Louis van Gaal | Manchester United manager

[#07]

Van Gaal's interview (BBC) post-match told you the difference between him and Moyes. That one line, quite openly saying, "I told them at half-time, you keep giving away corners and their superior height will cost us at least a goal."

It's a completely different attitude from Moyes and managers of his ilk who would suggest it's either bad defending in isolation or just bad luck. It's a mature management style of observing the play, noticing patterns, then letting his players know what he wants, why he wants it and then it's up to them to perform.

That's why he doesn't stand on the sidelines and that's why he doesn't rant and rave at the fourth official. He knows what his players are supposed to be doing. If they don't perform to his liking, he will deal with them off the pitch, in the dressing room or on the training ground.

I much prefer that style myself. Even in comparison to Ferguson barking on the sidelines.

Also the fact that Van Gaal repeatedly mentioned he was not happy with the result, and that we should have taken our chances first half. Thinking about the Di Maria volley...we could have opened the game right up in the first 10 minutes. Moyes said he was happy with point after Cardiff away, he'd have been drooling to have 'made it difficult' for Chelsea.

I agree with you that far too much is made of Van Gaal not being on the touchline. Touchline presence is mostly, in my opinion, a psychological trick. A very valid one, yes, but it does not work for everyone. Undoubtedly players were afraid to see Sir Alex on the touchline, and I think even opposition players felt Fergie's presence. However, Van Gaal is not Fergie and he knows that. Not everyone can get the 'Fergie effect' by going down onto the touchline. Nobody thinks Neil Warnock screaming at players from the touchline makes any difference do they? Van Gaal presents the picture of control: nothing ruffles him, there are never signs the plan isn't working. That's how he creates belief in his players, it seems. That's how he creates his aura. We gotta let him do it his way.

 

[Insanity]

Still has a lot of work to do. He has made some mistakes with the formation and personnel. He rightly talked about our unbalanced squad, but still failed to correct it (or may be there wasn't enough time to rectify it). Actually exagerrated the problem with the addition of Falcao. In Mata, Van Persie, Falcoa and Rooney, we have too many players fighting for the same positions. Which will cause us trouble at least until January.

Injuries or otherwise, he hasn't been able to work out our defensive troubles. Rojo looks like a horrendous buy. Blackett can't defend much. The other three are constantly injured. On top of that our defensive organization has looked a bit our of sorts in general. The worry is that the players we have been/are linked with are no better. Vlaar, de Vrij, Vermaelen, Hummels, Shawcross and others are all defenders who cannot defend very well; in Hummels case not consistently enough.

For me the jury is still very much out on him. Top 4 is a minimum for us this season. The result in the next 3 will set the tone and pretty much give an idea where we will end up this season.

 

[Stretford Red1978]

Van Gaal's interview (BBC) post-match told you the difference between him and Moyes. That one line, quite openly saying, "I told them at half-time, you keep giving away corners and their superior height will cost us at least a goal."

It's a completely different attitude from Moyes and managers of his ilk who would suggest it's either bad defending in isolation or just bad luck. It's a mature management style of observing the play, noticing patterns, then letting his players know what he wants, why he wants it and then it's up to them to perform.

That's why he doesn't stand on the sidelines and that's why he doesn't rant and rave at the fourth official. He knows what his players are supposed to be doing. If they don't perform to his liking, he will deal with them off the pitch, in the dressing room or on the training ground.

I much prefer that style myself. Even in comparison to Ferguson barking on the sidelines.

Great post, exactly as I see it as well.

 

[Minimalist]

Still has a lot of work to do. He has made some mistakes with the formation and personnel. He rightly talked about our unbalanced squad, but still failed to correct it (or may be there wasn't enough time to rectify it). Actually exagerrated the problem with the addition of Falcao. In Mata, Van Persie, Falcoa and Rooney, we have too many players fighting for the same positions. Which will cause us trouble at least until January.

Injuries or otherwise, he hasn't been able to work out our defensive troubles. Rojo looks like a horrendous buy. Blackett can't defend much. The other three are constantly injured. On top of that our defensive organization has looked a bit our of sorts in general. The worry is that the players we have been/are linked with are no better. Vlaar, de Vrij, Vermaelen, Hummels, Shawcross and others are all defenders who cannot defend very well; in Hummels case not consistently enough.

