I would like to throw a question to all of you who believe Ole is clueless, does not know how to coach etc.
Explain how he managed to get 3rd place in 19/20 and 2nd place in 20/21 with the squad. It better be an answer that analyzes his tactics and in-game management and not dumb answers like "counter attacking" and "individual brilliance". To make your job easier, how about you guys analyze how we defeated Man City at Etihad last season and also the season before?
In case the counter attacking and individual brilliance replies come, let me explain why this is wrong. Ole's tactics are certainly not counter attacking, in fact his team is setup for a high press where he has 3 attacking forwards in a horizontal line and a center forward further up front. With the double pivot at the back, the tactics are aimed at blocking out the defensive midfield and main defense from playing the ball out. There is also alot more flexibility where the 2 forwards on the left and right side can defend and attack the wings without the need for the full backs to cover the entire wing.
Individual brilliance is also wrong as no players just go on to the pitch and strut their skills.The idea that players decide the game themselves is illogical. If that is the case, we might as well get all teams to play without managers. There are 2 reasons why fans think there is individual brilliance. One is due to the tactics that Ole uses, where the players are positioned in areas where they can make full use of their skills. The 2nd reason is that the players are quite direct and individualistic in their play, resulting in them being better at transitional attacks (thus the "counter attacking" feel) rather than creating and exploiting spaces against teams with low block. Since most teams come with a low block, there is a tendency for the players to try the individualistic approach due to their nature. Thus, the "individual brilliance".
Using his finishes as if they were some sort of impressive feat is funny to me. Let's get some context. In 2019/20 we finished on 66 points - same points as Chelsea. That was a whole 15 points behind City in second and 33 points behind the league leaders. We were closer to Bournemouth and Watford (who both got relegated) than we were to the league leaders.
We came 2nd last season due to circumstance - not down to our brilliance. We finished on 74 points, which going off the points required in the past few seasons would have had us 3rd. We finished only 4 points ahead of a Liverpool side who were basically playing with midfielders in defence for the majority of the season. Chelsea once Tuchel came in accumulated more points in that period than Ole did for United, whilst also winning arguably the most prestigious trophy available in football.
These 'achievements' if you can even call them that, without context can always be spun to look great. In reality, he's got a squad that is one of the most expensive on the planet and he's won the square root of feck all in 3 years, struggling to even match the points tally of a Jose Mourinho who also wasn't good enough, despite having a far better squad.
Let's start breaking down your assessment of the side now.
Firstly - how does the fact that the side 'presses' (I use quotation marks because our pressing is fecking laughable at times), mean we aren't a counter attacking side? Even that City game you used as an example, we were more than happy to concede posession to them, they were camped in our half for the majority of the game, they had a feck tonne of shots, just couldn't score and made some individual errors. Ole Gunnar himself claims we are a direct, counter attacking side, which goes against your point:
“We have a culture at Man United that we want to stick to: traditions, built from Sir Matt [Busby] and Sir Alex [Ferguson]: pace, power, quick attacks,” the 48-year-old continued.
“No one has invented any style by themselves. They have taken little bits from other managers and teams and I have taken a lot of my football philosophy from the time I was here at Man United and in Norway [as a player].
“I had some great coaches there with the same beliefs that we have to attack quickly when there is the chance and the opposition is out of balance then you counterattack.
“All the best teams can counterattack. All the best teams can break down a deep block. It’s about players – the quality [of them] and we are getting there – and getting better in most parts of our game.”
Also your explanation of forwards being in a horizontal line is extremely basic football. Most forward lines are alongside eachother, that hardly makes him a football revolutionary. Also yes, I agree, we do try to stop the opposition from playing out from the back - we are just fecking woeful at it, with players pressing out of sync, Bruno being the only one to press at times, leaving space in behind for opposition to progress further forward etc.
No-one is suggesting he just throws players out onto the pitch to play. The complaints being sent his way are that given his coaching capabilities/approach we rely too much on individual quality, whether or not that is his intention is irrelevant. If he is trying to implement a collective style that improves the level of the squad but isn't able to do so, that's still failure.
There are very clear issues with our play, that have been prevalent since he's joined. The improvement in playing personnel has made it more apparent as we are falling short in the aspects of the game that are far more reliant on him and the coaching staff than the players. Our pressing is very poor and unorganised at times, we lack triangles on the pitch and far too often players are situated too far from eachother, movement off the ball isn't good enough, passing is too slow and predictable, allowing opposition defences to shift over etc. These are issues that are his responsibility to sort out.
Lastly apologies, but your last point is fecking ridiculous. Since lots of teams play a low block against us, players decide to become individualistic? Firstly, I thought we weren't reliant on individuals, so which is it? You're claiming we both aren't individualistic and supposedly that the players also choose to be at the same time. Secondly, Pep, Tuchel, Klopp etc. have some of the best players in the world in their team and also have to deal with low blocks - that's literally the whole purpose of having a collective style. If you genuinely think players being coached to pass better, move better, if you can implement triangles which allow forwards to be isolated against FB's etc. isn't going to improve your chances against a low block, then there is no point even having this discussion, as we obviously very clearly have different opinions on football.
