You are not wrong, but you are also not 100% correct, I think what he meant by (United cannot play the way we play) is that United cannot play a defensive style, not United cannot play back 3, in the second statement, I think Amorim is referring to what he knows in terms of his own principles of play and those principles can be achieved with a back 4 as well, which could be the reason why he would perhaps start with a back 4 and then gradually transition to his favored formation of back 3, he might also go ahead with a back 3 as well, we will see, either way, I think what he wants to achieve at first is his players adhering to his principles.
Ruben Amorim - Manchester United Head Coach
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
Tactical and formational overhauls will take time. He's unlikely to send the players out with a completely unfamiliar set up after just 5 training sessions.
First training session. Let’s go
Who's putting the cones out?
I hope we get his press conference today, now that he’s gotten his work permit. I’m excited to hear him talk more about his vision for the club. No doubt he’ll be asked about certain topics, especially Rashford and the players returning from injury.
I would assume his first presser will be around Thursday for Ipswich
They looked unfamiliar with whatever Erik send them out with though to be fair.
Unsure if you watched the presser or just read his quotes, but in the interview it was very clear he was referring to the way sporting set out defensively with 30 something % possession and riding their luck in the game.
He also says he needs to show something that he knows very well, which basically confirms 3 at the back because that's all he knows. When he tried 4 at the back at the very start of his career, it was terrible and he almost quit all together because it wasn't suited to his style.
surely if it takes time they have to start learning it? you think we will train 3-4-3 and then play games with 4 at the back ?
People put way too much focus on the number of central defenders. There's much more to a gameplan and strategy than numbers of a formation.
No because then you have to train both formations.. you cant just send a team with a formation you don't train.
Especially when we have games every 3 days, there will be no time to train 2 different formations.
We are better off training and playing the same formation. In our build up, we are used to using the 3 at the back anyway.
I think we will be playing 3 at back from the off. He said we will see from 1st game the idea. So he will start off with 3 at back and build from that. Week by week and game by game we will stick to it, best way. It will take a while until players adjust to it but needs to be done.
Then he will know the players that suits it and then come the transfer window move on ones that are not needed.
Then he will know the players that suits it and then come the transfer window move on ones that are not needed.
It is not like they have never played a different formation in their life. They are professional football players, most of them will have played a system with three defenders somewhere in their life with former clubs or national team. Ipswich is the best game to start with it and get some more experience with it. And then practise more against Bodo and Everton. Or would you start with it against Arsenal or City after a couple of weeks?
Odd that people think 3-4-3 or a variation of it, is some unknown tactic to professional footballers.
Even though Southgate regularly used 3-5-2. The South American players and ones from the continent, definitely will have played 3 at the back at international level.
Even Amad's national team Ivory coast have flitted between 442 and 343!
Granted, there will be some teething issues at first.
Even though Southgate regularly used 3-5-2. The South American players and ones from the continent, definitely will have played 3 at the back at international level.
Even Amad's national team Ivory coast have flitted between 442 and 343!
Granted, there will be some teething issues at first.
Last edited:
If you were to implement a new formation it is best to do this against Ipswich (no disrespect) than against Man City Arsenal or Liverpool. So 3 at the back we go from the first game
Maguire gets lumped with these 2 a lot but let's be fair, his attitude in and around the club has always been brilliant and he's always been available amd always tried his absolute best, even after losing the captaincy. I think he's a like for like backup/competition for De Ligt.
I agree that Rashford and Shaw need to go though.
No no rashford does a thing = bad please recall
He's on a club approved holiday. What is the issue with that?
Going on holiday is playing the big I am now is it. Interesting.
Must've organized himself with Case
Big time Charlie obviously.
This post is genius. Witchery. It’s everything
Do we have 3 center backs ready for the next game?
De ligt, Evans and?? Is Martinez OK now?
Very nice slim pickings to start 3 at back.
Even if Martinez is ready, we will only have Yoro, as a CB on the bench.