For me the jury is still very much out on him. Top 4 is a minimum for us this season. The result in the next 3 will set the tone and pretty much give an idea where we will end up this season.

Bizarre singling out them two and then just saying the rest are always injured (as if that excludes them from criticism for when they do play.)

Jones, Evans and Smalling deserve a lot more stick considering their length of time with us and overall experience, with regards to poor performances.

The idea that Rojo is a 'horrendous buy' is just hyperbolic nonsense and only yesterday he looked well solid in comparison to Smalling. Blackett is a kid for christ sake and aside from the Leicester match, has looked decent enough.

 

[Essaux]

LvG's promise is starting to unfold as United are starting to play better and better. I also think United could have and should have won against Chelsea.

Give it until the end of the season and I'm pretty sure we will see United in a top 4 position.

 

[SalfordRed1960]

Bizarre singling out them two and then just saying the rest are always injured (as if that excludes them from criticism for when they do play.)

Jones, Evans and Smalling deserve a lot more stick considering their length of time with us and overall experience, with regards to poor performances.

The idea that Rojo is a 'horrendous buy' is just hyperbolic nonsense and only yesterday he looked well solid in comparison to Smalling. Blackett is a kid for christ sake and aside from the Leicester match, has looked decent enough.

Totally agree. I think Rojo has played better each game. It is now his 4th or 5th game, where he has played with a different CB or LB each game. Think Shaw will now keep LB, so if Smalling or Jones can stay fit, we should start to see a consistent back line. It is then we can truly judge them. But to say the back line has been rubbish, just does not match what they are doing on the pitch.

 

[Dr. Funkenstein]

I agree with you that far too much is made of Van Gaal not being on the touchline. Touchline presence is mostly, in my opinion, a psychological trick. A very valid one, yes, but it does not work for everyone. Undoubtedly players were afraid to see Sir Alex on the touchline, and I think even opposition players felt Fergie's presence. However, Van Gaal is not Fergie and he knows that. Not everyone can get the 'Fergie effect' by going down onto the touchline. Nobody thinks Neil Warnock screaming at players from the touchline makes any difference do they? Van Gaal presents the picture of control: nothing ruffles him, there are never signs the plan isn't working. That's how he creates belief in his players, it seems. That's how he creates his aura. We gotta let him do it his way.

He's said himself that there's no point in shouting from the touchline because he can only reach the players near the touchline. Most of his instructions do concern players further away, and in interaction with eachother, so it's necessary for all of them to hear him to change something. That's why he describes himself as a sitting down manager. That he isn't at the touchline at all is because in the PL the manager is in the stands, and can't just stand up from his seat and sit down again.

He gives his instructions before, at half time and with subs. They will learn to trust those, and know they're well prepared. And they know he's present and watches them, no doubt about that. Maybe he could be at the touchline more to influence the referee, but on the other hand there's no inflation yet, if he finally decides to critisize the referee, it will make an impression.

 

[Theonas]

Van Gaal's interview (BBC) post-match told you the difference between him and Moyes. That one line, quite openly saying, "I told them at half-time, you keep giving away corners and their superior height will cost us at least a goal."

It's a completely different attitude from Moyes and managers of his ilk who would suggest it's either bad defending in isolation or just bad luck. It's a mature management style of observing the play, noticing patterns, then letting his players know what he wants, why he wants it and then it's up to them to perform.

That's why he doesn't stand on the sidelines and that's why he doesn't rant and rave at the fourth official. He knows what his players are supposed to be doing. If they don't perform to his liking, he will deal with them off the pitch, in the dressing room or on the training ground.

I much prefer that style myself. Even in comparison to Ferguson barking on the sidelines.

This! I myself never understood the over-analysis that goes on when teams conceded goals especially from set-pieces as if making mistakes is some unique occurrence. It seems to me pretty obvious that the more you put you expose your defence and put it under pressure, the more likely a mistake will happen, it is simple human nature. Never understood why pundits and some managers focus on stopping those mistakes rather than not exposing the defence like that in the first place.

