How does it even make sense? Ole got rid of Fellaini because "Fellaini was never a United midfielder" but then resort to have McTom as permanent CM?
39
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 43
- Goals
- 10
- Assists
- 3
- Yellow cards
- 4
- Status
How does it even make sense? Ole got rid of Fellaini because "Fellaini was never a United midfielder" but then resort to have McTom as permanent CM?
We should sell him this winter while his stock is high
never a united player
never a united player
Feel free to read it again without looking at it through an Ole vs Ten Hag lens. Ole was clearly not good enough.
Also, I couldn’t care less who made the worse decision if that’s what you want to get into.
The core message of the post is that someone with the philosophy that we have attributed to Ten Hag should not see McTominay as a starter in the midfield.
I do think that Scott is capable of being a better central midfielder than Fellaini was, it's just that it's rare that he actually shows it. However Fellaini was better as an outright defensive or attacking midfielder, albeit Scott is probably a bigger goal threat in the latter despite his all-round play being significantly worse.
Sure he's not but he is in a vein of form. The best of his life. In a team that cant score for sht. Then the manager will just bench him? Coming off 2 goals against Chelsea? How many times have you seen a striker having a bad game and the manager just keeps him on because they know one chance and they will score. This is all Ten Haag is doing. Increasing the probability we score. When he comes off it goes down. If Rashford was on fire, or we bought a top striker i.e. Kane, Oshimen or we had a RW that could do something attacking wise then McTominay would have been benched. We are fkd not because of McTominay. We are fkd because of our recruitment and the fact Rashford has gone ga ga.
Forget about possession based, short passing build up. Just go direct through long balls or play into wide areas during your build up phase. He isn't a top class player, but he's one of your more reliable ones this season. ETH could easily put together a system that's suits those players. Why hasn't he ever played a back three? To me, its clear the profiles in your team would suit that type of setup
Until recently, we could barely put out an actual back four consisting of four defenders. Even now it's iffy, we would have to keep starting Evans.
Also I hate all formations with a back three but that probably doesn't play a significant role in Ten Hag's thinking.
The McTominay conundrum. We can't control games and build from the back with McTominay in the team. But we can't score goals without him.
What's funny is McTominay is playing the second striker position better than anyone could in this team. But the problem is we shouldn't play this way (with second striker/ two #10s) in the first place. So eth has really painted himself into a corner.
I agree with a lot of that except that this myth that he is somehow a goal threat is just that. He’s done it in 2 games only. That doesn’t count as the form of your life. Sure if he ends up with 15 or 18 goals by the end of the season then I would agree but he’s never done anything for us that suggests this is remotely possible. I agree our strikers are dire, and given the desperate circumstances we find ourselves in it’s understandable from the manager. However, I find his continued presence deeply depressing in the same way I did when Fellani was here stinking up the place and entirely symptomatic of just how far playing standards here have fallen. He’s just a poor footballer. Just gets a free pass from some as he came from the academy.
He could be a menace in the same team as JWP.
We can't control and build games from the back because firstly most of our defenders struggle with it and secondly, most importantly our defence does not control the space between them and our high press comsistently. Yesterday our midfield completely dominated proceedings. (Despite claims in here they collective lost the ball just 13.3% (27 times out of their 203 combined passes, the highest being Bruno at 13). Its our defence that let them down time and again. Same story with the wide attackers offensively
Last edited:
Mate, I am sure, as an Arsenal fan, you would like to see us go down that route. And I am not even talking about turning us into being possession based, I am talking about a team that is at least semi-capable of doing something with the ball. Yesterday in the first 45min I thought we were actually alright in midfield and attack. There was no real penetration but the ball was moving fine. This went out of the window because our main facilitator lost his head around the 60 minute mark and resorted to punting it forward a lot.
And by the way, the team you are talking about would still in theory be better with McT on the bench instead of in the starting lineup. As I said, he is not adding significant benefits anywhere on the pitch. He right now has a knack to have good timing with runs in the box and with his finishing that looks good because you wouldn't expect it from him. But if he is playing in midfield, even as the highest midfielder, you are close to outnumbering yourself. Yesterdays iteration with Bruno going deeper for McT to be further up is double crazy because Bruno is best when placed in the attack.
