Time to abandon "progressive" football...until we fix the foundations

[Bilbo]

You have to be unbelievably brave as a manager to stick utterly and completely to your own ideology when the results look like ours. What happens if we keep losing? What if we lose the first 5 games? What about 8, or 10? It's not enough that the club will still back him. The pressure from everywhere else will be like nothing we've ever seen before.

Hopefully it won't come to that, but I think it's quite likely that Ten Hag is analysing those games and reaching the same conclusion as @Lentwood. It won't be an 'abandon the philosophy' conclusion, but it will likely be a tweak here or there, or the realisation that he needs things he doesn't have here.

 

[reelworld]

@Lentwood i think your original thread title was a bit clunky but basically I think you are right. We shouldn’t be trying to play a system we have no players to play in - we absolutely aspire to play modern progressive football and sign players to that end but until we have that we should play to our current players strengths. Clear.

This sounds logical. But my issue with this approach is that once the temporary system works, the manager would be forced or got comfortable to play that way all the time.
Even if the change was implemented incrementally, that could and would resulted in losing points and matches. And the manager will be in incredible pressure to resort to "what's working" instead of continuing his implementation of progressive football. Also this could create a false impression that the player who are only suited to counter attack football would be worth keeping thus United would be reluctant to sell.

Rather bite the bullet for now and shed out the players who aren't up to it.

 

[justsomebloke]

I want to make it clear at the outset that this is not a defence of Solskjaer, so to speak. I am not interested in defending or attacking managers at this point. The point is to address this notion that we have to play a certain style of football because 'we're Man United'.

Under Solskjaer, United were branded a 'counter-attacking team'. Whilst this wasn't quite true in the strictest sense of the word, we certainly played more conservatively, with a deeper defensive line, and relied on fast breaks and/or the so-called 'moments of magic' to win games.

In Solskjaer's first season, we finished 3rd, somewhat miraculously, after barely stringing two good performances together all year. The football was dour, we finished miles off the top, we didn't win a trophy...but we did finish 3rd and I don't recall us being thrashed/ embarrassed often, if at all.

Now...and this is the very important part...if you all think back to the start of Solskjaer's 2nd season, the general consensus from fans and pundits was that Solskjaer had done an OK job of stabilising the club but that we would never win anything by playing football this way and that we were somehow 'lucky'. In fact, many of our own fans made the argument that our 3rd the previous season was a false-position somehow, although I don't buy that personally. So, and this is the important part, we saw that in the first home game of Solskjaer's second full season, we played Spurs and tried to implement this 'progressive' style with a high-line...and I am sure you all remember very well we got absolutely destroyed, with the game finishing 1-6.

After this, Solskjaer quickly abandoned any thoughts of 'progressive' football and went back to his comfortable 4-2-3-1 middle-block with fast breaks. Once again, we ground out results and we managed to finish 2nd...however, again, we finished miles off City. As many will recall, we also reached an FA Cup Semi and a Europa League Final. Again, these achievements were written-off by fans and pundits, who talked about how we didn't play 'the United way' and that Solskjaer had to win a trophy.

Personally, I think we did very well to achieve those cup runs and that league position with what was essentially the 4th or 5th best squad in the league, but that wasn't enough for the 'we're Man United' brigade who somehow think we've a God-given right to win things! I believe it's stupid to set goals based on what the club might have achieved in the past and we should be more appreciative of were we are/were as a club. Sometimes finishing second and getting to cup finals isn't to be sniffed at!

However, once again, under pressure from fans and the media, and armed with three fancy new signings (Ronaldo, Varane and Sancho), United tried to implement progressive football at the start of Solskjaer's third season...only this time, we didn't abandon it, we got torn apart week after week by very average sides and destroyed by the good one's, culminating in Solskjaer getting the sack at Christmas. Many at the time, myself included, highlighted Solskjaer's lack of coaching experience and suggested that a better coach COULD have coached these players to play a more progressive style.