 

[vidal7]

Van Gaal's interview (BBC) post-match told you the difference between him and Moyes. That one line, quite openly saying, "I told them at half-time, you keep giving away corners and their superior height will cost us at least a goal."

It's a completely different attitude from Moyes and managers of his ilk who would suggest it's either bad defending in isolation or just bad luck. It's a mature management style of observing the play, noticing patterns, then letting his players know what he wants, why he wants it and then it's up to them to perform.

That's why he doesn't stand on the sidelines and that's why he doesn't rant and rave at the fourth official. He knows what his players are supposed to be doing. If they don't perform to his liking, he will deal with them off the pitch, in the dressing room or on the training ground.

I much prefer that style myself. Even in comparison to Ferguson barking on the sidelines.

I agree with this.
We had moyes on the touchline and his shouts were fecking horrible. "Go on danny" was heard so many times and danny welbeck would never "go on". I dont evene know what he meant by that actually.

 

[Player Red]

He's said himself that there's no point in shouting from the touchline because he can only reach the players near the touchline. Most of his instructions do concern players further away, and in interaction with eachother, so it's necessary for all of them to hear him to change something. That's why he describes himself as a sitting down manager. That he isn't at the touchline at all is because in the PL the manager is in the stands, and can't just stand up from his seat and sit down again.

He gives his instructions before, at half time and with subs. They will learn to trust those, and know they're well prepared. And they know he's present and watches them, no doubt about that. Maybe he could be at the touchline more to influence the referee, but on the other hand there's no inflation yet, if he finally decides to critisize the referee, it will make an impression.

At one point late on I thought I saw Giggs give the ball back in from half way down the touch line. Thought he had been talking with Shaw. I am sure he will give messages to the players, just not necessarily him doing the talking.

 

[ravelston]

Because of the sending off, it was even more important for the defensive leader (Terry) to sort things out. It was certainly piss poor to leave our tallest player completely unmarked, worse than having Drogba being marked by Rafael. They also took off Willian and Hazard and got Mikel and Zouma in, which added even more height and strength to their side.

Chelsea didn't man mark at the free kick. They lined 6 players up along the 6 yard line and then came out to get the ball. Turns out the ball was Cahill's and he missed it. Nothing to do with being disorganized - they were perfectly organized, it just didn't work.

 

[Empire]

Ryan Giggs does go to the touch line a fair bit, Louis van Gaal has praised his ability to explain things to the players, I don't see a problem with it. Giggs is the bridge between players and management just like Kluivert was at Netherlands.

Louis van Gaal going mad will possibly make the players more nervous, if Giggs is good at this then leave him to do it.

 

[MDFC Manager]

Chelsea didn't man mark at the free kick. They lined 6 players up along the 6 yard line and then came out to get the ball. Turns out the ball was Cahill's and he missed it. Nothing to do with being disorganized - they were perfectly organized, it just didn't work.

I don't know. The studio replays here showed Ivanovic being touch tight on Fellaini for all the previous set pieces.

 

[ravi2]

Still has a lot of work to do. He has made some mistakes with the formation and personnel. He rightly talked about our unbalanced squad, but still failed to correct it (or may be there wasn't enough time to rectify it). Actually exagerrated the problem with the addition of Falcao. In Mata, Van Persie, Falcoa and Rooney, we have too many players fighting for the same positions. Which will cause us trouble at least until January.

Injuries or otherwise, he hasn't been able to work out our defensive troubles. Rojo looks like a horrendous buy. Blackett can't defend much. The other three are constantly injured. On top of that our defensive organization has looked a bit our of sorts in general. The worry is that the players we have been/are linked with are no better. Vlaar, de Vrij, Vermaelen, Hummels, Shawcross and others are all defenders who cannot defend very well; in Hummels case not consistently enough.

For me the jury is still very much out on him. Top 4 is a minimum for us this season. The result in the next 3 will set the tone and pretty much give an idea where we will end up this season.

I would give Rojo till at least Christmas before accessing him in that manner, he appears to be improving each game and the constant changing of his CB partner cannot be helping at all.
I believe Rojo will come good and by the end of season you may have a differing opinion of him.

