I genuinely don’t think there’s been a big problem with the wider centre backs. Yoro got taken apart but he’s young and has looked fine otherwise. De Ligt has been fine, Martinez has looked better than he did in a two last season.The central defenders playing in the middle of the three have been comfortable. I have said as much in this thread. Maguire has a centre half left and right of him. It’s great. The problem is for those playing in the wider areas.
If we are only going to see the benefit next season, not because it is a new season, but because we change the players - then I see no point in persisting with this in the present. If you don’t have the players, then stop playing against their strengths.
He should have been sacked in the summer. No extension. Especially given our financial situation.
Then they sack him but instead of letting Ruud finish this season and then giving Ruben the optimal way to start on this revamp, they rush him in.
They have admitted it was a mistake. Doesnt change the fact that it is the primary reason why Amorims reign has been such a rough start.
We didn't pay him a lump sum he is still being paid by the club now.Why do people go on as if sacking him in the summer was free? The numbers were around 20m in the summer too.
Why would you sack a manager and let an interim run for the season, what help is that, or what does that do? Nothing.
Hiring a manager midway at least it give him 6 months to have a look at the squad before the summer.
Your preference is to waste next season for the manager to decide.
Example... The manager realised Rashford needs to go...if we sign him in the summer, Rashford gets another whole season...
We didn't pay him a lump sum he is still being paid by the club now.
Out of the two of us, I would say that you lack basic understanding.And even if he was sacked in the summer, we still would have had to pay him... what bit of that do you not understand?
Why do people go on as if sacking him in the summer was free? The numbers were around 20m in the summer too.
Why would you sack a manager and let an interim run for the season, what help is that, or what does that do? Nothing.
Hiring a manager midway at least it give him 6 months to have a look at the squad before the summer.
Your preference is to waste next season for the manager to decide.
Example... The manager realised Rashford needs to go...if we sign him in the summer, Rashford gets another whole season...
Out of the two of us, I would say that you lack basic understanding.
As Berba has already outlined we are still paying him.
Amorim is presenting a vast change in system and that types of players needed. Introducing that halfway through the season is a potential risk that could have been avoided. Especially since we know he would have also prefered to wait till the summer.
The summerbreak could have given him time to asses the squad without it impacting our season.
Good points, but I don‘t think the formation is that unsuitable really.I disagree.
In our defence, I would say that Mazraoui, Dalot, Yoro and Martinez are adversely impacted by the nature of the roles they are being asked to play, with it not best suiting their strengths.
In midfield, Mainoo’s weaknesses are being exposed by the switch from a three to a two. Bruno I agree is not really playing poorly as an individual player, however, I don’t think he is suited to his role either in that it doesn’t best serve the team. He can’t get beyond anyone, yet is now effectively supposed to be the left sided forward. If we were to replace him in that role tomorrow, it would almost certainly be with a player with a completely different profile.
Rashford and Garnacho have been direct victims of the evolution. Rashford was in terrible form anyway, I concede. Garnacho is now finding himself out the door as there is no role for him.
This is a large part of our playing squad that the new manager has come in and sub-optimised. We were struggling before, but what chance did we have of getting out of a slump in form while being asked to play in unsuited roles?
So do you think if a manager was sacked in the summer, it doesn't cost money?
Can you show me any evidence of that?
How can a summer break give him time to assess the squad? When players come back middle of July for pre season and the season starts in August?
It makes no sense to have an interim, over a permanent manager. At least they can have 6/7 months to find players for the system, which players are good enough and which aren't.
No but it would undoubtedly have been cheaper to sack him instead of extending the contract and then sacking him.
During the summer you can implement it without hurting the season as much as switching style in the middle of the season. Surely you can understand that.
Did he always play 3 at the back at Juventus? I see that he started with 352 and then later moved towards 4312 with the famous Pogba, Vidal, Pirlo, Marcisio midfield.Ah apologies!
Conte has switched away from a 3ATB system for the first time in ages - he sets up with more of a 4-3-3 with both 8s playing extremely high in and around the opposition area. Historically though he's always used 3ATB.
Tuchel is much more of a pragmatist than anything; he isn't really wedded to one system but prefers to just pick one based on the players he has at his disposal. Last year Bayern played more of a 4-2-3-1 / 4-1-4-1 for the most part.
Generally, how I see it works is, if a manager is sacked, the payout is their contract.. so Ten Hag has 2 years left, he will be paid for those 2 years.
If he gets another job, those payments stop, which is why Ten Hag is too expensive for Dortmund right now.
I agree that switching mid season is not ideal, the manager has minimal time on the training ground. However; we can all accept and acknowledge that Ten Hag should have been sacked in the summer.
There is no point looking at that, we need to give Amorim this season to weed out players and hopefully win us the Europa League.
An interim would get us to end of season but it wouldn't benefit us, we may get higher in the league which will mask some issues. I rather the board see the glaring issues in this squad.
We have lost 8 out of the last 10 matches or something like that.So go back to the formation that we managed to end the season on -1 goal difference?
Not sure if you've watched us over the past few years...but it has been a long time since we were 'Attack Attack Attack' and 'having a go at teams'.
No idea why people seem to agree that we need an overhaul of payers, culture, everything really...and then get cold feet as soon as we have some bad results and want to change to what has not worked for us before.
That shift towards the diamond midfield was post-Conte and under Allegri - Conte stuck very consistently with his 3-5-2 at Juve.Did he always play 3 at the back at Juventus? I see that he started with 352 and then later moved towards 4312 with the famous Pogba, Vidal, Pirlo, Marcisio midfield.
Tuchel indeed more of a pragmatist. I think typically it is more of a pragmatist system, unless you have the squad for it.
Same with LvG and the Netherlands.
It worked for the tournament, grinding out results but not a system to play attractive football long term.
City was not in for Amorim. Amorim confirmed it and Pep extended his contract. So "we would have lost Amorim" was just a media fantasyI think EtH had to go, so do we just continue on with yet another caretaker, or, do we go for the man that likely City would go all in for in the summer (and who knows who else).
It was the right call. What wasn't the right call, was a complete change without time to train or to adapt, meaning we'll "suffer" for the rest of the season with little to no gain compared to just adapting for the end of the season then fully changing everything in the summer.
