Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
If we had Ole tactical last season, we could have won the game and probably could be 6-9 point clear of Liverpool.

I still don't like Ole's gameplan in a big games, thought we're too big to play like underdogs. Pressing, possession, one touch, and patten of the movement haven't improved since he became United coaches .
 
Robbie Boy said:
Either Neville or Carragher - can't remember which one - made a point that we set up against them based on reputation. Had we played any other team with that first eleven, I believe we would have gone for it and probably won.

Nevertheless, I would have taken a draw before the game so it's a good result. Still a-bit disappointed with our set-up and the two big missed chances. A draw was a relatively fair result and Liverpool's front 3 looks a shadow of what they were. Mane is ludicrously overrated and Salah is a numbers man these days. His all-round game is rubbish.
Click to expand...
That was Neville and I completely agree. We just didn’t do enough. If that was any team other than Pool we would have been braver and pushed for the win.
 
Zlatan Ibrahomovic said:
Dont know why he refuse to make subs.

Big managers make subs in the 45-60th minute which decide the game.

Ole watches watches and watches and then subs Greenwood in the 90th.
Click to expand...
Why make subs when we had something going on in the second half? Things worked pretty well. Why risking to change our positive momentum.

You say “big managers make subs in 45-60min”.
Kloop who many people claim is the biggest, when did he make the subs? And they were even on a downward trend in the match.

The right time (match watch) to make subs doesn’t exist. Every match has its own life. Can’t complain about the subs today.
 
Polar said:
Why make subs when we had something going on in the second half? Things worked pretty well. Why risking to change our positive momentum.

You say “big managers make subs in 45-60min”.
Kloop who many people claim is the biggest, when did he make the subs? And they were even on a downward trend in the match.

The right time (match watch) to make subs doesn’t exist. Every match has its own life. Can’t complain about the subs today.
Click to expand...
The difference is we had genuine match winners on our bench which ole had used well in the smaller games this season. Today he wasn’t brave enough with his subs and we didn’t push home the advantage. I just didn’t expect it as he was far more positive against City and PSG who are equally good teams.
 
Poor first half, but should have won it in second half. Could have used more attacking subs earlier, but I was mostly happy with us.
 
TrustInJanuzaj said:
Also agree that’s got to be the clear upgrade in this team. You can carry either/or but we have to have someone more progressive in that midfield partnership. The reason I use the word cowardly, is because I think we should have pushed Pogba deep and gone to a 4-5-1 like we are best at and had Cavani/Greenwood on in the 60th/70th minute. We could have easily done some damage to that Liverpool team.
Click to expand...
I agree to an extent but I think you also have to notice they were still very much in the game and getting up the pitch and creating half chances against us. Unsettling the shape at that time may have caused more problems than benefits but I can see where your coming from.

I just don’t think we have the midfield flexibility to change very much in game against a possession based team.

To stay three points ahead of them rather than losing and being level is obviously better for us than them, although I was gutted we didn’t take those chances in the second half.
 
Carl said:
I hope you're not expecting it to be any better in here mate.
Click to expand...
No I don’t. I know what’s going on in this thread:D More surprised some people also have this mindset during matches.They have to be heavily biased or bitter for some reason.
 
RUCK4444 said:
I agree to an extent but I think you also have to notice they were still very much in the game and getting up the pitch and creating half chances against us. Unsettling the shape at that time may have caused more problems than benefits but I can see where your coming from.

I just don’t think we have the midfield flexibility to change very much in game against a possession based team.

To stay three points ahead of them rather than losing and being level is obviously better for us than them, although I was gutted we didn’t take those chances in the second half.
Click to expand...
Sure I know I’m reacting with my heart rather than my head. I agree they were in the game but I can’t help but think we could have pinned them back a little more. Anyway like I said head is saying good point.
 
TrustInJanuzaj said:
Sure I know I’m reacting with my heart rather than my head. I agree they were in the game but I can’t help but think we could have pinned them back a little more. Anyway like I said head is saying good point.
Click to expand...

But mouth is saying "cowards" :smirk:
 
He got slaughtered in the match day thread for picking Lindelof.

Great call, he was excellent in defence.

His tactic for the game suppressed Liverpool, kept a clean sheet and carved out two good chances to score. Job well done, unlucky not to take all three.
 
TrustInJanuzaj said:
Sure I know I’m reacting with my heart rather than my head. I agree they were in the game but I can’t help but think we could have pinned them back a little more. Anyway like I said head is saying good point.
Click to expand...
Yeah just one of those results, you would probably take it before hand but then when it pans out how it did you feel disappointed.

Im hoping we realise the important of a top DM this summer so hopefully next season we aren’t having this convo.
 
