We conceded less this season with 2 CB’s and this keeper so yeah, probably good to feck off the third CB when chasing a game.
Ruben Amorim - Manchester United Head Coach
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
We conceded less this season with 2 CB’s and this keeper so yeah, probably good to feck off the third CB when chasing a game.
Better the manager finds out before the summer which players he can trust rather than if he'd joined in the summer and we'd had to have the 'everyone gets a clean slate' only for what has happened since he joined to then happen at the start of next season.
My advice to everyone is to eat the shit sandwich now and hope that dessert that comes later will more than compensate you for it.
That was whilst playing 4 at the back, the poster wanted an extra attacker or midfielder not an extra defender.
We start every game with 5 at the back as the wingbacks play like fullbacks.
Yeah personally I'm not seeing anything a lot of managers haven't done here or elsewhere.
Ten Hag did everything you've just described over a period of 18 months between the summer of 2023 until he was sacked.
Freezing out Sancho and then loaning him out was touted as dealing with "player power" back then as well.
Yeah I think that's the case to some extent. Even the likes of Pep and Klopp had to adapt their styles after the first few months in the PL.
Amorims lack of flexibility is a concern if I'm being honest. Been watching the odd Sporting game over the last few months to get an idea of where Amorim plans to lead us. But from what I can see they've already switched back to 4 at the back.
You need to be able to separate emption from the actual data we see before our eyes.
I refuse to believe you, or any other poster, thought it would be this bad - not only in terms of results but in how the whole team has failed to function for the most part. I get people do not like the idea of turning on a manager who has come into a difficult situation (and this was obvious, I had an argument with someone on here about how this would inevitably happen though I had no idea it would be this bad) but there has to be some kind of minimum expectation here. There can't be true carte blanche to average a point a game for 2/3 of the season.
Personally I feel most get so swept up in taking sides or being right, they lose the ability to take a step back and assess things fairly. I could not give a hoot if Amorim is the guy, or if ETH was going to be or anyone, what I want is a manager who shows me something to then get behind. Who can get something extra out of his players, who can start to impose a style on a game that we then see weekly? I am hopeful Amorim can turn it around, he has long enough to get a run of results going and, who knows, we might be able to win a cup - what an end to the season that would be - but it's perfectly fine for fans to say that, right now, what we have seen is unacceptable and if it continues he may be sacked in summer.
I can see why you might want to be flexible for Baggio. Not sure the same applies for Amad
Yeah,might have something to do with the players??
Absolutely and it is frustrating but when we go into chasing mode it's rarely a back 5. It's usually 3 at the back (with one stepping up into midfield) and our wing backs push really high. I don't see the need to drop a CB in those moments we just need to play like that from the start as we do create a lot when we do.
With Maz at RCB and Dalot LWB (for now hopefully) then it quickly becomes a 4231 in moments of transition anyway. The focus on 3 CBs feels like misdirected frustration.
Out of curiosity, what did Pep and Klopp adapt when they came to PL? I, personally, don't see any difference in the way they tried to play in their earlier jobs vs what they tried in the PL
If anything, Klopp was criticized for sticking to his high octane style of play when he came mid-season to the PL
Hillarious you’re trying to make it sound like our squad was good last year because we won the fa cup. Talk about revisionism to back up your point. We played shocking football all season to the point the fa cup was an anomaly and something most of us here said shouldn’t be a justification for eth keeping this job. Unfortunately our board are idiots and extended his contract on the basis of it, which has created the mess we’re in now.
Of course he has a bad loss rate - he’s come in mid season, has signed one player who’s played half a game, is trying to change the entire system with barely any training. He told the board to expect this kind of chaos. It’s all to be expected, except for some fans who are unnecessarily freaking out.
Its obvious fans dont understand what adapting the style means. They think it means change to a 4 at the back formation.
I have seen Amorim adapt, he went to Liverpool, City and Arsenal and played a different style by adapting.
I'm sorry but I dont want my manager adapting his style for Leicester at home, I would rather us stick to what we want to play and lose. This will mean we get the players that can play the managers style.
What guarantees do we have that a Frank type manager with give us results? What guarantees do we have that an Amorim type manager will? As we all see it doesn't.
Accepting the current mediocrity for the potential and improbable greater good is not an act of heroism, far from it.
