Just run of ideas, about 6 or 7 games against ‘top six’ without a win now. Idea he is good in big games is now out the window.
"save energy & avoid injuries" strategy against top teams?
- Thread starter Borys
- Start date
Listen, go back to what the debate is about - you are trying to argue it might be a tactic that Ole is using because his record against smaller sides is better than bigger ones.
Lets just count from this arbitrary point you want to take, i.e. Bruno's arrival. From your table - what was our points per game in big games for last season?
You can't count this season because as you put it yourself, it's a tactic he might have adjusted to for this campaign. So last season when that bizarre tactic you claim of was not in place, what was our record against big teams where we had Bruno?
Well exactly, I feel the same and this seems to be the difference to our EPL and CL campaign. We looked more intense in Champions League, even if we were shit at times. In EPL we just seem to be in 2nd gear.
| Season | Team | PTS/Game | Group |
| 2019/20 | ManUtd | 1,7 | Against Top-Teams pre-Bruno |
| 2019/20 | ManUtd | 1,4 | Against Top-Teams with-Bruno |
| 2020/21 | ManUtd | 1,1 | Againt Top-Teams |
All in one table. The difference over the course of the season between pre-Bruno (1,7pts/game) and with Bruno this season (1,1) equals 4,8pts*. If we calculate to 2019/20 with Bruno against top teams, the difference is 2,5pts - over the course of the season against top 4 teams (Liverpool, Chelsea, Tottenham, City). Maybe, just maybe, Ole made that calculation and thought it's not worth a risk if we're playing every 3 games.
Again, this is all just a theory. But it doesn't exactly look that stupid if you look at those small differences. At the same time, we're much better now against weaker sides which actually makes a significant difference considering the number of games.
* [points(a) - points(b)]*top4teams*2
Our stats are so good since Bruno arrived. Let's use it!
Ole's stats before? No need. Irrelevant because it's so low, it's embarrassing. Just use the 2-3 great months when he is the caretaker if you have to.
Shows how much we're over relying on Bruno. We're just one Bruno-injury away back to the shit storm. Thank god, he's a top fitness freak.
Ole's stats before? No need. Irrelevant because it's so low, it's embarrassing. Just use the 2-3 great months when he is the caretaker if you have to.
Shows how much we're over relying on Bruno. We're just one Bruno-injury away back to the shit storm. Thank god, he's a top fitness freak.
If you were honest you will admit that pre Bruno, with Pogba injuried, we played with Andreas Perreira and Jesse Lingard as our creative force. But you forget that fact and put it all on Ole. We play with Bruno since almost a year now, so it is more representative of the actual situation (while having DvdB on the bench) then the shit show that was the start of last season.
Our results against small teams have improved, even if we are playing badly. It is because we have players who can make a difference. If you put players out of the mix you can prove whatever you want. But it is football, players matters, not just the managers. At the end of the day players are playing the game, they are not pieces on a chess board. Better are the players, better are the chances of the manager.
I haven't forgotten shit because Pogba was a player in some of my match examples where we were dropping points.
I agree its more representative of the current state but it is not irrelevant and therefore should not be excluded from the analysis.
Wait wait wait - how have you calculated the 19.20 "top teams with Bruno" statistic?
I'm looking at the games we played in the Premier League - Bruno joined on 30th January 2019. In that campaign from the top 6/7 (counting Leicester and Arsenal together here because one is a traditional top 6 and the other was actually in the top 4 battle):
City: 2-0 win
Tottenham: 1-1 draw
Leicester: 2-0 win
Chelsea: 2-0 win
What games did you use to calculate 1.4 points per game?
So what do you suggest? Which sample would you take as the most representative and why?
I calculate from all competitions, including Champions League final against Sevilla for example (to get larger sample). I did those calculations a couple of days ago but it seems right - 2 W 1D from 5 games like below:
Why are you using all competitions? This thread is clearly related to a tactic for the league - so stick to the league results.
