Yeah after Palace I was happy with the approach. Now I'm just thinking what the feck this, we had no idea at home to Tottenham. Too far.
Glaring systematic problems with EtHs tactics
- Thread starter Lentwood
- Start date
Its both our tactics being completely off and easy to play against, and our players being low on confidence and motivation. Both of these things are the responsibility of the manager.
At this point i can't think of a single argument for him to keep his job. We have a good squad, and it shouldn't be this hard to get us either playing well or wining ugly.
At this point i can't think of a single argument for him to keep his job. We have a good squad, and it shouldn't be this hard to get us either playing well or wining ugly.
This is the crux of of it. There are many details but this is ultimately what it comes down to.
The main focus of our set up and style looks to be playing out from the back to bring the opponents out to create spaces to move the ball forward quickly. Or alternatively, pressing aggressively to create turnovers higher up the pitch.
We don't do the first phase of these particular well most of the time, we're often caught in possession with back to goal while playing out, or we don't press effectively and get passed through with ease, leaving lots of space. If we do get the first part right, we then fail in the second phase, ie hurriedly giving the ball away, running into crowded areas and turning over the ball ourselves or worst of all, losing most of our 50/50 challenges which you need to win to sustain pressure if playing a pressing game.
It's a total non-starter the way we've gone about it, so I think we need a totally different idea to create a more solid base for a while.
Could be counter attack, or more patient possession with players closer together, but something needs to change.
Ive always been on the page where EtH didnt derserve the sack and earned at least another season after all the things that went against him last year..He dealt with an unbelievable amount of sh*te last season.
But also said, if he gets to continue this season, and clearly nothing has improved,, by all means pull the trigger. Going by the start to this season, apart from a decent game vs Barnsley, and a half decent one vs Palace, We look terrible. At the end of the day, teams just seem to find it far far too easy to play against us and thats on the manager,,
I cant see him surviving Porto and Villa.. I think Ruud could be in charge come the Brentford game
But also said, if he gets to continue this season, and clearly nothing has improved,, by all means pull the trigger. Going by the start to this season, apart from a decent game vs Barnsley, and a half decent one vs Palace, We look terrible. At the end of the day, teams just seem to find it far far too easy to play against us and thats on the manager,,
I cant see him surviving Porto and Villa.. I think Ruud could be in charge come the Brentford game
I have to agree with everything you've said, but this is not only the Spurs match, this meandering around as a collective of punch drunks has become the norm. Previous games (and far too many) we have witnessed this directionless and apathetic interpretation of, what I assume, is the manager's "tactics". We have all observed, far too regularly, how an opposing player can run almost the length of the pitch completely unhindered by any United player. I have watched other teams/matches and I fail to notice other teams succumbing to this "knife through butter" routine, as you say it's a "pub team" naivety, but I'm certain this "team" are all supposed to be international standard. The manager has to take his share of the failure of his "tactics", which , to me, seem verging on the surreal, allied to the lack of motivation, can surely see only one outlook, we will soon be requiring another manager. Considering three of the back four plus the 'keeper played for him at Ajax you would suppose they would have an understanding of his "qualities", and yet they also seem to have the appearance of "punch drunks". (By the way I wouldn't have the city manager anywhere near our club)!!!
Not sure about that. I agree on the observation, Mainoo isn't shining as bright as he did last season, but there are many possible explanations for it. Its Kobbies 2nd season, he became a regular, played international games even. We should expect our opponents to be prepared for us and our players and Mainoo. Which means, opposition players will know about his strength and weaknesses and they will be ready to make use of that. Same happened to Greenwood in his 2nd season.
You might have a point, there might be issues with Ten Hag bringing his points across but we shouldn't just assume this. For what its worth, it might as well be a situation where a player like Dalot or Antony nods and nods and agrees to everything the managers says, making the impression that he thouroughly got his objectives - only for it then to turn out to not be the case. You raise a great point, we certainly should have a manager we can trust to deal well with young players, giving them the right amount of time, the right amount of stick and the right amount of arm around the shoulder. But lets be real, that isn't going to make the search any easier at all.
