Yep. We had this issue with Michael Keane and Dyche. Kept playing him this and last season despite the mistakes every single week and it was super detrimental. Weird loyalty to having him before and knowing him from before played into it probably.
Is there favoritism or not?
- Thread starter Fortitude
- Start date
Yep. We had this issue with Michael Keane and Dyche. Kept playing him this and last season despite the mistakes every single week and it was super detrimental. Weird loyalty to having him before and knowing him from before played into it probably.
What is favoritism? A leader putting personal relations higher than the performance of the team? I don’t think that happens in professional football at this level. Managers live and die with the team performance, they’re gonna go with what they think leads to wins and points.
Do you mean that managers prefer some players over others to promote the team performance? Of course every manager favors some players over others, it’s what their job is.
Or do you mean a manager having a different opinion about which player will help the team performance than you do? As when a manager will play a grafter over a fan favorite at times, or an enabler ahead of a finisher, or let someone play themselves through a bad patch instead of benching them? There are thousands of visible and less visible reasons why a coach might want to let Bruno play through bad form but make sure Shaw has competition, or prefer Antony to Sancho despite fewer goals and assists. I don’t really think ‘favorites’ cover them so well.
Do you mean that managers prefer some players over others to promote the team performance? Of course every manager favors some players over others, it’s what their job is.
Or do you mean a manager having a different opinion about which player will help the team performance than you do? As when a manager will play a grafter over a fan favorite at times, or an enabler ahead of a finisher, or let someone play themselves through a bad patch instead of benching them? There are thousands of visible and less visible reasons why a coach might want to let Bruno play through bad form but make sure Shaw has competition, or prefer Antony to Sancho despite fewer goals and assists. I don’t really think ‘favorites’ cover them so well.
This ‘Bruno and Rashford our are best players, of course they have to play’ stuff is so simplistic. What about ‘our rules and principles’ that Ten Hag keeps talking about? Are they being followed? Does he actually have a plan or vision or has he simply reverted to ‘Rashford, Bruno, McTominay are most likely to produce a goal so out them on the pitch’? The plan isn’t much more than ‘anything can happen in a football match’ and just have as many potential goalscorers on the pitch and hoping they manage something.
I haven’t got a problem with Bruno and Rashford playing, so long as it’s for the right reasons. If we have an actual identity/plan and it’s just not been coming off in the final third, then fine, soon it will. But that appears to be giving too much credit. Rashford is literally left, then right. Bruno is 10, 8 then 7. There is no plan beyond ‘having them on the pitch increases our chances of ‘something happening’ really’. We can comfortably say in advance with such an approach that there’s no way that enough will ‘happen’ for us to achieve anything. The odd wondergoal from Rashford or wonderpass from Bruno is not going to take us to the top. It’s a disrespect and a massive underestimation of the competition level if he thinks that is a viable plan. How many goals does he expect McTominay to score for him? It won’t be enough. There will never be enough moments because these are not even Ballon D’or level players at their very best anyway. They are no better than the individuals our rivals have anyway.
I haven’t got a problem with Bruno and Rashford playing, so long as it’s for the right reasons. If we have an actual identity/plan and it’s just not been coming off in the final third, then fine, soon it will. But that appears to be giving too much credit. Rashford is literally left, then right. Bruno is 10, 8 then 7. There is no plan beyond ‘having them on the pitch increases our chances of ‘something happening’ really’. We can comfortably say in advance with such an approach that there’s no way that enough will ‘happen’ for us to achieve anything. The odd wondergoal from Rashford or wonderpass from Bruno is not going to take us to the top. It’s a disrespect and a massive underestimation of the competition level if he thinks that is a viable plan. How many goals does he expect McTominay to score for him? It won’t be enough. There will never be enough moments because these are not even Ballon D’or level players at their very best anyway. They are no better than the individuals our rivals have anyway.
Of course managers have favourites. Just as the fans do. If we all did our starting xi for Sunday with everyone fit, there would be dozens of different combinations.
He favours the best players. Sancho isn't playing because he's done nothing in the chances he has been given. Bruno and Rashford are being favoured because he knows if they find form they are capable of performances beyond anybody else in their position, although with Rashford I feel he must be running out of patience.
