojlund.
It takes time to implement these patterns, especially with so many injuries, but if ETH can be brave enough to endure bad results and stick to his tactics, you might be better off long term.

Yeah this is what I took from things myself.
Still the defensive issues needs resolving and with AWB now out for a couple of months, might be a long season ahead

 

[RedOrange]

Looking from the outside, there are things in the last 2 games that should give you some hope.
Against Arsenal, ETH implemented a Brighton-like tactic to bypass our pressing and it worked pretty well. I think ETH wants to implement it against top 6 away teams to try to improve your awful away record last season, and I can see it being efficient once you get used to it.
At home, he wants a more direct approach, there was one passage of play that perfectly showcased what Eth tried to do : Eriksen got the ball next to your box, avoided pressure with skills, found a direct pass to Bruno, who instantly played Rashford in space who then crossed it early for Hojlund.
It takes time to implement these patterns, especially with so many injuries, but if ETH can be brave enough to endure bad results and stick to his tactics, you might be better off long term.

I'm sure Arteta endured an angry mob of Gooners braying for his head for much of his first 2 seasons, but Arsenal's upper management and ownership were willing to stick with it. I'm not so sure ETH will get that from the Glazers.

 

[(...)]

I'm sure Arteta endured an angry mob of Gooners braying for his head for much of his first 2 seasons, but Arsenal's upper management and ownership were willing to stick with it. I'm not so sure ETH will get that from the Glazers.

For sure and I was one of them, I wanted Arteta out and hated the way we played. One scene in Amazon's documentary changed my mind : Arteta was imploring players to take more risks, to believe in what they trained for. It made me understand that he wasn't the one trying to have such a boring play style.
I have no idea if it's the case for you, and I'm certainly not going to judge those calling for ETH's head.

 

[jesperjaap]

Managres always judged on results, there were plenty of games last seasom we were really poor and still got results, especially in the final third of it.

I dont think we can use all the inury and off field concerns as a valid excuse for how poor we have been so far.

But I do think all the injuries are a valud reason we simply cant critique Ten Hags tactics at the moment. potentially six players are missing from Ten Hags ideal eleven at the moment and Bar Hoijlund only the first two games have we had anywhere close to a full strength side.

I thought our transfer window was way short of where it could and should have been and before a ball was kicked, didnt think we would actually make the top four looking at other clubs business.

I think we will finish between 5/8th which isnt good enough, but I do think our first eleven is actually not a million miles away from a good side. Whether we substantially improve is another thing though, despite a plethora of signings, there are still a lot of players here that have had injury problems,consistency problems and even appeared to down toold before....a number of them under three managers.

Where we havent progressed is yet again come next summer, we will be talking about a cull of ten deadwood players, there are still that many and coudl be more. We will also still be talking about needing quality reinforcements in three positions we have been saying that almost every summer for several seasons and I predict there will be a lot of talk of moving on HALF of the signings we have made under Ten Hag so far.

So personally all this tactcal talk, it isnt the big reason we are failing, it is the sme reasons as it has been for several seasons.

Until we are actually able to do a proper cull of players the press always mentions each summer, until we are able to have a window where we bring in the right number of players and the right type of players for the right positions.....the tatics are a side show.

This could be due to ownership, lack of a DOF, scouts or even having appointing wrong managers, but for me our recruitment has been our biggest downfall for a long time, not our tactics.

We have spent a lot of money in several of the summer windows over the last decade, but genuinely how many of those signings have people been genuinely excited about? For me most of them have been at the wrong end of there careers as for me beying Hoijlund and Sancho at the time, I have to go back eight seasons to Luke SHaw and DiMaria.

In the seasons since then I could name more than double that amount I thought at the time would be really poor signings, a few were higher fees, everyone of them has been in my opinion and tha isnt even including a couple of this seasons signings.

 

[FriedClams]

ETH wants his team to be

Onana

dalot
Varane
Martinez
Shaw

casemiro
Mount
Bruno

antony
Hojlund
Rashford

in tighter games, swap Dalot for AWB and mount for amrabat

that would leave a bench of

GK
Lindelof
Awb/dalot
Eriksen
Amrabat/Mount
Garnacho
Martial

we very likely Will not see that first XI play together this season, but I’m confident that’s what he was trying to build. Two full backs comfortable moving into midfield on the ball, solid CB partnership, world class DM with two 8s getting up and down, game changing wingers and a hardworking CF. On paper, it works, and I’d love to see that team for ten games in a row as I think it would let us be in control of most games we play, but We probably aren’t getting to see it and that’s not ETH fault.

 

[Cassidy]

ETH wants his team to be

Onana

dalot
Varane
Martinez
Shaw

casemiro
Mount
Bruno

antony
Hojlund
Rashford

in tighter games, swap Dalot for AWB and mount for amrabat

that would leave a bench of

GK
Lindelof
Awb/dalot
Eriksen
Amrabat/Mount
Garnacho
Martial

we very likely Will not see that first XI play together this season, but I’m confident that’s what he was trying to build. Two full backs comfortable moving into midfield on the ball, solid CB partnership, world class DM with two 8s getting up and down, game changing wingers and a hardworking CF. On paper, it works, and I’d love to see that team for ten games in a row as I think it would let us be in control of most games we play, but We probably aren’t getting to see it and that’s not ETH fault.

He will want Amrabat in the 11 with Mainoo as the under study.

They are the only 2 players in the squad capable of helping with the build up phase and progressing the ball through carries.