Ruben Amorim - Manchester United Head Coach

Toshey said:
Are you expecting more from the players, or is it just Amorim's fault?
Click to expand...
Players make silly mistake but Amorims selections are odd, and I don't think his system sets the squad up for success so there's big ownership from him.

Forevergiggs1 said:
Doesn't he? How many players would you actually keep? I can think of 2 definitas and 4 maybes. Just because we've spent a shit load of money doesn't mean we have good players. Add to the fact that most are mentally weak it's just a recipe for disaster.
Click to expand...
Mainoo, Amad, Bruno, licha, MDL, Maguire, Yorro, Ugarte for me all have capacity to perform well in this system if we could get wingbacks, another midfielder and a striker.
Gordon'sHill said:
I have seen you over last few years constantly support ETH and constantly shout down anyone who opposed that view. I don't believe he successfully adapted as such, an insanely easy draw in a meaningless competition led to a trophy. He was pragmatic but in second season it was chaos, which ultimately was not that different to Ajax but he previously had a physically and technically far superior team compared to others. In the PL that was not the case. I am concerned though that Amorim wont adapt, even short term, and that is going to be his downfall. Is there a modern team with 3 CBs who has a won a major league or European trophy? Honest question would love to know. Simeone as I understand is pretty much 442 but is renowned for solid defense.
Click to expand...
I didn't "constantly shoot down". I backed him and others didn't, but that's neither here nor there. His system was open in season 2 and thats something he should have owned. I felt he could have reverted to pragmatism but chose to steer the course instead and it cost him.

But that's probably a good segway into Amorim who is also choosing to go through pain and will get windows to help him. My view is that he could show more flexibility in the interim, and not say stupid shit in the media. But that doesn't mean I have no faith or I'm not backing him as a coach to get it right in the medium to long term.


UnitedSofa said:
So essentially you want us to go back to 4231, the same formation and tactics that got EtH sacked?

Then we’ll go through all this suffering again at the start of next season?
Click to expand...
That system got us 3rd and 8th which is far better than being close to relegation. And no, he can still get rid of players, buy wingback and 10s and drill the long term system in pre season.


Lyng said:
Well there had been far less games. Sticking with Ten Hag would not have meant we had suddenly been higher up the table. I also dont believe we would have beaten Arsenal at the Emirates by going back to square one.

In my opinion there has been a slow but clear progression in our way of playing with us controlling more games. But we still have a squad with players that are simply not up to snuff in the Premier League. Going 4 at the back is not suddenly going to make them better. We also have players who look much better now like Maguire.
Mainoo had a horrendous start to the season as well, so I doubt the system is the issue. Very young players will always have ups and downs.
Click to expand...
Its not about sticking with the previous coach or not. I believe seeing through the season with more flexibility on the system to suit the players would have yielded better results. Doesn't matter who would be at the helm, Eric ruud or Ruben.


silvercre said:
European spot was gone by the end of September. Then it was evident that this season will be a bad one.

You think the system is making Mainoo lose the ball easily and be outmuscled and not making himself open enough to get the pass, not try to drive forward? Or he just needs to work on himself?
Click to expand...
No, it wasn't. We were what, 7 points off top 4 with two thirds of the season to go was it?

Mainoo problems wasn't just being muscled off in certain games.
 
Sir Jim will be more upset about the TV than the loss I'm sure...

Sidenote, why does every single fecking detail behind the scenes at the club leak every single time. It's become a running joke ffs
 
Great to hear about the broken TV. It should be do-or-die time for anyone involved with football at the club currently, so only right that the tempers are flaring.
 
MO_Football92 said:
He doesn't have to use the same principles as ETH did in the 4231.

I think many people are overemphasising systems currently. They're really not as important as made out to be.

Amorim is making an absolute fool of himself for not adapting imo.
Click to expand...

Why should he adapt?

If Arteta adapted at Arsenal you'd probably have had 2 more managers since and still have Lacazette, Pepe and Abuameyang stinking the place out.

It's quite clear that it doesn't matter if it's 442, 4231, 433 or 343 or who the manager is. A lot of these players clearly just aren't good enough, don't have the pride to fight to get better. They are comfortable doing the bare minimum and are where they are because that's where they deserve to be.

Either they adapt and improve or piss off.
 
Hoof the ball said:
In order to demonstrate inherent bias and lack of reasonable fairness towards the alternative system, consider the following :-

1. When a manager, married to 4-at-the-back, and a career-long proponent of either 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3, endures significant problems with the implementation of his system, please note that, whether from within media circles, or within fan circles, there is a distinct lack of suggestion that these career-long proponents of 4-at-the-back systems should perhaps be flexible enough to utilise a 3-at-the-back system.