TrustInJanuzaj said:
He said we didn’t use the ball enough, which we didn’t. We didn’t set up positively and the changes were the wrong ones, we weren’t brave enough. Maybe cowardly is harsh but we didn’t set up to win that and ended up playing far worse than we can. People can be happy with the result but realise we are far better value that than performance.
Click to expand...
I think we did set up to win, and I think our set up is the one that made the most sense.

With the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to say that Liverpool weren't all that sharp today and that we should have been braver. And I agree with that to an extent, but I don't think there was anything wrong with how we went into the game.
VP89 said:
Lindelof isn't a bad defender that's not the argument.

The point is, playing two slow defenders as a combination is not good because it invites extra pressure. You lose control of the game and you can't adapt as high a press because they can't be caught at the back in behind.

Top clubs don't partner 2 slow center backs for a reason. Stones covers Diaz, normally Gomes covers VVD, Dier covers Vertonghen, Zouma covers Thiago Silva.

You play 2 slow center backs and you have to play 2 holding midfielders to cover them. Then you don't have control of the game and invite the team on to you. This happened with Spurs, City, Arsenal and now today with Liverpool. Its quite obvious to be honest, I don't know why it needs spelling out to you.

If we were so set on Lindelof and Maguire as safety defenders we could have at least taken more of a risk centrally and perhaps put Pogba in the middle, Rashford right, Martial left and Cavani up top. But instead two slow defenders meant two holding midfielders to cover them, so a creative CM was put out right.
Click to expand...
I think there are arguments for both over the other, but at the end of the day, I feel that the expectation was that Liverpool would start the game like a house on fire, and that being able to soak up that pressure is what would make or break the game for us.

So I don't agree that it's an obviously bad decision, but I see your point.
 
Should nicked it there in the end with Brunos and Pogbas chances.

I thought the tactics were good. Keep it even until the 70th minute. Then try and nick it. Ferguson used do the same.
 
Jonno said:
He got slaughtered in the match day thread for picking Lindelof.

Great call, he was excellent in defence.

His tactic for the game suppressed Liverpool, kept a clean sheet and carved out two good chances to score. Job well done, unlucky not to take all three.
Click to expand...
The match day thread is a disgrace for team selection outrage. Do you ever hear people coming back and saying "You know what, Solskajer got the selection spot on. I for one will stop being such a bell end when it comes to this in the future and trust the judgement of the man who gets to watch them all train day in day out leading up to the match".

Nah, do you feck. They're back in there next week moaning that Telles is picked instead of Shaw.
 
I am glad that he is saying we were not good enough. It assure the fans that he knows with such football we cant win the league. The result is not bad, but the performance was.
 
Giggsyking said:
I am glad that he is saying we were not good enough. It assure the fans that he knows with such football we cant win the league. The result is not bad, but the performance was.
Click to expand...
We lacked quality moving thr ball forward really. Too rushed or panicked sometimes. A bit more composure and we win that game, such fine margins really.
 
Every time Bailly doesn’t play people act as if prime Ronaldo wasn’t playing.
 
Deserves lot of credit for past few weeks, but the praise for today is weird. Liverpool were absolutely terrible and pretty vulnerable, and our defence was excellent. That's about it.

Oh, and our players clearly had no idea what to do with the ball anytime we got near it, especially in the first half. Clearly he was happy with one point, proved it with lack of subs too even though we had Rashford and Bruno who were terrible and could be replaced with academy players, let alone with someone like Greenwood and VDB.
 
He’s being too cautious in the big games, but win next couple of league games and the result today will look better.
 
Norman Brownbutter said:
Dude...
Click to expand...
Can’t see what possession stat necessarily have to do with my argument. We had very good defensive control. They didn’t score and didn’t have many chances; LFC wasn’t a big threat to us.

We let them hold the ball as long as they didn’t possess a threat. We wanted to lure them forward in order to strike back behind their line.

Let’s stop assessing games based on position stats in isolation. The match today is a good example of how irrelevant possession stats is to value performances in many occasions.
 
Coming away maybe a little disappointed with 'only' a point shows our huge progression in the last 12 months.
 
crossy1686 said:
Well it's better than losing them like we did to Arsenal and Spurs
Click to expand...

It’s also worse than winning which we haven’t done in 9 or 10 games in league and cup against City, Spurs, Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea.
 
RUCK4444 said:
Yeah just one of those results, you would probably take it before hand but then when it pans out how it did you feel disappointed.