I certainly haven't seen it like that. Sure, BOU played it deeper and let us have the ball but we were not very penetrative with it and when they won it back, the weren't overly cautious to go for it against us. The midfield was the worst unit yesterday because it was not capable of adding any layer of security against the breaks. I agree with you though, yes the defence should push higher up when we press but I absolutely don't think we pressed high up yesterday. We certainly did against Chelsea but yesterday looked very different.
It surely isn't just because McT that we have no ability to control a game but his presence in games like yesterday is double fecking us. Neither is he adding a lot on the ball or off the ball, it also led to Bruno going deeper. Which is not adding to his strength but more is weaknesses. I am not even the biggest Bruno fan but to see him pushed away from their goal to accomodate Scott McT of all people is almost heartbreaking. Bringing McT on as a last resort for the last 10minutes when you need a goal sounds like a plan - bring on the artillery when nothing else works. But to have that as your Plan A is insane. It is expecting a below-average midfielder in McTominay to play as second striker, a good AM in Bruno to play in CM and leave an ok midfielder in Amrabat to deal with everything DM related. Yeah it is really shocking why it doesn't work. Just get rid of McT, add Mainoo next to Amrabat and let Bruno play further up. Or Leave Bruno out or put him on the right. But those BS constructions in midfield are not helping us at all.
I wouldn't sell him because I believe he can still play a role but there is no way he should be playing this much. It doesn't compute
Would MCT get into any current Top 10 side? I doubt it.
First, Yesterday Bruno created 6 key chances. In most teans that would garner ag least a goal if your creator in chief laid on 6 clear cut chances.
So I can't agree going deeper makes him any less creative. That is why I increasingly don't buy this over fixation on how Mctominay plays. Yesterday our midfield statistically hardly gave away the ball. Yet we got caught on breaks when WE were on the front foot. That instantly tells me there is a gap between defence and attack that is being exploited. Yet given we had over 70% possesion game game, it leaves me in no doubt it was the in ability of our defence to control the area behind our control of possesion and our press. Which is pretty much what I witnessed. I can't lay the blame on the midfield supposedly not shielding them yet they spent it on thd front foot.
Above all, our lack of penetration was down to consistently poor attacking decisions outside. Both from our fullbacks and wide forwards. Constantly picking the wrong ball and wrong time to shoot.
Apart from that I defintely agree I'd prefer to see a midfield with Mainoo next to Amrabat. Because a lack of a second midfield playmaker behind a bruno will always be a disadvantage.
So the player that you wanted to sell is now one of the first names on the team sheet? Maybe its the club that wanted to sell him more than EtH did? Not to dissimilar to Harry I suspect?
In the result we seem to agree that Mainoo-Amrabat-Bruno seems like the most plausible way to go (given the current squad) I just want to reply to this one sentence.
I said that playing deeper isn't increasing Brunos strength. Personally I don't really see anything in those key passes statistics but I can get behind you stating that Bruno created 6 which is good. Maybe it is but playing deeper had him go Hollywood a lot yesterday. This might have been the case as well if he played further up, thats for sure but playing deeper, it felt he did it more often because his starting position was further away from goal and his tendency to force things left him with no real choices than go long. It also emphasized his weaknesses because the physical and gritty BOU players kicked and shoved him around quite well. He is too weak to be part of such a battle, which isn't something I hold against him, I just don't think it is a good idea to play him deeper. For sure not for McT. In todays game he would have to contribute against the ball even he would have been the furthest up midfielder anyway. His abilities to harass players is surely helpful there. But deeper, it isn't enough.
The names are pointless if the set up is the same.
He needed to go to a midfield pair months ago and it is astonishing that he thought a Mount, Bruno and Cas trio was at all viable to begin with.
Mainoo is a likely a 2 year project, if they get knocked out of the CL then ideally you sack Ten Hag and then task a temporary manager with developing Mainoo, Hannibal, Diallo, Gore, Garnacho, finding out who among them can contribute then work towards improving the squad. So what if Utd end up 12/13 for a season.
I'm still desperate for us to sell both.
This!