We saw Ralf Rangnick arrive in January on an interim basis and we all expected to see a high-line and aggressive, pressing football. This happened for about 25 minutes in Ralf's first game versus Crystal Palace and then we never saw it again. Like Solskjaer, Rangnick stuck to the more progressive style and slowly but surely, as soon as we started to play better sides, we got absolutely torn apart again. "Yes but Ralf hasn't coached a side in a decade" argued many of our fans, " and his backroom team lacked top-level experience". "That's why we failed to implement this more progressive style".

So...here we are now, 6-months later...another new manager in the hot-seat, this time a successful, modern-day manager who is widely regarded as an excellent 'coach'. Once again, ETH has attempted to implement a progressive system and once again, we have been absolutely savaged by two very limited sides. So what's the problem now? How many more managers do we need to go through before we realise this is a road to nowhere?

At this point, it is clear to me that we do not have the squad to play possession-based, progressive pressing football with a high-line. Continuing to try to do this with the likes of De Gea, Ronaldo, McTominay, Fred, Dalot etc...is footballing suicide. We are turning-up and playing right into our opponents hands by playing a system that actually nullifies any strengths we might have and exacerbates the weaknesses. It should be abandoned, the line should be dropped, we should forget the idea of a press and we should go back to looking to hit teams on the break.

Now, at this point, I am expecting a flood of responses about how 'this is not the United way' or how 'we'll never get anywhere doing this' but I think that badly misses the point. This team are just not capable of playing a 'progressive' style. Ronaldo is 37, Varane and Maguire are 29. De Gea is 30. McTominay and Fred are 26 and 28. Shaw is 26. These are predominantly senior internationals who have been playing football their entire lives...the phrase 'can't teach an old dog new tricks' has never been more apt. We could have Pep, Klopp and Nagelsmann in charge...it wouldn't make any difference. Pep couldn't coach Joe Hart to be a progressive GK any more than he could coach DDG, so he got rid, and quickly.

IF we decide that we do ultimately want to play this progressive, aggressive style, we need a new squad. Simple as that. However, we're not Man City or Chelsea, who through their purchase by a Sugar Daddy could change their entire squad in three windows. It's going to take us several windows to get from this squad to a new squad. I believe the choice is very, very simple...do we want to spend the next few seasons getting absolutely spanked by the likes of Brentford, Watford and Brighton playing 'modern' football...or do we want nice, pleasant 3rd/4th/5th place finishes and the odd cup run with an 'old-fashioned' style?

Of course, the goal is, whilst we stabilise, we add quality players in the right positions who CAN play progressive football...so that in two or three seasons, we have a young, hungry squad capable of doing what Arsenal have done and transitioning from a fairly outdated style to a much more modern style based on young, hungry, aggressive players.

You do have to play progressive football to be a top team, so in that sense there is not much of a choice if that's what we want to be. That we need to make numerous changes to the squad is obviously right, and not just because they don't fit requirements of ETHs system. I really don't think it's an option to switch to a more pragmatic form of football in the interim. We have the wrong manager for that.

I would take issue with your description of Solskjær's first season, which you describe as dour and on-and-off. I don't think it was that - rather it divided into two totally different parts. The first, until Bruno arrived at the close of the January window, was exactly like that. But following that we did not lose a game for the remainder of the season, played some sparkling football and had (if I remember correctly) the best record in the league. We were a really, really good team that frequently just blew away weaker opponents. This was not a side that sat back and played on the break. In fact, I can't remember when we last looked better than we did during that period.

 

[largelyworried]

You have to be unbelievably brave as a manager to stick utterly and completely to your own ideology when the results look like ours. What happens if we keep losing? What if we lose the first 5 games? What about 8, or 10? It's not enough that the club will still back him. The pressure from everywhere else will be like nothing we've ever seen before.

Hopefully it won't come to that, but I think it's quite likely that Ten Hag is analysing those games and reaching the same conclusion as @Lentwood. It won't be an 'abandon the philosophy' conclusion, but it will likely be a tweak here or there, or the realisation that he needs things he doesn't have here.

Given that Lentwood's conclusion is to stop trying to press, play a high line or play out from the back, I don't see how that can be considered anything but abandoning the philosophy.