The only thing for certain is that ten Hag was 100% correct about Sancho. How Sancho has behaved in the last number of weeks is nothing short of a disgrace. He was given a lot of time off last season, time off to repair himself physically and mentally. The manager treated him exceptionally well. To turn round this season and not train well, then publicly go against the manager, then refuse to apologise in order to return to the first team, while still collecting 375k a week, is disgraceful. Whether he agrees with ten Hag or not is irrelevant. If he truly cared about the club or the fans that pay his wages he would have apologised long ago and tried to get back in the team, but he hasn’t. Ten Hag is and was 100% in the right here.
I don't think there's favouritism as such, but rather there's not quite complete trust or faith in some of the other players to take on the responsibility of being a starter or making consistent appearances. That's not to say that, in time, some of these other players can't earn that trust or elevate their game to a level where they are clearly better on a consistent and regular basis than some of our current starters.
The frustrating thing about a player like Bruno is that he can miss pass after pass for 80 minutes and then will pop up with a goal or assist. Sometimes we fall into the trap as fans of basing performances over the whole 90 minutes when often games aren't won that way. Games are often won in one or two key moments, like the cross that led to the goal yesterday from Eriksen. At the same time, our overall performances over 90 minutes needs to improve, and we definitely need more control and creativity over games.
The frustrating thing about a player like Bruno is that he can miss pass after pass for 80 minutes and then will pop up with a goal or assist. Sometimes we fall into the trap as fans of basing performances over the whole 90 minutes when often games aren't won that way. Games are often won in one or two key moments, like the cross that led to the goal yesterday from Eriksen. At the same time, our overall performances over 90 minutes needs to improve, and we definitely need more control and creativity over games.
Nah, it's mostly previous bad decisions he's forced to live with. People who expect instant results also forget that constantly cutting and pasting formations, tactics and roles on the pitch can be equally confusing and disheartening for the players who are the ones who must execute the plan. There's also this weird fetish among United fans that throwing a youngster in the deep-end is the best thing to do when the team isn't functioning properly.
I'm glad I'm not a manager as I would react fast and drop my best players and be surprised i continually lose 
Sancho is a typical example of someone who has god given talent but absolutely no drive or motivation. Wants to be called the best but doesn't want to work for it. He will wake up one day when he is 29 and has crashed down the leagues and wonder how it all went wrong
I'd imagine this thread is a subtle pop at Antony. It's hard to argue with that, as he's been dreadful. You could argue lack of options, but we need to see something different, at least tried. If you are a 70 million young forward in your first season, being flanked by Rashford and Antony, you aren't getting much service from either. Maybe try Mount, at the very least he works as hard as Antony, but potentially on the upside, he puts in crosses for Hojlund. We know what Antony can and cannot do, let's try something different. In Antony's absence we've tried Bruno on the right and it didn't work.
Antony can do whatever shit he wants and will never be criticized in public like Sancho.
Rashford is never subbed when we're chasing a winner even while ruining every possible attack.
Rashford is never subbed when we're chasing a winner even while ruining every possible attack.
It’s about Sancho. He might be an annoying git in the dressing room or training field. He might be needy, attention seeking and insecure. Maybe even more so than our other sick bird, Marcus. Mammy bird has to choose which to nurture and which to drop from a great height
Not this guy.
Harsh on Darren Ferguson.
Rashford and Bruno should have had at least a start on the bench, if only to show ETH is in charge and performances haven't been good enough.
Antony I understand why he starts because he is the best option there, Pellestri really isn't it and Amad is injured.
Antony I understand why he starts because he is the best option there, Pellestri really isn't it and Amad is injured.
Mark and Jason.
ETH may not have favourites, but he is certainly reluctant to drop or bench certain players. None, none of our players are playing so well, that they should be guaranteed a start each game.
I think ETH is finding it difficult, the whole job. It's too big for him.
I think ETH is finding it difficult, the whole job. It's too big for him.
I wouldn't call it panicking, more a lack of trust in the alternatives, who've continually disappointed.
Hopefully we do see Hannibal more, bht Eriksen is always used more deep-lying.
