- Joined
- Sep 30, 2011
- Messages
- 1,493
I hope and I think Amorim roughly has figured out his starting 11 after more than 10 games in charge which he should as a coach.That is first job description of a coach.
I hope and I think Amorim roughly has figured out his starting 11 after more than 10 games in charge which he should as a coach.That is first job description of a coach.
This is just the beginning. The team needs a lot of additional players.Jeez, ok.
He has the best 11 figured out. We all know it actually.
And what happens when someone from the best 11 gets injured, suspended or is in horrible form?
Our best 11 has Diogo fecking Dalot in it, let that sink in.
Also contains 19-years old midfielder, impotent (footbally speaking) striker, error prone keeper and hit and miss playmaker.
In my eyes, Amorim is proven as great coach. All he lacks is...well footballers.
But they do. They come on for 10 minutes at the end when the game is won, there is no pressure, and they can slowly get used to PL play.Collyer has been in the squad for at least 2/3 weeks. If you look at most young players, that's when they actually get their chances, when the team is not at its best.
Hardly is there a youngster who is thrown in when the team is firing and doing well.
Honestly, I’d prefer Collyer to Eriksen in the middle of the park. The latter will get run ragged in the first half of an hour, at least Collyer will bring legs and graft.What choice would he have, bring Collyer into the team who isn't ready for PL football?
Hoof it up makes no sense in today's game.I watched the post match interviews and a few of the post match analyses and found a couple of things interesting.
Slott's Post Match Interview.
In this post match interview AS mentions 4 or 5 times that United played long balls and that is very difficult to play against. A few on here have taken offense at this comment saying it wasn't true. In Ian Wright's analysis he too mentions that 80% of the time, according to the post match stats, United went long with the ball.
I have been yelling for us to go long for weeks now, and stop this tappy tappy play out from the back, lose the ball, and concede a chance type of football. As Wrighty pointed out, the long ball gives you a 50-50 chance of winning possession and then you are already half the way up the pitch. If you don't when the 50-50 the your defensive line starts there and not 8 or 12 yards from your own goal when you have lost the ball with tappy tappy. There is nothing wrong with going long if you aren't great at playing out from the back. In fact it's the most sensible decision in that circumstance. However Slott was saying 'United just went long; and that is very hard to play against." as if it was somehow not gentlemanly conduct. Like playing tennis and hitting the ball too hard for your opponent to return. Isn't making it difficult for the opposition to play exactly what you should do ? It was a tactic and clearly by his complaining it worked. Well done Rubin.
Hoof it up makes no sense in today's game.
You won't get that from Amorim, thank god.
If you want that kind of football you have to get an english manager from the 90s.
Why aren't you topless?Why is he topless.
He is!Why aren't you topless?
Slott did the typical thing that kind of manager does, makes excuses, the more I see of Slott the more I believe that he will not be a long term success. What he had to say was utter shite anyway, we bossed the midfield and played through them as well as playing long balls, and besides Liverpool regularly rely on long ball breaks on the counter, honestly he could not have looked more like a prat with the nonsense he was spouting.I watched the post match interviews and a few of the post match analyses and found a couple of things interesting.
Slott's Post Match Interview.
In this post match interview AS mentions 4 or 5 times that United played long balls and that is very difficult to play against. A few on here have taken offense at this comment saying it wasn't true. In Ian Wright's analysis he too mentions that 80% of the time, according to the post match stats, United went long with the ball.
I have been yelling for us to go long for weeks now, and stop this tappy tappy play out from the back, lose the ball, and concede a chance type of football. As Wrighty pointed out, the long ball gives you a 50-50 chance of winning possession and then you are already half the way up the pitch. If you don't when the 50-50 the your defensive line starts there and not 8 or 12 yards from your own goal when you have lost the ball with tappy tappy. There is nothing wrong with going long if you aren't great at playing out from the back. In fact it's the most sensible decision in that circumstance. However Slott was saying 'United just went long; and that is very hard to play against." as if it was somehow not gentlemanly conduct. Like playing tennis and hitting the ball too hard for your opponent to return. Isn't making it difficult for the opposition to play exactly what you should do ? It was a tactic and clearly by his complaining it worked. Well done Rubin.
