Only a few crazies thought he'd have us winning the title up against a peak City and Liverpool. You weren't a nostradamus for being 'proved right' on that front.
Ole Gunnar Solskjær | Managerial Watch
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
In order to know Solskjaer wasn't good enough - not just to win a title - one did not need to be nostradamus. Just open one's eyes.
Oles idea of tactic was passion, verticality, pace, intensity and directness. Not that those are wrong but at this point in time, every team was shaped like that. Then came Barcelona with their tiki taka showing that you can combine such football with collective principles to get even better. From then on, more and more teams employed pressing and zonal principles, positional play. We went from Fergie to "be hard to beat" Moyes, LVGs version of possession football which had zero penetration as long as he didn't have a great individualist on form, to destructive Mourinho. Only to arrive at Ole... Who then wasted even more time chasing a form of football that isn't the meta anymore.
You shouldn't act as if you can speak for anybody. And just fyi - your Atletico example isn't really good as the success isn't soooo great and even them went on to become more proactive than before. If all you care about is results, thats fine. Go for it. You can save yourself the time to watch the games then and you can talk about us being great when we won 3:1 and we were shit when we lost 0:1. Each to their own. But lets not act as if you would set the marks here and anybody else is "just not getting it".
Thats actually true. I was also under the impression that a half decent coach must have been able to get more out of this squad. Either I've been wrong or we don't have a half decent manager right now. But after all - all this doesn't really make Ole a better coach because we wasted time moving sideways.
I am sure Pep and his players are still really distraught when we beat them to "close the distance" to 11 or 12 points behind them when around Christmas we were pretty even with them... Oles City knack is a bit overplayed, whenever Pep really needed a result, he got it. Granted, Ole had us playing very intense against them, those were games we really looked up for it. But in the grand scheme of things it was more a case of "just another game for City" while it was "our world cup final". Something we made fun of Liverpool back in the day...
I'll save us the time and state that this post is exactly in line with the rest of your posts and hope we agree to disagree.
I like that way of interpreting the whole thing. It would have been the smart thing to just politely avoid that question but in this day and age and with journalists crazy for something to get some sauciness out of, it is just fine.
Follow your own advice. My post had absolutely nothing to do with "irrational hatred towards a half-decent manager" but with being shocked that so many fans seemingly learned absolutely nothing from the misery. I am sure, you are capable of seeing the difference arent you? I am sure you would have been able to understand that from my first post as well. It starts getting a bit tiresome always getting accused of some form of hate."Some of my favourite post-Fergie memories were under Ole"
"2nd and 3rd in back to back seasons was decent"
"I enjoyed those wins at the Etihad with Dan James and Lingard starting"
The meltdown in some of these responses are genuinely hilarious
"Ole in-ers are a cult!"
"These posts make me want to delete my account"
Get a grip lads. There's disliking a managerial reign and then there's just irrational hatred towards a half-decent manager. The frothing at the mouth from certain posters comes across as weirdly resentful as if Ole shagged your missus or something.
The answer has to be no. If we need an interim manager right now we're likely better off going with Ruud than with Ole.
In an era where a lot of people online and on the caf think that 'football is boring now' and there are no more superstars due to the likes of Pep coaching the mavericks out of players, I thought it was refreshing to see Ole encourage his forwards to use their individual brilliance instead of coaching repetitive patterns of play. Sure, it wasn't the way to win a PL title but top 3 finishes in each of his full seasons was evidence of his tactics being successful enough to warrant some credit.
I apologise for accusing you of irritational hate. Just on the bolded part - 'misery' isn't a word I would use to describe Ole's tenure. As a fan, I felt happier under Ole than any other manager. Far from miserable. There were a couple of miserable results in his last month at United but overall the good memories far outweigh the bad memories.
ETH and Ole are both rubbish managers at United. I think equally rubbish.
True. But would you not say we played our best football under Ole? Even better than tactical managers like mourinho/LVG. He got the best out Bruno, he made martial look really good. He had average players like James, Fred, Lindelof etc. our squad is way better now. We have a very solid defence, ole loves youth players, he’d love Mainoo, Garnacho and Diallo who he actually bought himself didn’t he.
I can see zero justification for even thinking about hiring Ole again.
Fair.
That book is closed.
Zero chance Ole back at Utd.
Zero chance Ole back at Utd.
I wouldn’t say our best no, it was maybe our most exciting yes. But tactically it was terrible, we played tactics used by smaller clubs, counter attacking with a low back line, only we didn’t have players that smaller clubs do, we had much better players, so we were great in counter open space, but terrible against teams that we had to attack.
A back line almost touching DDG (who was still a good line keeper) and the the infamous McFred duo just in front of the back line protecting Maguire and Lindelof. Boot the ball to Bruno and see if he will manage to launch Rashford/Martial/James. I think that was the tactical plan at the time.