I did actually agree that Bruno should be rested sometimes, but I am curious how people think Bruno being benched will solve our problems. Will the team work better with Mount/Eriksen? Will Bruno recapture form with a break?
I dunno.
This is what I want to see, would make the midfield a lot more solid.
Having a favorite player and being guilty of favoritism are two very different things.
The question that you need to ask is, how influential is Rashford outside of his statistical productions? In other words, when he's not scoring (1 goal in 1000 minutes now), is his supporting role significant to justify his guaranteed inclusion?
In the last 365 days (passing and defensive actions) as compared to all players in his position. Higher percentile meaning better:
- Passes completed and attempted in the 17 and 8 percentile.
- Progressive passing distance in the 12 percentile.
- Assists in the 47 percentile, Expected assists in the 9 percentile.
- Key passes in the 14 percentile
- Passes into final third at 18 percentile.
- Crosses into penalty area in the 13 percentile.
- Progressive passes in the 26 percentile.
All the above are below and well-below average. He's averaging 0.97 crosses per game. Not even an average of one. Little wonder Hojlund isn't going to get service.
- Shot creating actions are in the 46 percentile. Marginally below average. Keep in mind, a good portion of this includes his good last season in terms of goal production. It serves as more critical examination of his whole game and not just on his numbers, which is the point isn't it? How good is Rashford when he's not scoring? How good was his general play even when he's scoring?
How good is his defensive contributions?
- 5 percentile in tackles attempted. Almost rock bottom. 13 percentile in tackles won. 12 percentile in dribblers tackled, and 6 percentile in dribblers challenged. Again, this is not in comparison to all players in every position; this is in comparison to players in his position. Even then he's incredibly low in this regard.
In possession?
- 28 percentile in successful take-ons.
- Carries in the 19 percentile.
- Progressive carry distance in the 36 percentile.
The above demonstrates quite clearly that you have to draw a distinction between Rashford the scorer and Rashford the player in general.
What has he done well?
- All his shooting based stats are in the higher percentile, of course.
- Long pass completion % is high.
- Passes into penalty area is marginally above average.
- Take-ons and shots as shot creating actions are very high.
- Goal creating actions are above average.
- Very high at carrying into the penalty area and getting touches in the penalty area.
- Draws fouls at a high rate and is above average in % of aerial duels won (from that position.)
Rashford is far from droppable when he's not scoring, but he can always score, hence he plays in the event he does, but he's not scoring right now, so, it'll take courage to bring Garnacho in and increase his minutes.
In the last 365 days (passing and defensive actions) as compared to all players in his position. Higher percentile meaning better:
- Passes completed and attempted in the 17 and 8 percentile.
- Progressive passing distance in the 12 percentile.
- Assists in the 47 percentile, Expected assists in the 9 percentile.
- Key passes in the 14 percentile
- Passes into final third at 18 percentile.
- Crosses into penalty area in the 13 percentile.
- Progressive passes in the 26 percentile.
All the above are below and well-below average. He's averaging 0.97 crosses per game. Not even an average of one. Little wonder Hojlund isn't going to get service.
- Shot creating actions are in the 46 percentile. Marginally below average. Keep in mind, a good portion of this includes his good last season in terms of goal production. It serves as more critical examination of his whole game and not just on his numbers, which is the point isn't it? How good is Rashford when he's not scoring? How good was his general play even when he's scoring?
How good is his defensive contributions?
- 5 percentile in tackles attempted. Almost rock bottom. 13 percentile in tackles won. 12 percentile in dribblers tackled, and 6 percentile in dribblers challenged. Again, this is not in comparison to all players in every position; this is in comparison to players in his position. Even then he's incredibly low in this regard.
In possession?
- 28 percentile in successful take-ons.
- Carries in the 19 percentile.
- Progressive carry distance in the 36 percentile.
The above demonstrates quite clearly that you have to draw a distinction between Rashford the scorer and Rashford the player in general.
What has he done well?
- All his shooting based stats are in the higher percentile, of course.
- Long pass completion % is high.
- Passes into penalty area is marginally above average.
- Take-ons and shots as shot creating actions are very high.
- Goal creating actions are above average.