 

[sullydnl]

As I just saw pointed out on twitter, Arsenal have now overtaken us precisely by allowing Arteta to continue trying to get his team playing the way he wants them to even through two 8th place finishes and multiple heavy defeats. That's the sort of patience we need.

It was the same with Klopp and Pep. They set out the way they were going to play from the start and even when that meant shipping heavy defeats they didn't deviate from that core philosophy.

Basically, if you want longer term success then suck it up. If things go badly for us in the shorter term then so be it.

 

[Bilbo]

Given that Lentwood's conclusion is to stop trying to press, play a high line or play out from the back, I don't see how that can be considered anything but abandoning the philosophy.

Erik has had a couple of months with these players now. He knows what he has and, crucially, what he doesn't. I suspect the ego in him (not a criticism) felt that he would be able to get something out of them, and maybe he will, but if not then we have little choice but to park the way he wants to play until we get players in.

Let's be realistic here. Brighton and Brentford were scoring against us easily. Some of it handed on a plate, but not all. It's natural for a coach in that situation to think about his set up. He has to be adaptable otherwise he won't get another season to complete his vision.

I'm not suggesting we go as far as OP states, but then I suspect he isn't either, but to say 'let's keep doing exactly what we've been doing' is suicide - unless we can bring in 2 or 3 players to help us get there

 

[MO_Football92]

Why does not playing a possession style mean abandoning progressive football? There are multiple playing styles; both attacking and defending, and it's up to the coaches to identify a suitable system for their players.

Another thing, playing out from the back isn't a style of play but a phase of play during the build-up. When to execute it depends on situations in-game; I don't understand why English football fans and pundits try to simplify football like this.

 

[Lentwood]

If this is your logic, whatever pragmatism you want to introduce, these players have already proven they cannot do that either. Hence why they got Ole and Ralf playing similar awful football. I don't know why you ignore this. Your temporary step back isn't some foolproof plan.

I wouldn't say that's true though - as I said in the OP, we came 3rd and then 2nd under Ole and reached a cup final.

Many complained about the football but we were making progress in terms of results.

We went wrong for two reasons - the usual poor recruitment (failing to address key issues like the CM/GK positions) and Ole's inability to transition the team into something capable of challenging.

However, we undeniably had a platform. Confidence was pretty high, results were generally good, we qualified for the CL two seasons running, we went deep in cups...at that stage, if ETH had come-in, we'd have been in a good position to kick-on.

Now we're nowhere again and I feel we need to stabilise a little before we can think about playing really technical, progressive football

 

[stefan92]

Why does not playing a possession style mean abandoning progressive football? There are multiple playing styles; both attacking and defending, and it's up to the coaches to identify a suitable system for their players.

Another thing, playing out from the back isn't a style of play but a phase of play during the build-up. When to execute it depends on situations in-game; I don't understand why English football fans and pundits try to simplify football like this.

Because English people in general seem to know very little about football tactics.

 

[Lentwood]

You do have to play progressive football to be a top team, so in that sense there is not much of a choice if that's what we want to be. That we need to make numerous changes to the squad is obviously right, and not just because they don't fit requirements of ETHs system. I really don't think it's an option to switch to a more pragmatic form of football in the interim. We have the wrong manager for that.

I would take issue with your description of Solskjær's first season, which you describe as dour and on-and-off. I don't think it was that - rather it divided into two totally different parts. The first, until Bruno arrived at the close of the January window, was exactly like that. But following that we did not lose a game for the remainder of the season, played some sparkling football and had (if I remember correctly) the best record in the league. We were a really, really good team that frequently just blew away weaker opponents. This was not a side that sat back and played on the break. In fact, I can't remember when we last looked better than we did during that period.

I do say in the OP though that it wasn't a 'classic' counter-attacking set-up. I'm not saying we sat on the edge of our own box or anything, but we just played simpler, more conservative football than we have attempted to play these last 12-months.

Again, I feel people are perhaps believing that I am suggesting some kind of radical, uber-negative, cowardly set-up. I'm not, I am just saying would it be wise to reign it in just a little whilst confidence is shattered and we try to stabilise?