 

[rover]

guys, in old days fergie was not standing there to give instructions to our players. instead most of the time he was there to rant at the opposite players especially when they made a nasty tackle. the most actions he was doing was to pick an invisible card out from his pocket. refs are also his targets too. forgot whom there was a ref once said that his heart beat was bumping up once he saw sir alex was running out from the stand. probably we are now paying back the remedies for his bullying too. by saying so i have no complaint.

 

[Momochiru]

Chelsea didn't man mark at the free kick. They lined 6 players up along the 6 yard line and then came out to get the ball. Turns out the ball was Cahill's and he missed it. Nothing to do with being disorganized - they were perfectly organized, it just didn't work.

I thought Chelsea fecked up with that free kick. The kick was very close to the corner flag and they should have defended it like a corner. Instead they set up a defensive line pretty close to the goal line, so they could force our players to move behind the offside line. I thought that was pointless, since a physically imposing GK like Courtois controls that area usually. Had they defended it like a corner and man-marked our players, they probably wouldn't had conceded, with their height advantage and all...

 

[Insanity]

Bizarre singling out them two and then just saying the rest are always injured (as if that excludes them from criticism for when they do play.)

Jones, Evans and Smalling deserve a lot more stick considering their length of time with us and overall experience, with regards to poor performances.

The idea that Rojo is a 'horrendous buy' is just hyperbolic nonsense and only yesterday he looked well solid in comparison to Smalling. Blackett is a kid for christ sake and aside from the Leicester match, has looked decent enough.

The rest are always injured and those two have hardly shown to be authoritative defenders. What is so bizarre with that statement. I would prefer McNair to start over them, irrespective of his dominat foot.

It's an easy excuse that one is young and another one is new to the league. Young or new, the basics of defending should not elude you as a defender. Check out Rojo's starts and he has made risky passes in each and every game. He either leaves the ball too short or hits it straight at the opposition attacker, repeatedly, and that too without much pressure. Blackett isn't much different. What is being accustomed to the league got to do with that?

Neither is even a decent header of the ball. The two of them have no positional sense what so ever.

Both look like defenders who are afraid to defend. They shy away eachtime they have to make a tackle.

If hoofing the ball to the opposition without much pressure is defending then I am certainly wrong.

Based on the performances so far, Rojo looks like a bad buy. He may improve, and Blackett may learn to defend. Though, I don't have a crystal ball; I can only comment on what I have seen so far.

 

[2 man midfield]

This time last year, Hernandez scored in the 77th minute to give us an undeserved win against bloody Stoke.

Moyes after the game was full of it and said "Oh its great to be part of one of those late United comebacks" . . .

A year on and after all we have been through, we go toe to toe with the best team in the country, don't look as bad as we thought we would, produce a really late come back to earn a draw, that we deserved and LVG is not happy.

There is the difference.

We'll get there. Bit by bit.

*Applause

Yesterday when that late goal went in I honestly didn't know how to react. I went for sheer unadulterated volume and almost broke the sofa.

 

[fishfingers15]

LVG explains the reason Rafael ends up marking Drogba for Chelsea's goal

I like how he's disappointed with a point against Chelski and having played well

Van Gaal's interview (BBC) post-match told you the difference between him and Moyes. That one line, quite openly saying, "I told them at half-time, you keep giving away corners and their superior height will cost us at least a goal."

It's a completely different attitude from Moyes and managers of his ilk who would suggest it's either bad defending in isolation or just bad luck. It's a mature management style of observing the play, noticing patterns, then letting his players know what he wants, why he wants it and then it's up to them to perform.

That's why he doesn't stand on the sidelines and that's why he doesn't rant and rave at the fourth official. He knows what his players are supposed to be doing. If they don't perform to his liking, he will deal with them off the pitch, in the dressing room or on the training ground.

I much prefer that style myself. Even in comparison to Ferguson barking on the sidelines.

Fergie in his later years was much more content to sit and watch. He'd only come down if things are going horribly bad or to welcome a sub. Van Gaal seems to do quiet fine and Giggs is always on the sideline.

This time last year, Hernandez scored in the 77th minute to give us an undeserved win against bloody Stoke.

Moyes after the game was full of it and said "Oh its great to be part of one of those late United comebacks" . . .

