Well that's just bad logic. "His mistake only mattered because someone else also made a mistake, hence the other person is more to blame." Could you imagine if that was actually a valid excuse?
5
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 55
- Clean sheets
- 24
- Goals
- 3
- Assists
- 1
- Yellow cards
- 9
- Status
Again go look it up. Its a normal thing. You might not be
Let me see if I've got this straight: Lindelöf's mistake causes Maguire's mistake. Therefore, had Lindelöf not made a mistake, then neither would Maguire?
It wouldnt be a mistake, unless Lindelof messes up dealing with the header correct. And again he doesnt have to win the header, just needs to stop his man flicking it into the path of another player. He could even foul him if needed.
Basic center back job. When one move forward to challenge for a header, the other one is supposed to cover him. Every match one center back attacks a ball and lose the challenge and his partner clears it and no one pays attention. Its so common. But Maguire was out of position which caused the goal. He was more at fault
He should have moved to cover his partner when his partner moved to challenge, but failed to do so. Regardless of whether or not Lindelöf won the challenge, Maguire should have been in position to cover, and he wasn't. His mistake was completely separate from Lindelöf's. Had the challenge been won, Maguire failing to cover his partner would still have been a mistake, albeit one without consequence. So your claim, that 'X happened before Y, therefore X caused Y' is demonstrably false. Or to put it in Latin: Cum hoc non est propter hoc.
No because if Lindelof deals with the situation in any way, shape or form Maguire's position can actually be of benefit to us.
If for example he doesn't win the header, but instead puts his player off balance and instead of heading the ball into the attackers path it skews off towards our left side Maguire now has lots of space to run the ball into, especially with Shaw hurt. If he gives away a freekick then no difference. If Lindelof wins the header, maybe it breaks to the left where once again Maguire is in a good position to move forward. And if Lindelof heads the ball back where it came from, again no difference.
Its only if Lindelof commits himself to trying to win a header and does a really poor job, allowing the smaller attacker to head the ball into a good path for other attackers that we are in trouble. And of course thats what Lindelof does.
He's out of position if his CB partner fails to deal with it, sure. If any number of the other possible actions happened Maguire can actually be in the right position with Shaw hurt. Thats why its Lindelof's mistake that causes this because if he does literally anything other than what he did, Maguire's position is either of no consequence or can actually benefit us.
They both made a mistake and its bad communication from them, but its only if Lindelof does exactly what he did that we get found out.
No Maguires mistake is his positioning before lindelofs mistake.
As you illustrate yourself, it's very hard to predict how a challenge for a high ball like that might end up. Which is why, when one CB move to challenge, the other moves to cover. That's basic defending. Had there actually been a sign that he was preparing himself for another outcome, or that he was covering for Shaw, it might have been different, but there wasn't. He was in no-man's-land, ball watching, only reacting when Ayew blitzed past him. You can list as many eventualities as you like, it's completely meaningless when it's obvious that none of them were on Harry's mind, and when only luck would have had him in the right position.
Congratulations on being able to read minds
Still going on about him not dropping deeper, playing closer to his own goal just to babysit Lindelof? He could have covered it clearly, but realistically that wasn't even on his mind probably as we're playing on the front foot now. It just shows that being able to hold your own physically in this league can give you some leeway when it comes to style of play, like playing in a high line. I don't think either is particularly suited to it, especially not together. They don't have the pace to recover really. Even if Maguire was a bit closer it would have been a problem as he had to be like right next to him if he was to intercept it, it would've never worked if he ran back to win it, not from a natural distance anyway.
However, I'm really pleased with Maguire since he arrived. His passing was really good and I hope to see a lot more of it. I'm impressed so far.
However, I'm really pleased with Maguire since he arrived. His passing was really good and I hope to see a lot more of it. I'm impressed so far.
Cooperating in defence is not baby sitting. Lindelof does the same for Maguire. Was a very similar situation against Southampton where Maguire lost control of the ball in an aerial duel against a 30 kg and 20 cm smaller attacker. Lindelof didn't assume Maguire would control the situation himself against this tiny guy, but instead covered and saved the situation, otherwise it would have been 1-1 with DDG. It's not baby sitting. It is the way you do it, and when you fail there is a risk you concede a goal.
Last edited:
I remember that situation thinking Lindelof did a good job there. The question should really be, do you think this is inherent in this player? Because if it is, then it is relevant and if not it really is just an honest mistake anyone does from time to time.
Lindelof however has needed babysitting defensively several times in the past, in different ways. That doesn't mean he is totally useless and never do anything good, but it looks more and more like he has a few inherent flaws attached to him. That means, it is not mistakes it is just his level and the way he plays. Much like Blind, or even Smalling. He could have a very good game and not be quite good enough at the same time. His flaws wont change, but how much or how often will it cost us? Surely not every game? I'll bet Maguire wont forget to cover his teammate every game.
If you talk about Maguire and his positioning in that situation, it looked to me as a mistake that can happen from time to time. But then I have read from people who have watched him more than me, that it was kind of typical him, like it was some sort of weakness. Let's hope it was just a mistake.
Baby sitting is a just a disrespectful and derogatory way of describing something that any succesful CB couple needs: cooperation and covering for eachother. And itnis common that the two CBs have different strengths. Even the CBs who are among the best in the world in the air would need a partner who cover for them when they go up in the air. Anything can happen and the best CBs don't leave that possibility. Quoting an old Steven Seagal movie: Assumption is the mother of all feckups.
