Van de beek and Amad are not the problem here. It's the players that have been regulars in the first team that are the issue. It's something I've brought up for years on this forum and have repeated that our issue in this team is that we not only need technically good players but also players that are quick and mobile in defensive transition.
What Rangnick is saying isn't anything new and I've repeated the same lines for years. You need technical players as well as players who are strong in defensive transitions, hence I've always been against the idea of us signing players like Tielemans and Neves who are weak in the defensive transition if deployed in a higher defensive block. How many times have I mentioned Liverpool and their recruitment of big and fast CBs, their midfielders being extremely tenacious in defensive transition and the profile of player they generally target for the highly intensive play style of Jurgen Klopp?
Our problem when it comes to recruitment is the same problem too. We have hired managers who have all resorted to playing mid/low block football on the counter attack. Moyes, LVG, Mourinho and Ole, all ended up implementing a low block/mid block approach, which is a approach that looks to react to the opponent and not be proactive. So it shouldn't be a surprise that we ended up playing a reactive brand of football that relied on reacting to the opponent's mistakes on the counter attack. Whilst our rivals implemented a approach which was proactive and saw them sacrificing defensive stability for goals.
And Mourinho complaining about intensity is a bit rich when he personally brought in several players that weren't the most tenacious or mobile.
This is all true but its also a chicken and egg situation. The managers that come in, including Ole, and now including Ralf, give up on any kind of different football because they adapt to the squad they have.
When you force coaches to keep players, regardless of how those players are performing, that will constrain you. Many of the people on the CAF has to understand, if we get Ten Hag, unless the Board is willing to refresh the squad then nothing much will change. Ten Hag may come in with a plan to do X, Y and Z. However, he will look at the players he has and if he can't replace them he'll have to change what he wants to do.
People forget how different the squad Klopp inherited is to the squad that he started winning trophies with. He was allowed to recycle out a lot of players. That doesn't happen at United. Eric Bailly, Juan Mata and Lee Grant got new deals last summer. Can anyone explain why? That's just the way we, Man Utd, do business.
As long as we keep holding onto the same squad its almost delusional to expect a different output. These players are not suited to playing in a high backline, front foot, pressing way. We either replace those players or we go and get a counter attacking manager and stop pretending we wanna do something different.
I can see why some say he should have played but saying its ridiculous he was on the bench is a bit far fetched. Rashford is a broken man. He's done at least for this season. You can see why it was a tough call and either option was sht. If Rashford was ideal for the 9 position and Ralf got it wrong then Rashford should have come on and ripped Leicester apart. What did he do in reality? Nothing. This United team is fkd. No matter what option Ralf choose it would have been fkd. He's dammed if he does and he's damned if he doesnt.
Agreed. He's been cak. Dress it up how we want but its true. No he's not the only one. However, in his recent appearances he's been a ghost. Would anyone have banked on him scoring before Saturday? Has he looked like it? No.