I refer back to the example I keep using because it's an easy one. If you have a GK who is very poor with his feet and we all know that - how sensible is it to keep asking that GK to play 5-yard passes in his own penalty area? People talk about the 'process' but De Gea won't learn or change now, it's too late for him. Only a new GK will do - so I agree with all those saying 'change the players' but the key part is what do we do whilst we're in that transition period?

 

[sullydnl]

I do say in the OP though that it wasn't a 'classic' counter-attacking set-up. I'm not saying we sat on the edge of our own box or anything, but we just played simpler, more conservative football than we have attempted to play these last 12-months.

Again, I feel people are perhaps believing that I am suggesting some kind of radical, uber-negative, cowardly set-up. I'm not, I am just saying would it be wise to reign it in just a little whilst confidence is shattered and we try to stabilise?

I refer back to the example I keep using because it's an easy one. If you have a GK who is very poor with his feet and we all know that - how sensible is it to keep asking that GK to play 5-yard passes in his own penalty area? People talk about the 'process' but De Gea won't learn or change now, it's too late for him. Only a new GK will do - so I agree with all those saying 'change the players' but the key part is what do we do whilst we're in that transition period?

But the key point is that our plan was pragmatic. We were supposed to draw Brentford in and then go long.

If that's too much for them then in order to go sufficiently conservative then we will have to abandon the style of play we brought ETH in to implement in the first place.

And the exact same "how sensible is it to have your goalkeeper playing five yard passes in your penalty area" question was asked of Pep's City side in his first season, when Bravo was stinking the place out. Again he didn't stop trying to do that, he just upgraded goalkeeper as soon as he could.

 

[largelyworried]

Erik has had a couple of months with these players now. He knows what he has and, crucially, what he doesn't. I suspect the ego in him (not a criticism) felt that he would be able to get something out of them, and maybe he will, but if not then we have little choice but to park the way he wants to play until we get players in.

Let's be realistic here. Brighton and Brentford were scoring against us easily. Some of it handed on a plate, but not all. It's natural for a coach in that situation to think about his set up. He has to be adaptable otherwise he won't get another season to complete his vision.

I'm not suggesting we go as far as OP states, but then I suspect he isn't either, but to say 'let's keep doing exactly what we've been doing' is suicide - unless we can bring in 2 or 3 players to help us get there

As I mentioned on the previous page, its possible to play more or less defensively within a progressive framework. Pep has had times at City when the defense has malfunctioned, particularly in his first season. His response wasn't to change his fundamental approach to the game, his response was to put more bodies in midfield and to prioritise ball retention over chance creation. I'd be amazed if ETH just put his fingers in his ears and la-la-la'd his way through the next few months. I expect to see a lot of different formations and lineups, and no doubt lots of different approaches in training too. But I'd fully expect them to be congruent with his overall philosophy.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Hell no

 

[Oldyella]

Keep trying to play they way he envisions. If the players can't manage it, drop them. We will never go anywhere otherwise.

 

[justsomebloke]

I do say in the OP though that it wasn't a 'classic' counter-attacking set-up. I'm not saying we sat on the edge of our own box or anything, but we just played simpler, more conservative football than we have attempted to play these last 12-months.

Again, I feel people are perhaps believing that I am suggesting some kind of radical, uber-negative, cowardly set-up. I'm not, I am just saying would it be wise to reign it in just a little whilst confidence is shattered and we try to stabilise?

I refer back to the example I keep using because it's an easy one. If you have a GK who is very poor with his feet and we all know that - how sensible is it to keep asking that GK to play 5-yard passes in his own penalty area? People talk about the 'process' but De Gea won't learn or change now, it's too late for him. Only a new GK will do - so I agree with all those saying 'change the players' but the key part is what do we do whilst we're in that transition period?

I'm not talking about the counterattack thing (for once), which I think you describe more or less fairly. It's more that a description of the 19/20 season that doesn't note that the first long half of that season was fundamentally different from the February onwards part of it seemed a bit inadequate! But you could probably argue that the football of that spring was still fairly direct, if not conservative.