Countless managers come in mid season and improve results. He may be a success long term and it’s obviously too early to judge but the idea we can’t expect better than the shite we’re being served is idiotic.
Not when changing the entire system.
My guess would be that there are a lot of managers who have made a success of that too. Not that I think it should really be a stick to beat our current manager with, more the executives that decided upon this strategy.
No? He changed his entire setup and tactics after losing his first two matches. No more "Ajax" style and rather going for the usual stuff to get results, playing very similar to how Ole set up the team.
Thats an ok short term solution, but not long term, in my opinion.
Playing an extra centre back? We can’t expect results because we’re playing 3 at the back instead of two? What’s different about the strikers job? What’s different about the midfield two’s job? It’s a crutch. There is zero excuse for how poorly we’re playing.
The only real difference is the full backs being expected to attack a little more. What we’ve done is wilfully make our attack worse than it already was.
Chelsea’s back 4 > Tuchel’s back 5 went alright like
Funny example too because he also expressed a desire to take over in the Summer instead. He eventually, like Amorim, took the job though and made the best he could out of a tough situation.
Amorim aint making the best, quite the opposite, it’s like he’s making it as difficult as possible for himself and his players.
Last edited:
That wasn't adapting?? That was adjusting how we play considering the opposition to get the best outcome.. oh wait
There are 2 main reasons, imo, why we are struggling at the moment.
1. The system doesn't fit the players, mainly the wingbacks. They are not good attacking wing backs, unless Amad is playing there. The wing backs are so crucial for how Amorim wants to attack and when that doesn't work, we get a very stale attack. Almost no chance creation, we've seen it so far after Amorim took over, we have mostly been relying on "magic" from Bruno, Amad or Garnacho.
2. The players mentality. The players seem to think they are better than most teams, which is evident in the lack of urgency we see when we play teams like Southampton, Leicester etc.
Just look at the difference in urgency and attacking play before and after we concede. These players seem to think that they can coast through matches vs these kind of teams, which is hurting us in the PL.
I was really confident in this guy when he came in, I really liked what I heard and could see in his interviews. After Friday I'm honestly lost, it just seems he's far too stubborn with his system and he has no plan B.
It is true that United had bad results last year. 8th place league finish, 60 points, 57 goals scored, 58 goals conceded.
But United are currently on 13th place. If you extrapolate the current 'per game' rate, you finish the season with 46 points, a 14 point drop from last year. You get 44 goals, 13 less than last year. And you get 54 goals conceded, only 4 less than last year.
This is actually about as big as the drop from Ten Hag's first to second seasons, which was 15 less points, 15 more goals conceded, same amount of goals scored.
With some good players in De Ligt, Maz and Ugarte at least added in too.
But we didn't switch Managers and try to completely change our system half way through a season last year. I'd also argue we had more depth to our forward line last year.
The problem is that Amorim has come in and attempted to rebuild the club his way half way through a season when it should have been done in the Summer. This is completely on Ineos for backing Ten Hag in the Summer, it's also on Ineos for bringing I'm Amorim when they did knowing full well he would do this and knowing he warned them as he warned us that results would get bad.
The difference is that some of our fanbase simply doesn't have the stomach for it. As someone else wrote, they're all talk. They want the club to change but don't want the required messy bit to make it happen.
The system is actually pretty flexible. There've been times lately where it allows for Bruno to drop into a back 6 when we're in possession for example.
If you can't see the difference between getting shut of Rashford and getting shut of Sancho, I don't know what to tell you.
Rashford was the Manchester United poster boy, it was almost like performances didn't matter, he would remain a constant in the team. Sancho has always been shit for Manchester United, it's a move that just didn't work and moving him on is a typical transfer which happens at all clubs across all levels. Rashford's is the type which makes you sit up and notice, if Rashford isn't safe from being shipped out, you'd have to assume no player is. That's not something this club has had in a long time.
Lukaku, Ronaldo, Sancho, Rashford hopefully this is the last of it but wouldn't be surprised if it was not
There was a report somewhere that Ten hag wanted to give Rashford the sancho treatment but couldn't after doing it to Sancho, Ronaldo and losing Greenwood.
There's only really Ronaldo who is even close to being comparable to Rashford, but even that was a past his best, shell of what was once the greatest player in the world. His age made it easy.