Yep. That's was exactly it. And that double pivot never left the back 4. We were always with a back 6. Like you said boot the ball to open space hope for the best.
No we didn't
We had one of the highest defensive lines in the league in both of Ole's two full seasons, higher than under ETH
It also wasn't a counter-attack setup at all
You are obviously taking the piss right now.
19/20 Def. Line height 45.07 (6th highest in the league, highest: Liverpool 49.14)
20/21 Def. Line height 46.16 (4th highest in the league, highest: Liverpool 49.97)
22/23 Def. Line height 42.92 (14th highest in the league, highest: Man City 51.65)
23/24 Def. Line height 43.54 (15th highest in the league, highest: Man City 51.75)
Sadly this myth with never get dispelled that Ole played with a low defensive line and that we were set up to counter-attack. Similar bullshit, but widely accepted take to how Maguire can't play in a high line but Varane is suited to it...it's literally the other way around with years of evidence to back it up, but people will keep parroting this nonsense too.
I must have forgot us coming third last year.
That was Ole himself, so, yeah..
We finished 8th which flattered us.
It wasn’t, it was a club choice and he went along with it
Nothing mythical about it. Since when is the defensive line the only indicator whether something is categorized as counter attacking or not? Also it didn't take too long to realize for everybody and his dog that setting up with a lower block against us is the No1 route to success given that we weren't great in possession, not great in attack as it needed space to run into and subsceptible to counters. Don't you think that this would have had any influence on where our defensive line was? Opposition reacts - and they knew we became formidable at counters during Oles interim time. They adapted.
I mean, I see your point, there is a lot of stuff thrown around and quite a bit of it is hyperbole but you can't tell us that you think, that Ole had some decent tactics and ideas about controlling a match lying around but only visible to, suprise suprise, his biggest fans?
There is nothing wrong with simple game plans. But it will only get you so far. And Ole proved exactly that. And ETH in comparism is attempting to do a more complex gamestyle which isn't really working and doesn't provide with too much to show for it.
So, Ole didn't play a counter attacking game? feck me, some of you don't half make up some shite to defend the bloke.
We absolutely did play it, and it was quite effective at times. Rashford and Bruno played some of their best football under Ole, because it suited their game. The problem for Ole was when he tried to move away from that style.
We absolutely did play it, and it was quite effective at times. Rashford and Bruno played some of their best football under Ole, because it suited their game. The problem for Ole was when he tried to move away from that style.
Last edited:
Fair enough, there are a lot of people who enjoyed that football and I am not going to be the judge on whether that was the right kind of joy or not. At the end of the day, I was worried that it wouldn't be enough, as I said before, nothing against a simple but effective gameplan, but we had nothing more and therefor suffered as soon as teams were prepared for it.
Also fair enough. Everybody has its own connection and fan'hood(?) I guess. I can tell you I didn't like a lot of Oles tenure because of the time-wasting-worry I had from very early on. But thats not saying I did the right thing and others did it. It is just lets acknowledge that everybody watches, experiences, perceives stuff differently and then goes on to draw opinions, stances and conclusions from it and then formulates it in texts for this forum. I am sure you feel triggered when I brush things you took the effort to formulate away with saying "you're a fanboy anyway" as well. It is the same with this hate and negativity accusations.
I know it wasn't intended to be personal, we're good.
We did indeed finish 3rd the season before, but last season was a mess. The season we finished 3rd, probably had us finishing lower if you look at Xg. Much like the stats that had us expected to finish 4th in Ole's famed 2nd place season. But, just don't mention that one. Stats can only be used to suit an agenda.
Last edited:
Nope. Him and Sir Alex were the ones who drove the idea and asked Woodward to try and make it happen. There was a lengthy article in the Athletic about it a couple of years ago. Essentially, Ole sabotaged himself with it.
Interesting, I’d always read to the contrary. Oh well, either way it contributed to his downfall
It's funny that Ten Hag's 'good' season was based on a worse version of Ole ball but people somehow think he plays a high line.
Xg even had us 6th that season and 15th last last rather than the comfortable top 4 we were consistently over Ole's time. Different levels.
Read what you said. You have no understanding of football really.
I find it hard to pin down Ole's style as it was neither typically counter-attacking nor possession based. It changed a lot from game to game, didn't it?
The 5 best managers of the last 20 years: SAF, Ancelotti, Pep, Klopp and Mourinho.
Out of these 5, I think Ole's "style" was closer to SAF and Ancelotti than the other 3 at least.
The 5 best managers of the last 20 years: SAF, Ancelotti, Pep, Klopp and Mourinho.
Out of these 5, I think Ole's "style" was closer to SAF and Ancelotti than the other 3 at least.
Ah, here we go with the insults. I love posters like you.