Not exactly talking about a balanced partnership here. So tell me then, what would you like to call it when you're playing Fellaini or McTominay as a third CB right next to Lindelof, just not to concede headers? Babysitting, that is exactly what that is, no?
If I could like your comment I would, you're referring to under siege 2. One of my favourites, however I sort of agree with what your saying but lindelof is a big boy, he needs to be more dominant than what he has shown in his previous 2 games other wise he needs to feck off and let Maguire hold the defence by himself.
I'm not sure what you mean with balanced partnership, because that is rare. What we have here is a pair where both are comfortable to move around the ball under pressure. To do that you need two, not one, CBs who are comfortable in those situations. That's probably why Smalling got kicked out.
I wouldn't say it is very common to see McT or Fellaini as a third CB but of course a manager in general think about the team as a whole. Sometimes player A can compensate some skills for player B. And why would you play player B I'll get he need compensation? Because he has other skills that the coach value higher. Not babysitting. This is something we see often at setpieces where a strong forward may help defend a corner or a strong CB move up to score.
And what you wrote:"Still going on about him not dropping deeper, playing closer to his own goal just to babysit Lindelof?" In this situation it is not babysitting. Lindelof is expected to do the same thing for him.
Agree Lindelof needs to be more dominant in a situation like that. Just expecting the world's most expensive defender to also do the basics.
And yes, great movie and one of my all times favourite quotes
It is not really that rare with a balanced partnership. Most successful partnerships at the top level is pretty balanced wouldn't you say? I don't really see our defenders being comfortable on the ball under pressure as the be all end all to a successful partnership either. Most teams in the league might not want to press as much because we attack a lot on the counter ourselves. It is much more important to actually defend the few instances in each game we're in danger of conceding a goal, rather than playing a few passes out under pressure for 10 games a season. I haven't seen much from Lindelof to say he is creative, however the last game I really learned something about Maguire's ability to be creative on the ball.
So a long hopeful ball in the middle. A center back should never lose a challenge there? Lindelof has his flaws, but to expect a center back to never lose a header there is silly.
Succesful partnerships have had more than 4 games together. It too early to say anything about that. The qualities in this partnership might be more suited in a team with a dominant midfield.
It has been very few instances so far, but that is a combination of facing defensive teams sitting back and good defence from United.
Maguire have had one succesful pass that created a chance and Lindelof ran through with the ball once to create a chance. Not much so far but it looked as both tried to play through the line more last match. Longballs don't create much when you face teams with 8 defensive players.
I remember when Pallister joined United from Middlesbrough for a verily high fee at the time.
He was awful in the first few months, but then his partnership with Bruce flourished.
It ll gonna take some time to see the best of Maguire - Lindelof. They have been together for about 1 month...
He was awful in the first few months, but then his partnership with Bruce flourished.
It ll gonna take some time to see the best of Maguire - Lindelof. They have been together for about 1 month...
Idiotic penalty to give away tbh.
For all his good qualities on the ball there is very little evidence, at any of his teams, that he makes his side significantly better defensively.
He is no Van Dijk that much is clear
yep
He has aerial advantage but is poor against technical players. He is easily wrong-footed and does not recover quickly. He is definitely not a Ferdinand, Ledley King, Terry or Campbell. He could do well against Kane or Giroud, but would have a complete nightmare against players like Mane, Sterling, Zaha, James and Pepe.
Hope he develops to a commanding defender.
How ironic is it when England's first choice CB is one of our academy products.
If we kept Micheal Keane, we have 2 english cb starters.
If we kept Micheal Keane, we have 2 english cb starters.
I only watched the highlights. Anybody who watched the match who could give a short review of his performance?
85 mill for this guy...
Some of you guys make me laugh, so one game against Kosovo and he's back to being average and a waste of money? Give him a full season, let's see that body of work before we start making assumptions. You guys seem to love reacting on a game by game basis and giving hot takes about a players ability based on one game then he shines the next and you go to the other extreme praising him. Let's discuss Maguire as a Manchester United player at the end of the season. Give him time, man's a beast of a defender and it will show across the season.
Good on the ball and at forcing the issue when they settled into a defensive shape but made a poor error on the pen. Should have cleared it, failed to do so and then fouled the player whilst trying to clear it on the floor. I'd say he played well but undermined it with that error.
Can you really say he played well when the fabled England defense that we should apparently be modeling our club after lets in 3 goals against Kosovo?
Yes. What could he do about Rice's error and Keane's error? He culpable for his own error sure but his stepping out and passing was good.
Since when are we modelling our defence on England's and since when did anyone describe it as 'fabled'?
Since everyone wanted our defense to copy England's, get rid of our CBs and play out from the back like England
And part of the reason people were suggesting Maguire would be an upgrade is that he'd be able to sort out his defense better than the players we had. More leadership qualities. So if it turns out he doesnt do it thats a disappointment
I don’t get it. He’s been class for us so far and a clear cut above anyone we had previously. I’d argue he’s been our classiest looking player on the ball full stop, never mind in defence and yet......one game against Kosovo and he’s suddenly shit/average! Give me a break! Michael Keane and the rest of that defence did him no favours at all and the only thing he was at fault for was he penalty and that sort of thing is just gonna happen over a season.
The majority of sides in football are now playing out from the back. United's desire to do so has nothing to do with England. Even Bulgaria and Kosovo played out from the back.
The only commonality is that your favourite player Smalling doesn't fit into these systems which seems to be the emotional driver behind all your opinions around these matters.
The knee jerk posts in this thread are something else. 
- Status