No wonder you were trying to dilute our big game performances. The OP states "tactic in EPL", so obviously we are evaluating whether that's a good move or if it fares up statistically. Obviously it doesn't, I can't believe we went round in circles only to find you were taking other tournaments (aside from just preferential starting points) to make your puzzle fit!
If I stick to the league results, you will tell me it's a small sample.
I told you I made those stats a couple of days ago so no "diluting". Anyway, you've been attacking me and undermining everything, you will be asking me to do more and more analysis until there is a proof to your point, whatever that is. So I'm done here, if you want to discuss then bring your own data whatever you think is representative. Whatever I do will clearly not be strong enough evidence for you so it's boring at this point.
I'm not sure it's a strategy as such. Against Arsenal and Chelsea I think we lacked the quality to win, today I think we lacked the bravery.
These are the kinds of games and results we bashed Mourinho for though. I genuinely think City were there for the taking if we showed a bit more ambition.
These are the kinds of games and results we bashed Mourinho for though. I genuinely think City were there for the taking if we showed a bit more ambition.
No one is undermining. If you want to look at data to point to a logical tactic, use the right data. You are talking of a tactic in the EPL, so you should use EPL games to reflect whether there is logic to this. Prior to this supposed tactic change, since Bruno arrived, our big games have been very good in the league. So it's clear there is no case there.
The sample being small isn't my fault, you wanted to just count from Brunos arrival, not me. The OP references it as a tactic in EPL, not me. And it's not like you don't have examples to judge from - Leicester, Chelsea, City, Spurs games are all there to reflect upon, and they don't point to us struggling against big teams in the League under Ole post Brunos arrival.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,895
- Supports
️
We’re a different team post Bruno. Anyone denying that is lying to themselves.
Similar to Liverpool pre VVD. You wouldn’t judge Klopp now based on his efforts before.
Judge the team in its most recent form and we a winning more. Not convincingly but 3 points are all that matters. Fergie didn’t always have us winning convincingly either.
Similar to Liverpool pre VVD. You wouldn’t judge Klopp now based on his efforts before.
Judge the team in its most recent form and we a winning more. Not convincingly but 3 points are all that matters. Fergie didn’t always have us winning convincingly either.
We are not doing well against top sides this season, whether it's a tactic used to save players and energy or not, so whatever record we had last season against big boys is irrelevant. It's definitely not my point anyway, so I'm not digging into those stats.
The evidence shows we are doing rather well (at least compared to other contenders) against mid to small teams in the EPL since Bruno arrived (it's just a common myth that we struggle). That you can't deny.
You can make a valid point that our record against those sides over the season wasn't so good. But I couldn't care less what was our record before Bruno. Everyone knows we're fecked if he gets injured, so it kind of makes sense to avoid risk and injury in those games against top sides. Which is my point in the OP.
Maybe it was me, but I thought those CL games were much more intense than what we saw against Chelsea, Arsenal and City this season.
To be honest I would take a point and no injuries if asked before City game. Not so much against Chelsea and Arsenal, but we had a number of difficult games in that period so I can understand why Ole would want a game to be played cautiously.
Apologies, I wasn’t aware of your stance or posting history and just made assumptions from your posts in this thread.
However, I still can’t agree with your points. Of course Ole’s record as a whole does not get wiped away, but in football, particularly as a manager, you are judged on very recent results, and not on something that happened a while back when your squad was very different. It is why people like Ranieri get sacked from Leicester despite the heroics of winning the title for them.
You could have a very average record overall, but if you win 20 games on the bounce then your stock is extremely high. It’s about progress, and if you show it, you usually get to keep your job longer. If you show regression then you are in trouble, no matter how good you were before (see comments re: Guardiola these days).
Even the games you’ve pointed out where we played badly, or should have lost as you say, we scored 3 goals in several of them, so we have definitely shown progress, because our problem before was not necessarily playing badly against the lower half but struggling to create chances and score goals. We can do that now. Even when playing like shite.
That is why judging us post-Bruno (and further signings) is more relevant.