Lukaku and Sancho were just poor transfers that we've moved on. The Rashford one is the one that sticks out, we're effectively getting rid of a homegrown talent, who the club has been built around for the last 5 years and we're getting rid of him for what should be his prime years (in theory, I actually think the reality is he's the horse that's already bolted). It sends a clear message, it doesn't matter who you are, perform for this club or you'll be shown the door. I'm personally all for it.
It seems primarily flexible to become a back 5 with one forward. We struggle to get players into the box. Not a surprise really when we play 5 defenders and DM.
This is that kind of arrogant 'top red' post. We all want the club to change, though I fear it will never really change until Glazers are somehow gone. But there is change with a clear goal and change for its own sake. Right now we seem to be in the latter, with a young and unproven (outside a minor league) manager who seems to be struggling to know how to improve things and is making weird selections. He isn't getting sacked this season but unless there is clear improvement in play next season he will be. There are sensible reasons to be concerned about signing a relatively unproven system manager, something that is really rare in top level football. I read an interesting article at the weekend flagging that more clubs are now moving away from City's rigid positional play and playing more direct and taking more risks, Bournemouth is a great example of this. I don't know if this is how Amorim's Sporting played but I hope his system is not too rigid in positioning.
I dont understand fans who thinks playing 5 at the back means that wing backs are not allowed to attack.
Not long ago....Amad scored a hattrick from RWB.
In the Europa league game, Dalot got into the back post.
Its so clear that Amorim wants his wing backs to get forward and into the box.
Its like saying when we played 4 at the back for the last 10 years, we were free scoring with 5 players in the box...
Delusion much.
Good, I think it would be a mistake.
Garnacho has shown he has character unlike Rashford, and should stay.
Mainoo should be further developed and not overplayed.
I‘m curious about what changed when Amorim was appointed: do we still have a game model or did it go out the window?
EtH was gutless, all he cared about was saving his own skin, not a real root and branch overhaul.
Apply the same expectations you had for THag to Amorim. No one thought we were going to lose this much, although me and others pointed out that Amorim would not magically fix all the issues right off.
The loss rate is worse than expected and unacceptable. Let‘s hope it turns around, it has happened at other clubs.
Yea, I am really interested in this too after the song and dance that was made about the game model when Wilcox got his job and the strategy he was looking to implement.
Can viewers of the younger age group teams let us know if those teams are now playing the same system as the first team to make it easier for them to adapt to the first team when the time comes? Has that meant a change in coaching team at all in the younger age groups? The youth teams seemed to be doing well, has any of the changes to the way the first team line up impacted on that, or are they just carrying on with their own thing separate to what goes in with the first team?
I was left bewildered by Amorims choice to put Dorgu on RWB and keep Dalot at LWB on Friday, and I really don't understand Amorims urge to persist with two inverted wingbacks when it clearly not working.
It's clear to see that we are very predictable in our style of play, whereas we're dependig on our wide players to either cut in and shoot (alternativeliy passing it centrally/backwards) or us trying to force it through the middle somehow. The only slight exceptions to this is Garnacho and Amad, as a RWB, as they from time to time do actually go for the byline and try for crosses/cutbacks.
Our wingbacks offers limited penetrative threats and don't really go for the byline to do crosses or cutbacks. They rarely offer runs and/or penetrative threaths as they rather prefer maintaining their wide positions to receive the ball in their feet to cut back in and shoot or to play it centrally/backwards. This also leaves us with strikers that gets very little to feed on in the box without early crosses or cutbacks from the wide players.
They way we play now is so predictable and one dimensional, and seemingly easy to defend against for our oppossition.
We're not a team that crosses the ball into the box. We're relying on carries/dribling, not passing. We go for hopeful long range shots, rather that playing our way closer to goal. Little progressive play and lack of simultaneous threats (e.g. runs in behind from several players).
It's probably way to simplistic of me, but judging by both the underlying stats and what we see ourselves every match, I do beilieve that we could ask ourselves a few questions regarding our issues;
1. How can we create more chances/shots?
2. How can we get closer to the goal before finishing?
3. If solved, can question 1 and 2 get more out of our strikers?
4. How can we become less predictable/offer more threat in posession?
and 5. Can wingbacks playing on their "natural sides" have a positive impact on our issues?