A year on and after all we have been through, we go toe to toe with the best team in the country, don't look as bad as we thought we would, produce a really late come back to earn a draw, that we deserved and LVG is not happy.

There is the difference.

We'll get there. Bit by bit.

Spot on Rossi, my lad.

 

[LR7]

I actually find it incredible that the same people questioning LvG the most this season (on here) are the same people who refused to criticise Moyes until very late last season when it was obvious he was on the verge of losing his job. I actually think its borne out of a desire to be contrary rather than genuine opinion.

Anyway... I found this interesting following the whole "our identity is broken" bullshit:

Premier League clubs have fielded a record low number of homegrown players this season, a survey of Europe’s “big five” leagues has revealed. The Premier League is fourth out of the “big five” leagues when it comes to bringing homegrown players through the ranks, behind France’s Ligue 1 (24.6%) La Liga (22.4%) and Germany’s Bundesliga (16.4%). Serie A in Italy fielded a lower proportion, only 9.6%... However, there are bright spots: Manchester United, despite the flurry of high-priced overseas signings in the final weeks of the summer, have fielded 12 homegrown players this season, the fifth-highest number in the big five. http://www.theguardian.com/football...un-homegrown-players-in-blow-to-fas-greg-dyke

So after all the shit LvG got for employing a galactico policy and breaking our identity, we are now the bright spot? It was beyond ridiculous to begin with.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Posted this in the Hererra thread but probably more relevant here.

Yeah, we let in two silly goals against West Brom but generally the defending in our last two games has been dramatically improved compared to the previous games. You can't ignore the fact that this coincides with Falcao and Rooney both being unavailable for selection. Playing a lone striker against Chelsea and matching them up in midfield must have been a big factor in us dominating posession and conceding relatively few chances.

It concerns me slightly that Van Gaal has stumbled into a solution to our defensive woes, rather than proactively addressing it by having the cojones to leave one or two of his three big name strikers on the bench. He has a reputation for not caring about egos and making tough decisions, so I'd like to see some evidence of this. If he reverts to playing all three of them against City and they steamroll us in midfield it really will be a crushing disappointment. Almost enough for me to bump that "false dawn" thread again...

Thoughts?

 

[Adebesi]

I certainly agree we havent seen any evidence of the tough guy LVG who doesnt care about reputations. I was discussing that in this thread last week.

I think as obvious as the linkage between 1 up front and defensive solidity looks, we have to be slightly careful of assuming that is the only explanation behind it. It could also be down to the also quite obvious benefit of having senior defenders (Jones and then Smalling) coming back from injury, as well as Rojo finding his feet and the whole team becoming increasingly confident in what LVG is asking of them. Its the old correlation vs causation debate: just because two things happened at the same time it doesnt mean they are necessarily linked.

But all this is Devil's Advocate really. It seems highly probable to me that the change of shape has had a big impact. I dont read too much into LVG's disinclination to tackle the egos at this stage though. It is still early days and I think he is still very much assessing what he has. Im sure he will have the cajones to make the tough decisions when the time is right.

Having said that I do expect to see all three playing together again. I imagine he will be desperate to find a way to make that work and I dont think he necessarily has to give up on that straight away just because it hasnt worked well so far.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I certainly agree we havent seen any evidence of the tough guy LVG who doesnt care about reputations. I was discussing that in this thread last week.

I think as obvious as the linkage between 1 up front and defensive solidity looks, we have to be slightly careful of assuming that is the only explanation behind it. It could also be down to the also quite obvious benefit of having senior defenders (Jones and then Smalling) coming back from injury, as well as Rojo finding his feet and the whole team becoming increasingly confident in what LVG is asking of them. Its the old correlation vs causation debate: just because two things happened at the same time it doesnt mean they are necessarily linked.

But all this is Devil's Advocate really. It seems highly probable to me that the change of shape has had a big impact. I dont read too much into LVG's disinclination to tackle the egos at this stage though. It is still early days and I think he is still very much assessing what he has. Im sure he will have the cajones to make the tough decisions when the time is right.

Having said that I do expect to see all three playing together again. I imagine he will be desperate to find a way to make that work and I dont think he necessarily has to give up on that straight away just because it hasnt worked well so far.