Dont feel sorry for the players. Some of them have seen multiple managers by now and a few of them are senior enough to speak up, telling the manager "mate, whatever your plan, we don't think, it works like that" even if a young player like Dalot doesn't have the courage to do so. We have a long history by now for not being able to match the intensity of our opponents, that isn't just down on the manager.
I’m not sure there’s a way of measuring it, but I’d love to see a stat about the average distance between Utd’s centre backs and their furthest forward players, or perhaps their furthest forward centre midfielder. It would be a nightmare to measure, mind. EtH seems to like a deep defence as a guard against fast runs behind the back, but also a high-pressing midfield with often only one midfielder on defensive duties. It just leaves this gaping hole in the middle if the press gets played through, which it did a lot yesterday. It doesn’t matter how good the CMs are in that situation, absolutely anyone would look bad. It’s one of the reasons that I’m not completely convinced that Casemiro is past it, he’s expected to do a job that one man just can’t do.
Our pass maps regularly show this issue of how large the gap is between the back 5 and front 5. We don't play with a midfield basically.
Our pressing is utter shite
It is the same every week. Our back four are so deep that it creates far to much space for the midfield to cover.
In Sunday league you are told to make the pitch big in possession and make it small when our of possession. ETH has his teams do the opposite.
Why? It is because our defenders dont have the pace to play a high line? For all the Dutch / Eredivisie we have signed, Ten Hag didn't seem interested in the Micky Van De Ven, who is now the fastest player in the league.
In Sunday league you are told to make the pitch big in possession and make it small when our of possession. ETH has his teams do the opposite.
Why? It is because our defenders dont have the pace to play a high line? For all the Dutch / Eredivisie we have signed, Ten Hag didn't seem interested in the Micky Van De Ven, who is now the fastest player in the league.
He is killing Kobbie.
The gaps between our players is a huge issue. That is why Tottenham found it so very easy to play against us.
And their high intensity press meant that in possession, we were always isolated and gave the ball away.
It also meant it was easy to intercept our passes.
I have always said that when you are doing badly, you have to get very compact and keep the gaps down. Play tight and counter attack.
But yesterday we gave Tottenham, even without Son, the freedom of OT.
You also need your senior players to take control. But our captain charges around like a headless chicken.
It was so amateurish.
Don't give the ball away and make your team really hard to play against.
And their high intensity press meant that in possession, we were always isolated and gave the ball away.
It also meant it was easy to intercept our passes.
I have always said that when you are doing badly, you have to get very compact and keep the gaps down. Play tight and counter attack.
But yesterday we gave Tottenham, even without Son, the freedom of OT.
You also need your senior players to take control. But our captain charges around like a headless chicken.
It was so amateurish.
Don't give the ball away and make your team really hard to play against.
Correct.
Correct.
Teams like City , Arsenal and Liverpool are doing multiple transitions with respect to how their wingbacks play. Whether or not they invert stay wide, when they invert , where they invert. And all the permutations therein.
We are still in that stage where we have to essentially look at basic football 101s and still find ourselves not being able to do that.
This from a supposed high profile coach.
We are still in that stage where we have to essentially look at basic football 101s and still find ourselves not being able to do that.
This from a supposed high profile coach.
In his first year after 0-4 by Brentford he immediately consolidated the defense. He himself said playing aggressively doesn't mean concede 4. Team then played more compact and discipline. That was the time most fans assumed this is the right man to take the club forward.
I don't understand what stopping him doing the same? We have better defense now. Is that the management/Jim who has pressured him in playing this suicidal tactics? I mean I refused to believe ETH is some kind of clueless guy. I am not saying it is not his fault but there has to be something else too going on behind the scene.
I don't understand what stopping him doing the same? We have better defense now. Is that the management/Jim who has pressured him in playing this suicidal tactics? I mean I refused to believe ETH is some kind of clueless guy. I am not saying it is not his fault but there has to be something else too going on behind the scene.
Jim and the other INEOS guys weren’t here last season when we played with even worse suicidal tactics so not sure how you’re even considering that conclusion.
True. What is it then? The guy who immediately consolidated after 0-4 acknowledging tactical flaw, now refusing to do the same?