You brought up the xG stats and even in those Ole outperforms ETH.
There is a difference between counter attacking and being really good at attacking transitions.
Our xThreat in Ole's time was among the highest as well, which indicates we weren't really pinned back. The problem with nearly all the criticism that Ole's tenure received, not a lot is quantifiable (like he only had vibes), and of the things that are quantifiable, none of it can be backed by stats.
I'm not going to say Ole was perfect or that he didn't have his faults, but he was significantly better than what he receives credit for.
Always thought the main downfall to Ole was his complete lack of authority rather than tactics.
Too much of a soft shite and lost the dressing room
Too much of a soft shite and lost the dressing room
Errrrr what? The point is they're both shite. ETH didn't deserve to finish 3rd according to Xg, much like Ole didn't deserve to finish 2nd based on Xg. Neither season was anything remotely great, but obviously Ole's was better by virtue of the fact that we scored goals.
Last edited:
For all the talk of tactics, was he counter attacking or not, the reality is the players dictated how well he did.
For a spell Bruno, Rashford, Martial and Greenwood were all on fire at the same time.
You get four players of that quality performing at their best, you'll do well regardless of anything else.
The problem wasn't Ronaldo coming. He didn't stop other signings. In fact that first season it was a good job we did have him because Martial was injured.
The problem was those four, for various reasons, stopped performing consistently.
Maybe a bit harsh on Bruno but for sure he lost his shooting boots after that second season.
If you took those four players, had them all at their best and put them in today's team, there'd be no complaining about ETH's set up or style. We'd be bashing teams up and winning most weeks.
For a spell Bruno, Rashford, Martial and Greenwood were all on fire at the same time.
You get four players of that quality performing at their best, you'll do well regardless of anything else.
The problem wasn't Ronaldo coming. He didn't stop other signings. In fact that first season it was a good job we did have him because Martial was injured.
The problem was those four, for various reasons, stopped performing consistently.
Maybe a bit harsh on Bruno but for sure he lost his shooting boots after that second season.
If you took those four players, had them all at their best and put them in today's team, there'd be no complaining about ETH's set up or style. We'd be bashing teams up and winning most weeks.
I agree, ETHs first season got overpraised. But the same can be said about Oles interim period. It is what happens - people are hopeful, happy about the change, want to be positive. And lets face it, some are either clueless or they do not watch the games and only evaluate "how good we were" based on the result. So you are right, but that probably applies to some extent to any manager. Probably even great ones as SAF.
I would agree to that given that the criticism became really wild. But to me, that had more to do with the polarization of the fanbase and the radicalization of either "haters" and "top red fanboys". Ole did a decent job and I personally admit, that I thought, a different manager must have been able to make more out of this squad, which ultimately turned out to be wrong, but that only changes Oles relative standing - it doesn't raise his level.
I think, it is pretty difficult to now go back, and try to look at some data to distinguish a certain playstyle based on some stats. Because, as I said, our opponents reacted to our abilities on the counter and took away space. Obviously when that is the case, you aren't getting pinned back, you even have "more possession" suddenly, but that doesn't make you a possession based team, because it isn't your own decision, your own mission to keep the ball away from the opponent, it is more the opponent making the decision that handing over the ball to you is more benefitial for a good result than trying to keep it yourself.
Again - nothing wrong with a simple gameplan. Keep it tight and hit them fast - every top team has that ability. Even City or Barcelona, when given the opportunity, they'll hit you hard. But what makes them top teams is that this is not their only weapon in the arsenal. And this is what always was in question with Ole - would he be able to make the next step. Many doubted it from the beginning, many even now think he could have it in him...
This applies to every manager. Always. The good managers are better than others in terms of a) raising the baselevel of players, b) raising the top level of players and c) provide an environment and the conditions for their players to maximize their effect and to "have a plan" that does that for as many of the 11 players on the pitch as possible.
Absolutely. No chance.
It is interesting because it literally exemplifies how nostalgia and being stuck in the past hindered our club and its football legends from moving on in a comprehensive way.
How many of you that still won't admit Ole is a good manager, wanted him to play Bailly over Maguire, or thought van de Beek would immediately bench Bruno under "a proper manager", and that he was some elite player Ole was just too stupid to know how to use? 
Or that our 2021/22 team could win the league with "a proper manager"?
Or that our 2021/22 team could win the league with "a proper manager"?
I think point C is certainly true and is ultimately what management is all about.
That and having a good eye for talent in the first place.
Point A and B I'm not sure about. Never been convinced a manager can increase a players ability. A player is what he is to me.
Ole had a dynamite front four for a short spell. Greenwood coming and seeming to score with every effort for a while was a huge boost.
Just a huge shame he couldn't strengthen when all was going well. He should have spotted that even when playing well, Martial was not the option long term.