Actually - you can. That's the beauty of statistics. The question is what you want to explain with your statistics. If you got yourself a new car, you could create statistics on average fuel consumption before and after the purchase (I assume legal appropriation...). You could also make statistics including both cars. That takes the engine difference out of the equation, and some would suggest you are left with effects of the driver. You probably also should take into account transitional effects from changing your attitude to driving since your previous car was a Prius and the new one was a Mustang...
Chopping a large dataset into portions clearly affected by different dynamics (then analyzing these subsets seperately) will yield a better explanatory value of your analysis. Simple as that really. A good statistician is able to choose when to do what. I am no great statistician, but my minimal knowledge of basic statistics makes me side with Borys on this one.
I've said this in other threads: if Bruno gets an injury and is out for a couple of months, Ole won't be here when Bruno returns. Without Bruno, I give Ole about 4-5 weeks before being sacked.
Teams will eventually work out that if you mark Bruno out of the game, we can't score.
I'm well aware you can slice statistics to tell your own story, but go and read the posts and the talk please.
It might be "more relevant" but as you said yourself it doesn't make the first half irrelevant. So outright ignoring them would be a fallacy.
In any case if you read the posts I allowed him to count the period since Bruno came and it turns out he was even more in the wrong. The poster tried to use results in other competitions (FA Cup, Europa) to water down Brunos impact in domestic big games.
It turns out in PL big matches we were even better since Bruno arrived. The period of Jan 20 to seasons end suited my argument even more anyway.
We are in 4 wins against those "smaller sides", and we keep winning. I think solving the fitness issue was important, and the rest could come. Let's just see how Dec and Jan go then, shall we?
What is your point anyway? Initially you said we struggle to beat small teams. Which is not true. We did struggle in the past, but not now. What are you trying to prove now because I got confused?
How did it came I was "even more in the wrong" if it's not even my point?
So far it's only 4 pts so let's keep watching, shall we? I have a feeling we will have fun this season.
He made one sub yesterday, so that destroys your shit thread. Sick of people defending these poor performances now. Some of you lot would defend Ole shagging your wife, it's pathetic.
I'm not defending him. If that's the strategy, we will only be able to judge it later on (I guess After Liverpool game). Just pointing out those games in the EPL are less intense on purpose from both sides.
You might use some time off the internet, if that angers you.
This is why sometimes we throw in Pogba, VdB, and sometimes, Rashford or Martial come to help, and sometimes AWB and Shaw push up. If the teams figured that out, Bruno goes out of his zone and someone else is able to play that pass. That's why having a strong squad with depth matters.
But in PL we do struggle against smaller teams. Regardless of end result we struggled vs Brighton, West Ham, Southampton and Palace alone. Most of these teams cut us open more than Chelsea Arsenal and City did, combined.
And your point quite clearly pointed to diluted statistics which were false.
But looking at City for example, results were better because we focused on countering them, but they also believed they could beat us. Yesterday, City was not convinced they could beat us. They didn't believe they could let us go and test their backline and be safe. They were afraid of us, and it made them take this defensive shape. It impacts the game as a result. We also played tight, but so did they. A lot of the big games are now going to be this way. Why? Because they have all acknowledge that we have a good firepower now. Didn't we have some weird stats that we have won the most game by 3+ goals with Ole in charge since SAF or something?
But in big games now, everyone is going to defend against us. Yes, we will have to solve that aspect. But it's just the new reality.
We don't struggle if we win, which we did. And not just 1:0, we scored 3 goals often. If we do that, it means we find routes. But I guess that's an endless debate. I don't think it mattered that we struggle with SAF in charge, as long as we were winning at the end. Sometimes with difficulty. It's the same here. You win, you're forgiven.
I mean if we think like that, last season, Liverpool got cut open too in many games against smaller teams, but somehow, they missed their chances, and bam, they got countered and it was 1:0. Are you saying those wins don't count? They do apparently, since it got them a maximum number of pts. If we keep winning, really none of this will literally matter anyway.