At home, against the worst teams in the league, he can play as many strikers as he wants. I just hope his approach to the last two away games was evidence of a slightly more pragmatic approach when needed. We'll find out for certain if it was on Sunday.

 

[Adebesi]

It would be perverse for him to play all three of them against City. But isnt Falcao still injured? Maybe makes the decision for him (again)?

 

[Empire]

Posted this in the Hererra thread but probably more relevant here.



Thoughts?

And when Januzaj or Angel di Maria get injured? Or Januzaj doesn't step it up a few levels?

 

[Brightonian]

And when Januzaj or Angel di Maria get injured? Or Januzaj doesn't step it up a few levels?

Januzaj was our best attacking player against Chelsea, a game about which the consensus seems to be that we played pretty well. Why is he suddenly getting all this snide criticism? It's only down to poor finishing from other players that he didn't get an assist or two under his belt. The Caf would be singing his praises if RVP had slotted home that sublime through-ball, or laid it off for Mata to pass into an empty net.

Thoughts?

Agreed. I don't even think it's that hard to do at the moment. Neither RVP or Mata has been bad exactly, but neither has made himself indispensable. Falcao should be a lone #9 with Rooney in the hole behind him. That leaves room for a four-man midfield of whatever shape behind them. (Blind and Di Maria are no-brainers, and then it's just a case of choosing two more out of Herrera, Januzaj and Fellaini.)

 

[MDFC Manager]

Posted this in the Hererra thread but probably more relevant here.



Thoughts?

I agree about us looking defensively better recently. I think most attack minded managers would be trying to shoehorn all 3 of our strikers into the playing 11. I'm dead certain it's what Fergie would be doing too.

The vital cog in that system is Herrera really. Without him, it just doesn't seem to work.

 

[tombombadil]

Herrera is an excellent distributor of the ball and it helps that he has a very high work rate. He helps cover the ground, do the dog work and let the attackers attack. He and ADM's running is what allowed the previous 4-4-2 diamond to work. Not to mention they both have a good eye for a through ball and can shoot as well. Without either, we lost not only a runner, but a high quality runner. Valencia tried to fill that box to box role, but even he got injured before he settled into that role.

Gotta agree that most managers would want to shoe horn all that attacking power into one team. Or at least as many as possible. SAF would've done the same. I suppose it comes down to horses for courses at the end. Eventually, the manager will decide on a combination he thinks has the best balance for most games. Right now, LvG is still assessing that.

 

[Brightonian]

It does feel as if, coming out of this injury crisis, we're on the verge of having... not a settled 'first XI' exactly, because big clubs simply can't do that anymore, but a settled system in which changes involve swapping good players for other good players, rather than constantly experimenting to try and find a system which even works. Sometimes it feels like we haven't had that settled framework for years and years, maybe even since the latter half of 2011.

-Rafael and Shaw are clearly now our first-choice FBs.
-Blind already looks very settled sitting in front of our back four. Carrick will provide his competition when he's back to full fitness.
-Herrera was unlucky to fracture a rib (not the sort of injury we have to worry about becoming a tendency), but the plan is clearly for him to join Blind as the core of our midfield.
-Di Maria may be the side of a diamond or he may be the wing of a 4231, but his role is clear and he's doing it well.
-Mata may not have been at his most dangerous against Chelsea, but we basically know that in every game either he or Rooney will be playing in the hole.
-RVP, Falcao and possibly Rooney will be fighting it out for either one or two CF positions.
-Fellaini provides us with the tactical option, whether we want to add some height to compete for headers or man-mark a key opposition player.
-Januzaj is the youngster who doesn't have to play every game but will get loads of minutes, given that he can fill in for so many of our more senior star players when they are out, and will also play when we need wingers on both flanks.

I suppose what I'm essentially saying is that for the first time in ages the line-up dilemmas which we're debating in match threads are mostly decisions between various strong options, rather than fundamental questions about what our formation should be, how we should play, and which players we should be building the team around. There are holes, of course - our CB situation is still very much in the air, and Herrera's and Rafael's positions could both do with proper back-up. But those are specific problems to solve within a framework which feels like it might now be up and running.