You raise the same question that OGS faced early in 20/21, and which RR faced again around the turn of the year. If we're not able to do it the way I want, then how do we do it? OGS clearly went in a pragmatic direction and possibly that got us the second place finish that season. But I think it's clear that came at a heavy cost, as we saw when we attempted to move forward into a more progressive style last season. It kept things together in the short term, but it wasn't a way forward. To be fair, he couldn't continue in the same vein after the Tottenham game without losing his job, and the root cause in my opinion lies in the preceding transfer window, which failed to provide any of the pieces they would have needed to build further on the success of the preceding months. There's an argument to be made for being pragmatic, but firstly I don't think ETH is the man for that, and secondly I think that if we want to become a top team, we simply can't wait trying to play the sort of football that requires until we have the right squad. Although we also can't keep playing a kind of football we don't master and which keeps providing kicks to the groin results. Which just brings us back to ETH has to make it work somehow, or we're screwed. And in any case, the whole disussion is moot unless the club is able to make the right personnel decisions going forward. Which I realise is less a solution than a description of the awful mess we're in. Thank you so much, John Murtough.

 

[Greck]

I'd argue using negative tactics as a crutch is why we're in this position. Many of our players looked competent parking the bus or playing route one. We just built a team full of them and continued to overrate those performances. You can't properly build for a style if you're not playing it every week.

 

[SouthernRedDev]

We either play the way that suits the players, where we end up in the same situation with the same results as the last decade, or we play the new way where we will be inconsistent for quite a long time but hopefully ultimately a better team for it. I would stick with the managers approach unless there is a real crisis such as being close too dropping out of the league.

 

[Enigma_87]

You don't buy a Ferrari to drive it through the field..

Change doesn't come overnight. Especially after 3.5 years of Oleball or whatever that was..

 

[Hammondo]

I'd argue using negative tactics as a crutch is why we're in this position. Many of our players looked competent parking the bus or playing route one. We just built a team full of them and continued to overrate those performances. You can't properly build for a style if you're not playing it every week.

Exactly, its what has held us back. We are decades behind in football terms and we keep trying to avoid fixing it.

We signed a progressive possession style manager, so that's how it's going to be.

I am stick of the excuses to modernise.

 

[devips]

Let's not forsake long term objective for short term gains.

 

[Rozay]

Ah, that’s what we’ve been playing.

 

[Lentwood]

But the key point is that our plan was pragmatic. We were supposed to draw Brentford in and then go long.

If that's too much for them then in order to go sufficiently conservative then we will have to abandon the style of play we brought ETH in to implement in the first place.

And the exact same "how sensible is it to have your goalkeeper playing five yard passes in your penalty area" question was asked of Pep's City side in his first season, when Bravo was stinking the place out. Again he didn't stop trying to do that, he just upgraded goalkeeper as soon as he could.

Yeah but the above actually doesnt sound too far away from what I am saying...you use the example of the GK...Pep had England's #1 when he arrived and he didn't try to coach him, he just binned him and bought in Bravo, who as it turned out, was useful with his feet but not an especially good GK...so he bought in Ederson.

We all agree that the long-term goal should be progressive football and we all agree we need new players to do that.

The bit I am strongly disputing is that the players we have can be coached to do it. If they can't be coached to do it and we can't replace them, do we commit hari-kari every week and keep getting humiliated or do we adapt?

It seems to me that some posters want to see these players suffer, to really have their noses rubbed in it...and I get that fans are angry but I don't see how that helps or what it achieves. I think it comes from the idea they are not trying or don't care and so they should be punished but I don't go along with that narrative. I think confidence is at rock-bottom and they're out of their depth.

For example, I have been mega-critical of DDG at times but can I keep blaming him if he's being asked to do something he can't do, he keeps trying and he keeps failing? I just end-up feeling slightly sad its ended this way for a once world-class GK. Can you be angry at a fish because it cant climb a tree?