Yet......

2. When a manager, married to 3-at-the-back, and a career proponent of either 3-4-2-1 or 3-4-3, endures significant problems with the implementation of his system, please note that, whether from media circles, or within fan circles, there is a distinctly favourable motivation to suggest that these career-long proponents of 3-at-the-back systems should perhaps be flexible enough to utilise a 4-at-the-back system.

It's blatantly hypocritical and fans should definitely be aware of the way in which they disproportionately treat both examples above. How is the 3-at-the-back proponent infliexible for not shifting to 4-at-the-back, but the 4-at-the-back is not inflexible for not shifting to 3-at-the-back. It smacks of double-standards.

You will never see fans calling for a failing 4-at-the-back system to adopt a wing-back approach, but the reverse scenario is almost always likely expected.

And if you think this doesn't colour how much patience your give each of the above examples, then you're kidding yourself.
Click to expand...

Exactly this and it is really tiring to see. People act as though 3 at the back is a foreign concept which needs a rare species of player to be able to perform in. We have seen many teams in the PL use 3 at the back systems and even win the league with. The bias and lack of knowledge or adaptability of fans is so clearly on display with such simplistic arguments. We were utter shite with 4 at the back all season yet people are desperate to move back to the same system that got us into this mess in the first place.
 
Maybe Shaw and Mount needed an injured TV to keep them entertained in the treatment room
 
Hoof the ball said:
In order to demonstrate inherent bias and lack of reasonable fairness towards the alternative system, consider the following :-

1. When a manager, married to 4-at-the-back, and a career-long proponent of either 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3, endures significant problems with the implementation of his system, please note that, whether from within media circles, or within fan circles, there is a distinct lack of suggestion that these career-long proponents of 4-at-the-back systems should perhaps be flexible enough to utilise a 3-at-the-back system.

Yet......

2. When a manager, married to 3-at-the-back, and a career proponent of either 3-4-2-1 or 3-4-3, endures significant problems with the implementation of his system, please note that, whether from media circles, or within fan circles, there is a distinctly favourable motivation to suggest that these career-long proponents of 3-at-the-back systems should perhaps be flexible enough to utilise a 4-at-the-back system.

It's blatantly hypocritical and fans should definitely be aware of the way in which they disproportionately treat both examples above. How is the 3-at-the-back proponent infliexible for not shifting to 4-at-the-back, but the 4-at-the-back is not inflexible for not shifting to 3-at-the-back. It smacks of double-standards.

You will never see fans calling for a failing 4-at-the-back system to adopt a wing-back approach, but the reverse scenario is almost always likely expected.

And if you think this doesn't colour how much patience your give each of the above examples, then you're kidding yourself.
Click to expand...

It's because 4 at the back is tried and tested in the modern game, and most teams play it. If you want to try something different that's fine, but he needs to get results.

Also, the squad has been (badly) built to play 4 at the back with 2 wide forwards. These are the players we have. We're not doing well right now. Playing to the squads strengths isn't madness. Hypocritical? Just sensible.
 
VP89 said:
I'd rather he gave proper context behind it and acknowledged his inflexible approach to the system is contributing to it. He has a good set of players in a lot of areas but they aren't suited to his system.
Click to expand...
I'm just curious why you are so hard on amorim, not that you're particularly wrong, but with the context you were still adamantly defending ETH until the very end. It was clear for months we were going nowhere under him and a large part of our current situation is his fault.

One had 2 and a half years plus 500m to spend and the other came into a team in 14th and in free fall, with no pre season or transfer window. So why are you more harsh on the latter?
 
santeria13 said:
I'm just curious why you are so hard on amorim, not that you're particularly wrong, but with the context you were still adamantly defending ETH until the very end. It was clear for months we were going nowhere under him and a large part of our current situation is his fault.

One had 2 and a half years plus 500m to spend and the other came into a team in 14th and in free fall, with no pre season or transfer window. So why are you more harsh on the latter?
Click to expand...
I am defending Amorim on the aspects that matter - believing his system is going to be successful with the right players (as I used to with ten hag to be fair), and on his approach to management.

But he is failing to show pragmatism during transitional periods for the squad, almost running before they can walk. This is a mistake ten hag made too.

The money spent and signings I'm not getting into, I've always thought we wasted money under every coach and it's not manager specific but more structural. My hope is that is fixed for Amorim to be successful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.