That was survival mode at the start of his tenure, since that first season he’s instead stubbornly determined to make his “system” work.
No-one wants to constantly play a survival mode brand of football, he obviously believes in his system and has now decided he’ll either get it to work else go down with his ship.
It's not that they aren't motivated, in the sense that theyre "not trying", they're confused and struggling to get to grips with a ridiculous system that is completely alien and unnatural to them.
You have mentioned Lombardi a few times...what did Lomardi famously do in his first NFL job at the Packers? He tore up the long and overly complex playbook and essentially replaced it with what amounted to one play (the Packer Sweep) with a few subtle variations.
Since there were so few plays to master, and because Lombardi's attention to detail was so great, the 3rd choice QB when he arrived, Bart Starr, eventually rose from nowhere to become a Hall of Famer. Many of his teammates also suddenly found levels that were way in advance of anything they had achieved previously, simply because they did a few things very well through relentless practice of a simple system / setup.
You also mentioned SAF...his football was about the simplest on the planet! Part of motivation is understanding and believing in what you are doing. The best coaches get the players bought in and make it simple for them to execute their ideas.
Great analysis. I also think that one of the glaring problems is that he is too fixated on a particular tactic and style of play. He's trying to get the players to adapt to his tactics, rather than changing the tactics to fit players available. The roles and job description should be clear for all the positions, and irrespective of who plays - the job should get done. For example, if Hojlund and Zirkzee were to get injured (god forbid) - he should get someone to do the job and do it properly. He can't complain and say that "Oh, my strikers were injured so that's why we can't score goals" - No! That shouldn't be the case. Take Haaland out of the City team right now, and they will still end up being 2nd and win most games! Football doesn't depend on 1 player. Its not all or nothing. No number of players can get us playing the way he wants. It simply won't work if he doesn't adapt.
With ETH's tactics and the way he wants play - there are probably 20 players around the world who fits that philosophy. Its impossible to get all of them in the squad, which means you have to adjust. But he is way too rigid in his approach, not just this season - but all throughout his tenure. If Casemiro doesn't have speed, if Martinez is injured, if Rashford cannot track back, if we don't have a left-back - feckin change! He has to mould the team according to the squad. Right now It seems its feck all if any 1 of his top players are injured or playing poorly, every other game turns into a rout. If Plan A doesn't work, go to plan B, then C, and so on. That is the sign of a good manager. Right now it feels like its Plan A or nothing. And when you have just the 1 tactic, you are found out very easily and teams can plan perfectly against you. That is exactly what is happening, and that is my biggest criticism of ETH. He is clueless!
Fine. You can argue, that "one" tactic might be genius (like Tikitaka, gegenpressing, etc.), we don't know. But the team has to win first and foremost. it builds confidence, in the manager and in the players. There's a slow and steady process of building it one step at a time. Do the small things first, and slowly incorporate the big changes over time. That is when players start to believe that this tactic works and trust the manager. If you recall, he tried to get De Gea to adapt to his "ball-playing GK" philosophy from day 1, and got hammered. Was it ever going to work like this? Its been more than 2 years, and we are still struggling to see a consistent shape and a style.
I agree, far to many managers nowadays expect an entire squad to bend to their will, rather than mould what they have into a functioning unit.
It works if you're Pep and you can buy three or four players in one position at the same time with no opportunity cost whilst you build, but it'd take forever for any "normal" team to achieve.
That's why the management above them is so much more important now.
Clubs continue with their philosophy, buying the players that fit, and get the managers that also fit. You don't need to change many players in that situation.
Bringing in a manager just to apply whatever works is a really poor way to get the best out of anyone involved.
What you say...
The players all ARE exposed by his tactics. Look at this thread -- half of the posts want to get rid of our best players -- do you think the players don't know that that's being said/thought? Who would want to have their career ruined so the manager can spend years working out the massive bugs in his system?
It's not clear to me that the "right players" even exist, but at some point the manager has to work with what he has.
Fergie used to have a “back to basics” outlook when things were going wrong. Get your basics right.
Currently we’re not getting our basics right and the players are obviously confused by the setup.