Im hoping we realise the important of a top DM this summer so hopefully next season we aren’t having this convo.
Click to expand...
Agree completely, it’s fundamental.,
 
No matter how you sugar coat it he came out with the wrong tactic. We were swamped in midfield the first half, Thiago running the show and skipping past our players so simply (like Fred). Although second half we were strong and I have come to learn that that's our style of play, we rarely have two good halves. We got a point away at Anfield and could have won the game in that second half, we should give him credit for that as that's a good achievement and he did rattle them.
 
TrustInJanuzaj said:
The difference is we had genuine match winners on our bench which ole had used well in the smaller games this season. Today he wasn’t brave enough with his subs and we didn’t push home the advantage. I just didn’t expect it as he was far more positive against City and PSG who are equally good teams.
Click to expand...
The Greenwood sub was most of all a tactical sub. Ole was a little bit afraid Bruno was going to loose his head :D

The problem was that Pogba, Rash and Bruno also are match winners. It would’ve been to risky to replace McFred with for example Greenwood.

We had the opportunity to kill the match in the second half. To much “greed” could have hit us like a boomerang, and then many supporters would have been on fire in this thread. I guess naive and clueless would’ve been repeated in every second comment.

But..... I like your offensive approach and winning mentality. I’m also a little bit disappointed we didn’t bring home 3.points. That’s a good thing and says something about were we stand today compared with the last five years.
 
Toad said:
No matter how you sugar coat it he came out with the wrong tactic. We were swamped in midfield the first half, Thiago running the show and skipping past our players so simply (like Fred). Although second half we were strong and I have come to learn that that's our style of play, we rarely have two good halves. We got a point away at Anfield and could have won the game in that second half, we should give him credit for that as that's a good achievement and he did rattle them.
Click to expand...
In your opinion what should be the right tactic?
 
VP89 said:
Lindelof isn't a bad defender that's not the argument.

The point is, playing two slow defenders as a combination is not good because it invites extra pressure. You lose control of the game and you can't adapt as high a press because they can't be caught at the back in behind.

Top clubs don't partner 2 slow center backs for a reason. Stones covers Diaz, normally Gomes covers VVD, Dier covers Vertonghen, Zouma covers Thiago Silva.

You play 2 slow center backs and you have to play 2 holding midfielders to cover them. Then you don't have control of the game and invite the team on to you. This happened with Spurs, City, Arsenal and now today with Liverpool. Its quite obvious to be honest, I don't know why it needs spelling out to you.

If we were so set on Lindelof and Maguire as safety defenders we could have at least taken more of a risk centrally and perhaps put Pogba in the middle, Rashford right, Martial left and Cavani up top. But instead two slow defenders meant two holding midfielders to cover them, so a creative CM was put out right.
Click to expand...
Do you seriously believe we would have played a high line or dominated Liverpool if Bailly had played? We could do even do that against Burnley ffs.
 
Toad said:
No matter how you sugar coat it he came out with the wrong tactic. We were swamped in midfield the first half, Thiago running the show and skipping past our players so simply (like Fred). Although second half we were strong and I have come to learn that that's our style of play, we rarely have two good halves. We got a point away at Anfield and could have won the game in that second half, we should give him credit for that as that's a good achievement and he did rattle them.
Click to expand...

What tactic would have been the right one, though? And how would that have looked, away to Liverpool? I’m not sure first half was a question of tactic as much as of precision. Liverpool were really fired up, had a very clear game plan, and even though Klopp said he was very satisfied with his players first half performance, they didn’t createa whole lot. What Solskjær commented afterwards was that he was not satisfied with the first half, not tactically, but with the choices made and precision.

If Rashford had held his runs for an average meter, we’d have ended that half too with the better chances, even when not getting fully into gear.
 
Roboc7 said:
He’s being too cautious in the big games, but win next couple of league games and the result today will look better.
Click to expand...

He is cautious in the big games but I can understand it, we’re playing in such tight margins.

A loss today would have been a massive blow and would feel like a big step backwards, but maintaining the unbeaten league momentum I think has to be positive. Like you say, the next few games will “decide” whether it was the right call or not.
 
A-man said:
Do you seriously believe we would have played a high line or dominated Liverpool if Bailly had played? We could do even do that against Burnley ffs.
Click to expand...
No I believe our press would have been better and we wouldn't have been obligated to play 2 holding midfielders to cover 2 slow center backs, ffs.
 
VP89 said:
No I believe our press would have been better and we wouldn't have been obligated to play 2 holding midfielders to cover 2 slow center backs, ffs.
Click to expand...
Not a chance. We haven’t seen any of that in the last maychtes despite we faced poor teams, why would we against Liverpool? I don’t think anybody was surprised by the way this match was played. I think you over estimate Bailly as some kind of game changer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.