I know it’s utterly depressing
His goals have been great but they have ultimately cost us any sort of balance in the team. Need to move on from these type of players and actually have quality skilful midfielders who can beat the press and pick a pass. We’ve won 9 and lost 7, no wonder with our style of football. We’ve actually lost 11 in all comps and won 10. Car crash football.
I agree, leaving one midfielder alone while to push further up, is definitely an issue. But not because of itself or the numbers. Just look at City or even more clubs these days. Starting formations usually do not remain over the course of 90 minutes. Most teams set up differently whether they either are on the ball or off the ball. Being outnumbered in midfield against the ball can be fixed by changing the starting formation and adding a 2nd midfielder next to Amrabat, yes, but it can also be fixed by having Bruno and McTominay (in yesterdays case) by dropping next to him faster in a rotation or by a fullback tucking into midfield. I am sure, this is something, that ETH actually wants. Maybe this is a case of McTominay and Bruno simply not getting the timing right, when to get back and when to push up. In that case, the introduction of Mainoo, who seems an intelligent player even if inexperienced, might very well change things.
Rigid positioning is a thing of the past. Most teams are dynamic and shape up how it suits them in specific situations. Just installing a double pivot might fix the largest share of issues but teams will be able to adapt to that just as well. The one player not pushing up in that case will free up an opposition player to be able to interact with the game.
Other teams are able to get it done as well - it isn't just City. So I think, we absolutely should stick with the overall idea, but we have to nudge things here and there get rid of players who are only there for the occasional goal once in a blue moon and their height. We did go pragmatic last year - we can't wait until forever to make a switch.
Don't have to convince me of that - I am absolutely ready to go mid table for a year but only if the seed is out to improve further down the road. And that means introducing the players you mention. Now that being said, I guess it is a bit rich for us to say ETH should just feck the season. He earns for his family, he will want to continue this gig. So it is understandable that he will want to get results to keep him safe. So I wouldn't want to point fingers at him asking "why not?", but he needs to realize that his current iteration is neither getting us forward nor giving us results.
I thought, this video is doing a good job describing the situation with him
ETH wanted to sell both, but injuries meant that they got a chance and they both grabbed it so stayed in the team. Maguire by outperforming the other options, McTominay by scoring goals in a team that is struggling badly to do so.
All the comments about not being able to control midfield with McT in the team are fine but it was exactly the same midfield problem with him out of the team at the start of the season, with the exact same issues in midfield, the DM being overwhelmed with runners and an inability to construct attacks from deep, relying on forcing transition opportunities.
Ten Hag doubling down on this set up is hubris on a grand scale.
Ten Hag doubling down on this set up is hubris on a grand scale.
There is an argument that McTom is currently the best midfielder/attacker at the club, which tells you everything about the state of the squad...If you don't laugh you cry.
I can't be arsed to look for their stats, but Scott always has very low number of passings per game than any normal CM has.
Im not sure he did and whilst I agree he ended up playing them due to injuries, not sure hes a manager that plays players based on form. So far he appears at times to do the complete opposite.
This shows exactly why these chances created statistics are so incredibly dumb. Tell me one chance he created that you saw with your own eyes, and explain the sequence.
"Clear cut chances", and yet for some reason none of them counts as a big chance.
I'm pretty sure that some top ten clubs would buy him, and then coach him in a role that suits his skills, primarily making late runs into the box, but a DM, he most certainly isn't, and even as a CM he struggles, but a good manager would get the best out of him.
We need to promote these academy lads and give them game time. I'm certain that Mainoo would not be any less a player than Amrabat is, and is Hannibal less of a CM than McTominay as it stands at the moment?
One thing we can say, every manager ends up playing him more than anyone would have thought. The funny thing is if Fred had dug his heels in, and not left, I suspect we would be seeing McFred at Anfield next weekend...
It's terrible. If that's what he wants for the next 2-3 years, and he sticks to it, I can live with it. However, he's pretty rigid in who he is trying in that midfield position. This suggests that his #8 must prioritize scoring, or that he can't see why other traits would help out in creating more chances that isn't always reflected in the individual end product of the #8.