However ETH doesn’t have it in him to go back to basics. He will persevere with his way until they either magically get it, or he’s sacked.
The biggest problem managers like ETH have today is to admit that they are resorting to the basics. It's like admitting that they have failed with their tactics.
Successful managers (even those with a vision about how they want to play football) are the guys who are willing to adapt to the times , and even be ready to accept that back to the roots approach is needed.
Don't think ETH has the humility needed to understand what needs to be done. Incremental changes etc. That's all alien to him.
There is a spectrum though. You can have a broad philosophy or idea about how the game should be played but you have to expect (and be able) to make some adjustments. Take Klopp's Gegenpress...I bet his use of TAA was completely different to how he used his RB at Dortumund...he had a broad philosphy but adapted it to some of the strengths / weaknesses of his better players.
But I agree with your general point / idea, and this is why I don't understand why so many posters are scared to change the manager. I keep seeing comments like 'who would you hire?' (I could name 10) and also 'what if we bring in X and that doesn't work?'...well we fire them as well!
I'd hire McKenna...give him this season as a free pass and then demand top 5 next season...if that's not achieved....move on again!
"Coaches who can outline plays on a blackboard are a dime a dozen. The ones who win get inside their players and motivate." Vince Lombardi.
It feels very Dutch, to me, to play with large gaps between the players. Van Gaal did similar, with the aim that by moving the ball quickly it can create big spaces and overlaps. This feels incompatible with United being a turnover side, because as you say it means these gaps can simply be run through by the team in possession, and a press cannot be co-ordinates to squeeze a specific bit of the pitch, only a more general area, thus easily bypassed.
The more I think about it, the happier I am with what I just wrote, and my tactical analysis is usually gibberish. Possibly gibberish here too.
The more I think about it, the happier I am with what I just wrote, and my tactical analysis is usually gibberish. Possibly gibberish here too.
The question is, what is our philosophy? I've no clue.
Good post, highlights a lot of key issues. I think all these three things highlighted are based on our wingers though. They are not short passers or any good at taking a man on. They are quick transition players, so you really need to draw the press for the opponent, create the space they can exploit and you need players higher to play the passes to them running on - unless someone can play one ball over the top!
In my mind they have to be seriously productive if this is how we design our team and they're just not even close to the required output..
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5294650/2024/09/06/erik-ten-hag-tactics-debunked-manchester-united/
It’s an approach that saw success in Amsterdam because…
2) Ajax’s financial advantage over other Eredivisie sides allowed Ten Hag to acquire a higher proportion of the league’s best players, meaning his attackers were more likely to dominate opposition defenders, and his defenders were more than capable of bullying opposition attackers if they ever broke through.
You strike right at the heart of my recent worry as an EtH apologist. This summation has been gnawing at me. His ultimate style of football is made for those who have the best collection of talent I worry.
Last edited:
This has been an issue for a decade now. No shape, no structure, downed tools, players having more power than managers, bad investments or investments in players which create imbalance in the team, chopping and changing tactics or resemblance of tactics. ETH is the latest to that addition, he is adding more to the cause than the solution. It's the lack of conviction in ETH's own beliefs is what worries me the most, he practically threw the tactics after the 4-0 hiding in Brentford in his first season and went on a weird journey of fitting the tactic to a team instead of other way round.