De ligt, Evans and?? Is Martinez OK now?
Very nice slim pickings to start 3 at back.
Even if Martinez is ready, we will only have Yoro, as a CB on the bench.
I'd expect Mazraoui to start at RCB.
Yeah I agree. it is a funny worry people have when they say we don't have CBs for a back 3 and we need to buy CBs or WBs who know how to play a back 3, as if there are CBs and WBs out there who have been training since the youth teams to play those positions. All the defenders who play in a back 3 have come up playing in a back 4 and have been coached to play in a back 3 at some point in their career. Same with the wingbacks. All our CBs with some coaching can play in one position or the other in a back 3. At WB just due to more demands for stamina and 1 on 1 attacking I can see the argument more but even then, both Mazraoui and Dalot are perfectly capable to play those positions, as are Shaw and Malacia if we ever see them. Even the wide CB positions shouldn't be an issue as the majority of CBs nowadays defend 1 on 1 in the channels anyway. Its not as big an issue as some people make out.
Exactly this. I mean in our build up under Ten Hag we played a 3-1-6 so the players kind of know it right?
Also defensively, they have been so used to being isolated, how many times last season were our defenders left 1 v 1 ? They are used to this, when you play for top teams, you are expected to be able to deal with those situations.
Dalot played at Inter on loan in a similar system? Onana has played in a similar system. De Ligt has played various formations with Bayern, Juve, Netherlands.
Tactics don't matter right now. The first priority will be to get the players doing the basics properly, and putting 100% effort in.
Then we can worry about formations...
Then we can worry about formations...
Basics in what sense?
Put the pig bladder in the onion bag. Football for dummies 101
“Just go out and have fun and express yourselve lads”
If that’s really where we are at then Amorim is as helpless and doomed as every other manager since SAF.
Put the pig bladder in the onion bag. Football for dummies 101
I think he is on to something with the focus on identity. It has not only to do with playstyle tough, but with giving everything on the pitch, by realizing the history and weight of playing at MU.
I would want to see more interaction from all the players with the fans: some of them seem to full of themselves.
I believe Ten Hag tried to do the same thing, but he focused on a winning attitude. I suppose he succeeded in winning two cups, but the cracks were there which showed in the league especially. So many games we couldn’t get over the line.
In terms of playstyle Amorim isn’t that different from Ten Hag. Playing out the back, progressing forward quickly and pressing. Basically modern football.
The formation is both the same and different, both coaches play 316/325 in attack.
He’s a different person and will come at the project in a different way; we all hope he’s the one to succeed in making us compete again in the league.
From what Sporting fans have said, he started off playing fullbacks in those positions (albeit being played very offensively). Then after a year or two he changed one of them to being a winger, and later changed the other to a winger as well.
So it could go either way. He may feel he needs fullbacks there at first to keep us somewhat solid while the team gets used to what needs to be done, and then eventually change one (or both) to a winger so as to overload the attack. Or it may have been a case that he was experimenting with the different tactics, and he's now set on having wingers there straight away. None of us will know until we see his first few games (indeed it wouldn't surprise me if he's not set on either yet and he'll be experimenting to see which works best with us).
Has he feinted yet watching our guys attempt to run?
Rest in peace
It's right the budget is restricted. We can't be signing a brand new squad every two or three years. He's going to have to work with what he has, utilise some of the young players, be expected to raise money to fund additional purchases and stick with one or two key signings each year. I think honestly that's preferable to what was going on before.
Things changed and evolved from season to season but it also had to do with Sporting budget limitations. It's pretty hard and expensive finding a fullback that knows to attack/defend and has the stamina to do so.
Sporting academy has a long history of wingers so its easier to develop and teach a winger (Geny Catamo, Quenda...) on how to defend, since they already had the thing you cant exactly teach which is flair, dribbling, etc.
Shame we've put together such a shite squad then. He'll fail if he's not allowed to bring several players in.
He'll be needing another round of hair transplants after all this.