About the only rational you can use for why he chooses Mount and then McTominay is that they can score goals. McTominay has proven this season to score more goals than Mount who has yet to play himself into form, but history suggests he has that kind of goal scoring to his arsenal. McTominay has no other trait besides his ability to score. Mount on the other hand, has good technique, and can deal with half turns better and thus is able to provide better final third link up ability or rather the ability to transition/turn the build up phase into an attack.
The problem is that if I were him, based on the evidence shown by both players, I would be far more willing to try out (not settle on, key word being try out) someone like Mainoo and potentially even Amad when he comes back. There are problems even with these 2 players, which I will get into after I list their positives. Mainoo has already shown he can play through the lines under pressure, and is more assured in his dribbling while under pressure. So although he has not shown he can score like McTominay or Mount, he has already demonstrated in his limited playing time that he can provide those 2 things, while also being more athletic than Mount. As the #8 in this set up is meant to take advantage of number overloads against the opposition defense, springing quick attacks that are unpredictable (middle or via the wings) can quickly unsettle defenses.
This is important because one of the problems McTominay is currently showing is that he is not making himself available in higher areas of the pitch when shadowed by a very close opposition player. This means control suffers because the buildup phase is reliant on our #6, that has 1 less partner to play passes into. And this also means there are fewer attacks started through the middle, which can allow others to get better scoring opportunities than the current #8 receiving a pass under minimal pressure followed by passing to the wings to create, or a slower attack building from the back to the wings.
You've taken away the unpredictability (direction of attacks) an attacking overload can cause, you have lessened the time advantage an attacking overload has, which means you have ultimately lessened the amount of attacks United can build via this setup. Therefore, the tactical setup's entire mantra being that we would sacrifice defensive stability because the amount of attacks we can build will ultimately end up in United's favor, is nullified.
The problem with Amad is that he doesn't have the same physicality, and we don't know how his goal scoring will translate to the PL level. On the other hand, he having better technique than Mount and McTominay will allow our #6 to play more passes to our #8, and more attacking overloads will occur through the middle raising our unpredictability. This will also help out our control because there is one more person for our #6 to pass to.
The other problem with using Mainoo as a #8 is that he's probably been our best #6 because of his dribbling ability. Because the #8 gets on the ball fewer times than the #6, you're now making it more difficult for attacks to build.
I personally don't have a problem with any player being used as a #8 based on defensive ability. In this tactical setup, none have been able to satisfy that area of the game. So even with Amad for example, it's not like McTominay is providing you much defensive value outside of corners or freekicks. In fact, that's been the entire problem with this tactical setup in general. We're sacrificing defensive stability for better attacking opportunities. None of our players have been finding themselves in a good defensive position, and McTominay isn't exactly the greatest hustler when tracking back.
If it was a normal midfield setup, then someone like Amad as a #8 would be totally out of the question because of defense.
Read that post again, yes I somehow agreed with this. Although I'm intrigued to see if Scott will show consistency as goalscorer, then he's worth a place as starter. Goals win games. Current problem is Scott plays in position that magnify his weakness.
100% agree with you on this. We can’t act like we don’t need his goal scoring. I’d support trying him as some sort of false 9 or in a Muller role. Putting him in an 8 does neither him nor us any favors.
This is damning, but Fellaini was a better player than McTominay. He worked harder, was much better aerially as well as having arguably the best chest control in the world. McTominay wins some duels, but what happens to the ball afterwards is a mystery - it mostly bounces somewhere. Fellaini had fairly decent technique. He was just not very creative, a painfully average passer of the ball and had very little vision in attacking areas. He worked his socks off both ends of the pitch though. McTominay mostly strolls around, sometimes sprinting because he realises that he hasn't got a clue about where the ball actually is.
If we want to control games, McTominay cannot play. He doesn't show for the ball, he cannot pass the ball well enough, and he doesn't work hard enough to win the ball back. If we want to be a transitional team, McTominay cannot play - he doesn't have the passing ability, nor does he have the willingness to show for the ball and make progressive passes. If our only objective is to defend, create chaos and score from that, then he's fairly useful as an advanced midfielder as he knows where the goal is and is useful in both boxes.
But hey sometimes he scores lets keep him starting
Absolutely bizarre. The most obvious problem is the midfield being wide open.
He makes so few forward passes and always looks for the easy option. McSideways
- Status