I'm not taking exception to that. I was fine with us for the first 45 minutes.
But I think we could have made lower risk subs that might have changed the game and were too scared to do so. You can bet your bottom dollar that Lampard and Pep won't be as cautious at home as they were away when they play us. We will have to wait and see how they set up when they host us, but at OT I was expecting more to change the game in the last 20 mins. Instead we looked more penned in chasing shadows.
Ok now I get it. So even if we're getting the wins and the points, we struggle. Hard to disagree.
You should've explained that earlier on, I wouldn't waste my time on those stats. And I agree with the point we've done even better against top sides in the EPL last season since Bruno joined, just not sure how that is relevant in this discussion but like I said, it's not MY point.
With all due respect that's just ridiculous talk. Are you saying we never struggled to get a result against Southampton, Brighton and West Ham? If so just end the debate here because that is one blinkered point of view.
This idea that the game can't be a struggle if a team wins is one of the most broken arguments I've heard on the caf.
That's fair, but the moment they do that, I think they will regret it. Just like we regretted it against Pep in our one home game against them we lost 3:0 at HT. And I can guarantee you they will never do that again against us.
Yeah mate, I mean, we struggled under SAF too at times. But a win is a win. And as shown by Liverpool story, nobody remembers their "struggle" last year. They remember the score line, and the points. Really.
Well the OP in the discussion refers to his tactic on EPL, and I was just pointing out Ole tends to set his team up to perform better in the bigger EPL games. Post Bruno we beat City Chelsea Leicester and drew to Spurs last season for example.
This season under a slower more cautious approach we have mustered 2 points against City Chelsea Spurs and Arsenal, all at Old Trafford.
To be honest even in our more cautious approach we deserved to lose on balance. Their XG was double ours and Mahrez had a one on one that goes in the back of net 7 times out of 10. I can't even look back and say yeah it was worth us plaging ultra safe for 90 minutes.
Please can we not compare SAF to Ole though? SAF didnt really struggle as frequently as Ole did, and even in comparable tough times early on we knew he'd take us on to greatness because he was a winner before he joined us, and built credibility when he came along the way. Ole hasn't done that remotely as much to suggest we can draw parallels like that. I'm also being fair and not placing Klopp level expectation on him, because I know he's not Klopp - or I'd be out there demanding title challenges right now.
The games against the listed teams were struggles. We struggled to beat them, that's backed even by the statistics of the game and the XG. We do struggle to break smaller teams down this season. And we struggle to get at the top teams too.
We usually have a high xG and nobody cares about it so why should it matter for them?
They had 2 chances, we had 2 as well. And I am not even counting Scott missing the goal at the corner where all their back line was standing frozen.
We controlled the ball and played our game, we should have done better offensively but it's just the way this game will be when City decided to defend more.
No matter what he does some will try to spin it favourably won't they 
It wasn't so long ago that we had endless threads complaining about cautious approach against top sides and that results against the top teams was the only important thing. Now it's sensible
It wasn't so long ago that we had endless threads complaining about cautious approach against top sides and that results against the top teams was the only important thing. Now it's sensible
I don't discount XG. I mean you can ignore it if you want and ask which side create the best chance and youl get City as your answer.
The last 20 mins was far from controlled though, which is my gripe. We didn't do anything to change the game. This was the type of stuff Jose was getting grilled for relentlessly.
Wouldn't we want that to happen? It's not that I'm defending Ole, because I really wanted us to go for a win (because it's a derby!) even if that meant risk of getting hit by a counter, but I think them coming at us is what we prefer and exactly what happened last season as we got those big wins, right?
Yeah, hard to argue, "last season" being to operative phrase though. And I pointed out, THIS season is different and it certainly looks like the strategy has changed, not only from Ole, but also from opposition teams coming at OT. Which doesn't suit us IMO, so it seems we tend to go for a "safe" draw.
Exactly. We can't play games like we used to last season, the way that suits us. Therefore, I don't think it's sensible to expect the similar results against top sides this season.