 

[UpWithRivers]

I said the sad the same thing after Ole left and created the thread - We are a counter attacking team and we need to accept it' or something along those lines and I called for us to get Simeone because he suits our players. I got slated of course. But I still believe its true. This team is not a high press/possession based team. Its just not. Do I want that style of football? Of course. But when your best player in De Gea doesn't even suit it and 90 percent of the rest of the squad doesn't either then yr kinda fkd. Saying that ETH thinks they are and he knows more than me so lets see. I suspect if he gets a few players he might get a hybrid type of style but if we play like Ajax consistently without a total restructure of players then he is the God of management.

 

[Lynty]

Wasn’t this the dilemma that Arsenal have faced (maybe since the late 00s)

They want to play stylish football, but haven’t had the players to do so. Refused to be pragmatic, so have spent the last 6 or 7 seasons outside the top 4 as a result.

Personally, we know we have a good manager -so I’d prefer to see him stick to his philosophy and reform the squad - we can see he’s been given license to choose the transfer strategy - and I still think we’ll end up having a decent transfer window

 

[NLunited]

It is pretty clear this defeat is mostly on De Gea. From the manager‘s remarks they were to play long if playing out the back was not possible.

It must be infuriating for Ten Hag to see what happened. If anything, he was mild in his remarks after the game.

I expect to see a different attitude on Monday. Hopefully a couple of reinforcements too. We need an upgrade on McTominay because he looses the ball too much.

 

[NoLogo]

But the key point is that our plan was pragmatic. We were supposed to draw Brentford in and then go long.

If that's too much for them then in order to go sufficiently conservative then we will have to abandon the style of play we brought ETH in to implement in the first place.

And the exact same "how sensible is it to have your goalkeeper playing five yard passes in your penalty area" question was asked of Pep's City side in his first season, when Bravo was stinking the place out. Again he didn't stop trying to do that, he just upgraded goalkeeper as soon as he could.

He is spot on we have too many players who make shite decisions. De Gea passing to Eriksen is a prime example of that, why pass to someone who is man marked, just because he is closest to you? Absolute brain dead decision making, that's something ten Hag absolutely can't plan for. And good to see, that like I said before, he isn't strictly bound to playing one way, he is flexible in his tactical approach, but if the players can't think for themselves on the pitch it's all for nothing.

 

[NLunited]

He is spot on we have too many players who make shite decisions. De Gea passing to Eriksen is a prime example of that, why pass to someone who is man marked, just because he is closest to you? Absolute brain dead decision making, that's something ten Hag absolutely can't plan for. And good to see, that like I said he isn't strictly bound to playing one way, he is flexible in his tactical approach, but if the players can't think for themselves on the pitch it's all for nothing.

Exactly. I appreciate De Gea taking responsibility and I hope he can learn from this and do better.

His passing may be a weakness, but that can be masked by good decision making. He did well under Van Gaal.

 

[Peter van der Gea]

Yay, dump the progressive football, let's have some regressive football!!!

(or amateurgressive football? Not really sure what you're after)

 

[Lentwood]

Yay, dump the progressive football, let's have some regressive football!!!

(or amateurgressive football? Not really sure what you're after)

How about what used to be called 'football management' i.e. 'what do I have and how can I maximise their talents to form the most effective team?'

Rather than this new school of dogmatism which seems to insist 'there is only one way to play football (my way) and I require 23 hand-selected players to play it effectively'

I am not saying ETH thinks like that by the way...but some of our fans sure do!

 

[Boondog]

Any form of slowing the installation of ETH's program is the worst thing you could do. It is in fact what I would expect of poor ownership, the fear based managers who are afraid of the monsters under the bed and question the direction of those who work under them.

Go forward boldly. Challenge these players. Put more on them. Replace the low hanging fruit and get this group playing as a team in the new system. Then in January be ready to jump on the targets Coach wants and don't look back.

 

[Volumiza]

After 2 games.

I’d rather rewatch those 2 games than re read the OP.

 

[Lentwood]

Thanks for listening Erik

Lets grind-out top four playing this kind of solid, effective, counter-attacking style and worry about being "progressive" when we have a squad full of elite players.

Point remains, low-block and counter is always the most effective way to pick up a solid number of points because its the easiest way to play football.

 

[Lee565]

The foundations should be improving the defence and midfield first and foremost.