 

[fishfingers15]

I actually find it incredible that the same people questioning LvG the most this season (on here) are the same people who refused to criticise Moyes until very late last season when it was obvious he was on the verge of losing his job. I actually think its borne out of a desire to be contrary rather than genuine opinion.

Anyway... I found this interesting following the whole "our identity is broken" bullshit:



So after all the shit LvG got for employing a galactico policy and breaking our identity, we are now the bright spot? It was beyond ridiculous to begin with.

It's the usual suspects on this board.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Re Ferge shoe-horning in three strikers. Didn't he bin the Rooney/Berb/Tevez experiment after just one game?

 

[Stretford Red1978]

It does feel as if, coming out of this injury crisis, we're on the verge of having... not a settled 'first XI' exactly, because big clubs simply can't do that anymore, but a settled system in which changes involve swapping good players for other good players, rather than constantly experimenting to try and find a system which even works. Sometimes it feels like we haven't had that settled framework for years and years, maybe even since the latter half of 2011.

-Rafael and Shaw are clearly now our first-choice FBs.
-Blind already looks very settled sitting in front of our back four. Carrick will provide his competition when he's back to full fitness.
-Herrera was unlucky to fracture a rib (not the sort of injury we have to worry about becoming a tendency), but the plan is clearly for him to join Blind as the core of our midfield. -Di Maria may be the side of a diamond or he may be the wing of a 4231, but his role is clear and he's doing it well.
-Mata may not have been at his most dangerous against Chelsea, but we basically know that in every game either he or Rooney will be playing in the hole.
-RVP, Falcao and possibly Rooney will be fighting it out for either one or two CF positions.
-Fellaini provides us with the tactical option, whether we want to add some height to compete for headers or man-mark a key opposition player.
-Januzaj is the youngster who doesn't have to play every game but will get loads of minutes, given that he can fill in for so many of our more senior star players when they are out, and will also play when we need wingers on both flanks.

I suppose what I'm essentially saying is that for the first time in ages the line-up dilemmas which we're debating in match threads are mostly decisions between various strong options, rather than fundamental questions about what our formation should be, how we should play, and which players we should be building the team around. There are holes, of course - our CB situation is still very much in the air, and Herrera's and Rafael's positions could both do with proper back-up. But those are specific problems to solve within a framework which feels like it might now be up and running.

Great post there chap! I personally feel that when we have a more settled squad that plays together every week things will start to happen for us, on a consistent basis. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next few months!

 

[Bwuk]

Re Ferge shoe-horning in three strikers. Didn't he bin the Rooney/Berb/Tevez experiment after just one game?

Think so, and Rooney/Tevez/Berb was more versatile than Falcao/RvP/Rooney

 

[MDFC Manager]

Think so, and Rooney/Tevez/Berb was more versatile than Falcao/RvP/Rooney

Yes, but there were also Ronaldo, Giggs, Scholes and Carrick to fit in. Now, it's just very easy to drop Mata and Januzaj to make way.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Yes, but there were also Ronaldo, Giggs, Scholes and Carrick to fit in. Now, it's just very easy to drop Mata and Januzaj to make way.

That logic doesn't hold at all.

Ronaldo = Di Maria,
Scholes = Herrera,
Carrick = Blind
Giggs = Januzaj

That's without even mentioning Carrick himself or Fellaini, who both have a very good chance of starting on Sunday. Or Anderson, Fletcher, Valencia and Young.

Van Gaal's definitely got more midfielders/attackers to keep happy now than Fergie did in Berbatov's debut season. You can't brush over the fact that Fergie (unlike Van Gaal, so far) was willing to leave a high profile, expensive striker on the bench in order to put out a more balanced team. Only took him one game to realise this was necessary too.

 

[MDFC Manager]

That logic doesn't hold at all.

Ronaldo = Di Maria,
Scholes = Herrera,
Carrick = Blind/Carrick
Giggs = Januzaj

That's without even mentioning Fellaini, who's in with a very good chance of starting on Sunday. Van Gaal's got even more midfielders/attackers to keep happy now than Fergie did in Berbatov's debut season.