Every single manager in this league or other has shown some sort of a style of play. 'Transition' is not a style of play it is exactly as it sounds transition of play, there needs to be a style in defense and attack for this transition to be effective. It can be only two things
1- There is tactics and strategy hidden somewhere and it's taking time to unlock it, once it does ( if it does) then we will be successful
2- He is delusional [ I dont agree this is the case because from what i hear, he is a very smart guy who knows and studies football] Maybe it's a Dutch thing
Every single manager in this league or other has shown some sort of a style of play. 'Transition' is not a style of play it is exactly as it sounds transition of play, there needs to be a style in defense and attack for this transition to be effective. It can be only two things
1- There is tactics and strategy hidden somewhere and it's taking time to unlock it, once it does ( if it does) then we will be successful
2- He is delusional [ I dont agree this is the case because from what i hear, he is a very smart guy who knows and studies football] Maybe it's a Dutch thing
In my opinion we have issues both when we're in possession of the ball and without it
In possession
- Our players lack the patience to hold to the ball and wait for openings + the work rate needed to create spaces for others to roam. Bruno tend to stay too close to the striker, Rashford doesn't make himself available enough thus we tend to use these long balls that most of the time end up wasting ball possession
Without the ball
- Bruno stays too close to the striker, the wingers barely help in winning the ball back (especially Rashford whose border lazy) and the full backs are going too high. That leaves CM and the CB very vulnerable especially when we're attacked from wide areas
In possession
- Our players lack the patience to hold to the ball and wait for openings + the work rate needed to create spaces for others to roam. Bruno tend to stay too close to the striker, Rashford doesn't make himself available enough thus we tend to use these long balls that most of the time end up wasting ball possession
Without the ball
- Bruno stays too close to the striker, the wingers barely help in winning the ball back (especially Rashford whose border lazy) and the full backs are going too high. That leaves CM and the CB very vulnerable especially when we're attacked from wide areas
Yeah but what does "motivate" mean?
I think the media interpretation of motivation is a bloke yelling at players and them running around like their legs are on fire.
Motivation is more subtle than that. It's about pulling together in the same direction and that means understanding the shared goals and visions and being able to execute a plan on how to get there.
If your point is that our players lack motivation then I might agree IF you mean they lack direction and purpose - if you mean they're not trying / can't be bothered (which is the only understanding of motivation the media seems to have) then I strongly disagree that that's the case
It's not evident from watching us is it
It seems EtH wants to encourage chaos and huge spaces because he somehow thinks that helps us create chances.
The bit he doesn't seem to understand is that chaos also helps our opponents create chances...and it's easier to sit in shape and pick us off, rather than attempt to be the "agents of organised chaos"
I felt, that the end of last season, where he reverted back (to a degree) was also an adaption. Same for this year, where how we set up looks more like his first season. But it is difficult to tell for now, given that Eriksen is an important player and how he plays influences the team. Might just as well be the case that his lack of mobility makes the formation look different, who knows.
I get that it sounds very plausible, that he is that stubborn guy who tries to get his will against all reasonable considerations. I don't see that to be the case, I'd agree through the middle of last season, where the injuries were high, I also thought he should adapt now as the player material was obviously not suited but overall, I think there isn't much to back that claim of being overly stubborn. And to be perfectly honest, I am actually thankful he isn't just ripping it apart right now due to some suboptimal results. We need to break some of those blockages, as long as we always get back to "keep it simple" as soon as there is some discomfort, we aren't going to evolve.
As said in another thread (I believe) I think it comes down to what exactly are the expectations for this season. I haven't seen us being relevant in any way shape or form, probably thats the main reason, why I am less impulsive about the results. I mean, I get it, the results are certainly lacking but it will be a difficult task for any manager to simultaneously repair the broken bike, tune it to improve its performance and try to get into top 4 of the competition, where opponents already have mostly tuned up bikes. I am not hanging on ETH, but I don't think, there is much hope for significant change. Obviously, if we are dumb enough and bring in some hottalker who'll setup with a deep block and have us countering, we aren't going to lose as often. Looking at the current threads, maybe we really have to re-do that cycle once again so a few more will take the lesson.
You are away that every sacking comes with a payment to the sacked manager, aren't you? It is going to cost a lot, just to "give it a shot" and when the successor fails, there will always be enough fans to ask to give him a transfer window and lets see from there. The decision how to replace ETH is very important and we if we don't get it right, it can mean even more time wasted.
Well said. It is a bit shocking seeing such mindsets especially in our fanbase, given that they must have witnessed what happened when we went through Moyes, LVG, Mourinho, Ole and ETH.
Yes the first part i agree with. But the second part comes from the first part if you know what i mean. If every player is motivated in the starting eleven, they will try harder.
Doesn't necessarily have to if we're smart....two year contract, no payout if minimum targets are not achieved etc...?
Wasn't there a tweet from the Athletic the other day, that a sacking would cost around 17.5 million pounds?