If he's moaning about long balls then that means he's not a very good manager. ESPECIALLY when his CB is a tall bastard who's supposedly the best in the world. If what he said it's true and that's how they struggled, surely any decent manager would have switched tactic at least by the 2nd half? Not necessarily to change their entire game plan but maybe for the defenders to stay back more and anticipate crosses from the deep. Considering... you know, they really wanted the points? Personally I didn't see Amorim changing things too much outside of basically playing his best 11 again.I watched the post match interviews and a few of the post match analyses and found a couple of things interesting.
Slott's Post Match Interview.
In this post match interview AS mentions 4 or 5 times that United played long balls and that is very difficult to play against. A few on here have taken offense at this comment saying it wasn't true. In Ian Wright's analysis he too mentions that 80% of the time, according to the post match stats, United went long with the ball.
I have been yelling for us to go long for weeks now, and stop this tappy tappy play out from the back, lose the ball, and concede a chance type of football. As Wrighty pointed out, the long ball gives you a 50-50 chance of winning possession and then you are already half the way up the pitch. If you don't when the 50-50 the your defensive line starts there and not 8 or 12 yards from your own goal when you have lost the ball with tappy tappy. There is nothing wrong with going long if you aren't great at playing out from the back. In fact it's the most sensible decision in that circumstance. However Slott was saying 'United just went long; and that is very hard to play against." as if it was somehow not gentlemanly conduct. Like playing tennis and hitting the ball too hard for your opponent to return. Isn't making it difficult for the opposition to play exactly what you should do ? It was a tactic and clearly by his complaining it worked. Well done Rubin.
Trent Alexander Arnold
The general opinion seems to be that Trent ( as the pundits like to call him) had a stinker. However Slott said that Trent's problem was that he had Dalot and Bruno running at him all afternoon. Wrighty's analysis showed that 53% of United's attacking play went down our left at Trent. Everyone knows that Trent is great at crossing the ball into the box, but not much cop at defending; so Rubin set us up to constantly run at him, with Dalot and Bruno double teaming him and making him look like a mug. Again a tactic that worked. Well done Rubin.
The idea that Rubin has just one way to play and won't change and won't be pragmatic was clearly shown to be false on Sunday. He totally out smarted Liverpool with his tactics even if Slott doesn't think that the long play is very fair and we should have played to our weaknesses.
He set us up to win and the players followed through by implementing the tactics and giving the requisite level of effort.
It was an all round great performance.
The only think i saw was a multi polar play.If he's moaning about long balls then that means he's not a very good manager. ESPECIALLY when his CB is a tall bastard who's supposedly the best in the world. If what he said it's true and that's how they struggled, surely any decent manager would have switched tactic at least by the 2nd half? Not necessarily to change their entire game plan but maybe for the defenders to stay back more and anticipate crosses from the deep. Considering... you know, they really wanted the points? Personally I didn't see Amorim changing things too much outside of basically playing his best 11 again.
He was deflecting from the performance of Trent and the inability of his team to adapt to our shape. Their full backs and midfield left both wingbacks in acres of space and none of their leaders on the pitch (particularly VVD who had it all infront of him) recognised what was happening. Bruno was also running beyond their back line rather than dropping deep as he had been doing all through December.If he's moaning about long balls then that means he's not a very good manager. ESPECIALLY when his CB is a tall bastard who's supposedly the best in the world. If what he said it's true and that's how they struggled, surely any decent manager would have switched tactic at least by the 2nd half? Not necessarily to change their entire game plan but maybe for the defenders to stay back more and anticipate crosses from the deep. Considering... you know, they really wanted the points? Personally I didn't see Amorim changing things too much outside of basically playing his best 11 again.