My answer: I genuinely do believe that "naturally sided wingbacks", and giving them attacking freedom, can and will help us improve alot on all these questions.
So heres what the Premier League-stats show;
- 18th in crosses
- 17th in crosses into the penalty area
= We're not a team that crosses the ball (symptomatic of playing with inverted wide players/wingbacks).
- 11th in passes into the penalty area
- 9th in carries into the penalty area
= We're mostly relying on carries/dribling into the penatly area, not passes.
- 12th in number of shots per game
- 4th highest % of our shots coming from outside of the box
- 14th in % of our shots coming from inside the 18 yards box
- 18th in % of our shots coming from inside the 6 yards box
- 14th in shot distance
= Comparatively attempting more long range shots, rather than closer range shots from inside the box.
- 5th in completed passes
- 10th in progressive passe
- 13th in progressive carries
- 3rd and 4th in Touches in the Defensive 3rd and Middle 3rd
- 10th in Touches in the attacking 3rd and 10th in Touches in the Attacking Penalty Area
- 15th in goals coming from open play
= Getting possession isn't the problem, the problem is being progressive and/or creating chances with it.
I accept that it was only Dorgus first match, and also that it takes time to implement a new tactic and style of play, but I'm still somewhat concerned that this obsession with inverted wingbacks (and 10's) will prove unsuccessfull for us and be Amorims downfall.
It's clear to see that we are very predictable in our style of play, whereas we're dependig on our wide players to either cut in and shoot (alternativeliy passing it centrally/backwards) or us trying to force it through the middle somehow. The only slight exceptions to this is Garnacho and Amad, as a RWB, as they from time to time do actually go for the byline and try for crosses/cutbacks.
Our wingbacks offers limited penetrative threats and don't really go for the byline to do crosses or cutbacks. They rarely offer runs and/or penetrative threaths as they rather prefer maintaining their wide positions to receive the ball in their feet to cut back in and shoot or to play it centrally/backwards. This also leaves us with strikers that gets very little to feed on in the box without early crosses or cutbacks from the wide players.
They way we play now is so predictable and one dimensional, and seemingly easy to defend against for our oppossition.
We're not a team that crosses the ball into the box. We're relying on carries/dribling, not passing. We go for hopeful long range shots, rather that playing our way closer to goal. Little progressive play and lack of simultaneous threats (e.g. runs in behind from several players).
It's probably way to simplistic of me, but judging by both the underlying stats and what we see ourselves every match, I do beilieve that we could ask ourselves a few questions regarding our issues;
1. How can we create more chances/shots?
2. How can we get closer to the goal before finishing?
3. If solved, can question 1 and 2 get more out of our strikers?
4. How can we become less predictable/offer more threat in posession?
and 5. Can wingbacks playing on their "natural sides" have a positive impact on our issues?
My answer: I genuinely do believe that "naturally sided wingbacks", and giving them attacking freedom, can and will help us improve alot on all these questions.
So heres what the Premier League-stats show;
- 18th in crosses
- 17th in crosses into the penalty area
= We're not a team that crosses the ball (symptomatic of playing with inverted wide players/wingbacks).
- 11th in passes into the penalty area
- 9th in carries into the penalty area
= We're mostly relying on carries/dribling into the penatly area, not passes.
- 12th in number of shots per game
- 4th highest % of our shots coming from outside of the box
- 14th in % of our shots coming from inside the 18 yards box
- 18th in % of our shots coming from inside the 6 yards box
- 14th in shot distance
= Comparatively attempting more long range shots, rather than closer range shots from inside the box.
- 5th in completed passes
- 10th in progressive passe
- 13th in progressive carries
- 3rd and 4th in Touches in the Defensive 3rd and Middle 3rd
- 10th in Touches in the attacking 3rd and 10th in Touches in the Attacking Penalty Area
- 15th in goals coming from open play
= Getting possession isn't the problem, the problem is being progressive and/or creating chances with it.
I accept that it was only Dorgus first match, and also that it takes time to implement a new tactic and style of play, but I'm still somewhat concerned that this obsession with inverted wingbacks (and 10's) will prove unsuccessfull for us and be Amorims downfall.
What classifies as having the stomach for anything actually difficult?