The point remains Fergie was willing to leave a high profile, expensive striker on the bench in order to put out a more balanced team. Only took him one game to realise this was necessary too.

I don't know how you've made the comparison. Having 3 strikers (Rooney, Berb, Tevez) plus the Ronaldo of 2008/9 in the same lineup would be utter madness. Falcao, Rooney and RvP with AdM, Blind and Herrera isn't close to being as unbalanced.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I don't know how you've made the comparison. Having 3 strikers (Rooney, Berb, Tevez) plus the Ronaldo of 2008/9 in the same lineup would be utter madness. Falcao, Rooney and RvP with AdM, Blind and Herrera isn't close to being as unbalanced.

I genuinely cannot understand what you're struggling with here. Either picking three strikers will unbalance the team or it won't. All the available evidence this season confirms that this is not an approach that works for us.

Some people are arguing that Van Gaal is only doing what Fergie is doing, in trying to squeeze three top strikers into the same XI. Fergie didn't do that. Or at least he stopped doing it when it became apparent it wasn't working. I can't think of any other manager who regularly plays three strikers, two of whom are as un-versatile as RvP and Falcao. If Van Gaal persists with that approach, then he should deserve to be criticised for not making the tough decisions you would expect from a manager of his calibre.

Of course, if he picks the three of them in the next few games - and somehow finds a way to make it work - then I will happily eat my words!

 

[MDFC Manager]

I genuinely cannot understand what you're struggling with here. Either picking three strikers will unbalance the team or it won't. All the available evidence this season confirms that this is not an approach that works for us.

Some people are arguing that Van Gaal is only doing what Fergie is doing, in trying to squeeze three top strikers into the same XI. Fergie didn't do that. Or at least he stopped doing it when it became apparent it wasn't working. I can't think of any other manager who regularly plays three strikers, two of whom are as un-versatile as RvP and Falcao. If Van Gaal persists with that approach, then he should deserve to be criticised for not making the tough decisions you would expect from a manager of his calibre.

It's simple really. If Fergie had the current 3 strikers, he'd be very likely to play all of them. If he also had Ronaldo, he wouldn't. I'd be more inclined to agree with you if you had a Fergie example which didn't include the Ronaldo 'problem'.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

It's simple really. If Fergie had the current 3 strikers, he'd be very likely to play all of them. If he also had Ronaldo, he wouldn't. I'd be more inclined to agree with you if you had a Fergie example which didn't include the Ronaldo 'problem'.

The Ronaldo "problem" is really no different to the Di Maria "problem". You're still picking a team with four players who like to get involved centrally and do all their best work in the final third. Which is why playing three strikers (plus Di Maria and Ronaldo) will always leave us a bit too narrow and vulnerable on the counter. The fact Ronaldo was much more likely to get a goal means feck all really and doesn't take away from the point I'm making. Fergie realised the team would function better with Tevez on the bench and had the balls to make that decision.

Anyway - and foor the umpteenth time - I'm not making a theoretical argument here. I'm basing this on how we've been repeatedly ripped apart by mediocre teams whenever Van Gaal picked the three of them. Which contrasts with us looking much less vulnerable when circumstances forced him to pick fewer strikers. If he persists with the three of them and we continue to look as vulnerable as we have done, then questions need to be asked and this idea that "oh Fergie would have done exactly the same" holds no water.

 

[Rozay]

We are on track, as the consensus agreed we would be once we appointed Louis Van Gaal. It is funny though as once Moyes was sacked and the speculation was rife, I am pretty sure that most were underwhelmed by Van Gaal rumours and didn't want him.

Right now, I believe we are two players short in the first XI, and probably no more than 4 in total in terms of having the right squad.

A replacement for Blind is still needed to take us up a level I think. I would prefer a more athletic and strong option. We could also do with another centre-half, although we are not even short there numbers-wise. If one comes in, we would likely need to sell there.

We are also in a position where we would likely need Rafael to play every game, unless of course Valencia is still considered a viable alternative. I think Vermijl is up to back up though.

Lastly, at some point, I think we would need to add one more wide option to the squad. Again, not a numbers issue per se, more a case of quality. Young and Valencia could perhaps be replaced with one more useful option.