- Very high at carrying into the penalty area and getting touches in the penalty area.
- Draws fouls at a high rate and is above average in % of aerial duels won (from that position.)
Rashford is far from droppable when he's not scoring, but he can always score, hence he plays in the event he does, but he's not scoring right now, so, it'll take courage to bring Garnacho in and increase his minutes.
Yes. Even SAF didn’t tolerate poor decisions from Beckham or Ronaldo, both levels and levels and levels so many levels in fact that they’re in a different planet to Bruno and Rashford.
But at the same time he had players who he would allow certain things but never to the detriment of the team.. eg Cantona, Ronaldo
But at the same time he had players who he would allow certain things but never to the detriment of the team.. eg Cantona, Ronaldo
Antony is the obvious one. He's clearly Ten Hag's boy for being so bad for so long.
Bruno and Rashford certainly have been living off reputation more than performances this year, but I'm not sure it's "favoritism". Bruno especially should have been replaced given our other options have mostly been fit now, and there's a strong argument that for all of the individual creativity Bruno may bring, he does so at a cost of cohesion and control to the team.
Bruno and Rashford certainly have been living off reputation more than performances this year, but I'm not sure it's "favoritism". Bruno especially should have been replaced given our other options have mostly been fit now, and there's a strong argument that for all of the individual creativity Bruno may bring, he does so at a cost of cohesion and control to the team.
You can say the same about literally any manager.
Even retired Fergie yelled at Ole for not playing passed it Ronaldo
Even retired Fergie yelled at Ole for not playing passed it Ronaldo
I don't fully understand who has "continually disappointed"? You can't be referring to Mount (who has been here 5 minutes) or Eriksen (who transforms us the minute he enters the pitch), who is it then?
If a player is not performing, then you either look for alternatives or you keep playing him and hope he gets into form. It's not like we don't have options now to try something else, but if ETH continues with the latter in my eyes he looks weak and sends a bad signal to the squad.
Is it a weird obsession or just par for the course? You have loads of people getting themselves in a huff because the manager hasn't made 4 half time subs every match. A lot of fans are just very consistent in demanding that the baby be thrown out with the bathwater.
I'd be all for bringing Rashford off the bench - he's got a bit of a supersub streak, after all - but we just don't have another player close to his quality among our forward options. Sancho was supposed to be that, but even before the whole mess, he wasn't playing anywhere near well enough.
Rashford has played 12 games this season, and has 1 goal and 3 assists. He has been dreadful.
Rashford was subbed off 2 games ago when we were chasing a tie against Brentford.
To a point I agree but a few caveats for me.
Rashford CAN be a finisher of great moments. Bruno CAN be a creator of great moments.
Garnacho is young, raw, inexperienced and is right where most level heads should be. I remember a certain R Giggs back in the day, fortunate enough to see his formative years. Anywho, with Giggs, if there were 2 or 3 at the front post, he would hit the back post. He would beat his first man but fail to beat his second man. All of this is footballing experience and good players will build upon this and the experience. A lot of younger fans wil see qulaification fgrom a group as a massive opporunity to driee market shaw
Found some of the replies intriguing. By definition:
favouritism
/ˈfeɪv(ə)rɪtɪz(ə)m/
noun
1.
the practice of giving unfair preferential treatment to one person or group at the expense of another.
In this instance, the remainder of the squad who don't get a look in as preferred starters literally play no matter what they did the game before.
The manager said players would earn their place in his team, not have it by default. What kind of message does it send out to the remainder of the squad if certain players are exempt from his own decree?
favouritism
/ˈfeɪv(ə)rɪtɪz(ə)m/
noun
1.
the practice of giving unfair preferential treatment to one person or group at the expense of another.
In this instance, the remainder of the squad who don't get a look in as preferred starters literally play no matter what they did the game before.
The manager said players would earn their place in his team, not have it by default. What kind of message does it send out to the remainder of the squad if certain players are exempt from his own decree?
Anony was out for like 1 month and none of his replacements did any better. Hard to call it favouritism when no one is knocking on the door.CAF said:
Dropping players for the sake of dropping them will achieve nothing.
In answer to the original question, yes, unquestionably.