What I think it showed is that Amorim is prepared to mix and match his tactics for specific games. Everyone was expecting us to lose 4 or 7 nil. If we had done nothing but play out from the back I think we would have got hammered. He found something that they didn't like and used it. When they are now expecting a long kick from Onana we can then be a bit more cultured in the build up as there aren't 6 players waiting to pounce on the inevitable nightmare playing it out from the back would be if that was all we were going to do. Southampton were their own worst enemy with that dumb tactic when they clearly weren't good enough.Hoof it up makes no sense in today's game.
You won't get that from Amorim, thank god.
If you want that kind of football you have to get an english manager from the 90s.
@Hoof the ballHoof it up makes no sense in today's game.
You won't get that from Amorim, thank god.
If you want that kind of football you have to get an english manager from the 90s.
What I think it showed is that Amorim is prepared to mix and match his tactics for specific games. Everyone was expecting us to lose 4 or 7 nil. If we had done nothing but play out from the back I think we would have got hammered. He found something that they didn't like and used it. When they are now expecting a long kick from Onana we can then be a bit more cultured in the build up as there aren't 6 players waiting to pounce on the inevitable nightmare playing it out from the back would be if that was all we were going to do. Southampton were their own worst enemy with that dumb tactic when they clearly weren't good enough.
We certainly played through the midfield when it was on, but it wasn't one dimensional.
I saw some of Liverpool's previous game and every time it was on they hit a long ball up the right wing for Salah to go one on one with his man as he was faster and better than he was. Slott uses the long ball when it's appropriate. He just wanted to make it sound like we didn't play proper football when really he was out thought.
Slot's done a very good job but this is the first time I've heard him rattled a bit. Good omens for the future.Exactly this. Its funny to see Slot having a go at the football we played, we were not dominated on the ball.
Also, his comment about us playing with a low block is not true, that makes it sound that we played on the counter, yet we had almost the same amount of ball as they did. Isn't it every managers position that if you lose the ball get back in shape?
He also said the game was played in our half... well if we are not building from the back and playing long ball and the possession was like 48% how is the ball always in our half?
I think Slot was just frustrated that we changed up our style as he was expecting us to play out the back and Liverpool can lay traps.
Most of their goals have come from long balls anyway.
or penaltiesMost of their goals have come from long balls anyway.
Typical scouse manager. Klopp was the same, whenever we got a result against them they don’t like it and start coming out with excuses. We matched them at Anfield and they was lucky to get a point. The fact they needed a penalty for the point says it all. We scored 2 open play goals. I think every single one of their fans in the stadium and even most of ours probably expected them to score 5+.Exactly this. Its funny to see Slot having a go at the football we played, we were not dominated on the ball.
Also, his comment about us playing with a low block is not true, that makes it sound that we played on the counter, yet we had almost the same amount of ball as they did. Isn't it every managers position that if you lose the ball get back in shape?
He also said the game was played in our half... well if we are not building from the back and playing long ball and the possession was like 48% how is the ball always in our half?
I think Slot was just frustrated that we changed up our style as he was expecting us to play out the back and Liverpool can lay traps.
Most of their goals have come from long balls anyway.
Psychological now, because of the myth refs favoured us for years under SAFHe has to start commenting, complaining or anything about the refs! They're shafting us every turn they get. Giving every soft FK against us and blatant fouls our way are just ignored.
I couldn't agree more. It's become a bit of a farce now - every game it's the sameHe has to start commenting, complaining or anything about the refs! They're shafting us every turn they get. Giving every soft FK against us and blatant fouls our way are just ignored.
Wouldn’t expect anything else playing with 5 defendersWe look solid defensively, something ETH rarely managed.
He has always made zero comments about the refs. He never talks about it, it's one of his things.What was he like in Portugal in terms of addressing refs shitty performances? I think he needs to be vocal about that clown helping arsenal as much as he can.