Ask yourself whilst it may not be pretty, if we had a great progressive gk and probably another mobile centre back that is good on the ball, all right back and a midfielder that can sit along side casemiro and control the tempo of a match, we would get more positive results over the season than if we went and brought Antony for 75-85 million and also a striker but still having to make do with fred and mctominay in midfield as a partner for casemiro along with us being one varane injury away from Maguire being back in the side and dalot as our 1st choice right back.

 

[Dion]

Thanks for listening Erik

Lets grind-out top four playing this kind of solid, effective, counter-attacking style and worry about being "progressive" when we have a squad full of elite players.

Point remains, low-block and counter is always the most effective way to pick up a solid number of points because its the easiest way to play football.

I think this is a little bit deluded/seeing what you want to see if I'm honest.

We don't look progressive because we're playing poorly. We didn't counter today much at all, we played from the back and it was a mid/high block most of the game until the last half hour.

We sat back after the goal for half an hour and 1) it was the most fragile we looked all game and 2) the manager said we needed to do better in his post match interview.

 

[Abraxas]

I think this is a little bit deluded/seeing what you want to see if I'm honest.

We don't look progressive because we're playing poorly. We didn't counter today much at all, we played from the back and it was a mid/high block most of the game until the last half hour.

We sat back after the goal for half an hour and 1) it was the most fragile we looked all game and 2) the manager said we needed to do better in his post match interview.

I'm not sure, there's a definite difference between how we approached the last two games and the naivety that was on display against Brighton and especially Brentford.

We're playing long towards pace a lot more often, which is a good way to bypass some of the midfield build up problems and use our attacking players. It takes the spotlight off DeGea and his weaknesses. There aren't the same gaps between midfield and defence as in the early games, we are far more compact and I would not say we pressed much.

I think it's going to depend a lot on the opposition and whether we're at home or away.

 

[OrcaFat]

I want to make it clear at the outset that this is not a defence of Solskjaer, so to speak. I am not interested in defending or attacking managers at this point. The point is to address this notion that we have to play a certain style of football because 'we're Man United'.

Under Solskjaer, United were branded a 'counter-attacking team'. Whilst this wasn't quite true in the strictest sense of the word, we certainly played more conservatively, with a deeper defensive line, and relied on fast breaks and/or the so-called 'moments of magic' to win games.

In Solskjaer's first season, we finished 3rd, somewhat miraculously, after barely stringing two good performances together all year. The football was dour, we finished miles off the top, we didn't win a trophy...but we did finish 3rd and I don't recall us being thrashed/ embarrassed often, if at all.

Now...and this is the very important part...if you all think back to the start of Solskjaer's 2nd season, the general consensus from fans and pundits was that Solskjaer had done an OK job of stabilising the club but that we would never win anything by playing football this way and that we were somehow 'lucky'. In fact, many of our own fans made the argument that our 3rd the previous season was a false-position somehow, although I don't buy that personally. So, and this is the important part, we saw that in the first home game of Solskjaer's second full season, we played Spurs and tried to implement this 'progressive' style with a high-line...and I am sure you all remember very well we got absolutely destroyed, with the game finishing 1-6.

After this, Solskjaer quickly abandoned any thoughts of 'progressive' football and went back to his comfortable 4-2-3-1 middle-block with fast breaks. Once again, we ground out results and we managed to finish 2nd...however, again, we finished miles off City. As many will recall, we also reached an FA Cup Semi and a Europa League Final. Again, these achievements were written-off by fans and pundits, who talked about how we didn't play 'the United way' and that Solskjaer had to win a trophy.

Personally, I think we did very well to achieve those cup runs and that league position with what was essentially the 4th or 5th best squad in the league, but that wasn't enough for the 'we're Man United' brigade who somehow think we've a God-given right to win things! I believe it's stupid to set goals based on what the club might have achieved in the past and we should be more appreciative of were we are/were as a club. Sometimes finishing second and getting to cup finals isn't to be sniffed at!

However, once again, under pressure from fans and the media, and armed with three fancy new signings (Ronaldo, Varane and Sancho), United tried to implement progressive football at the start of Solskjaer's third season...only this time, we didn't abandon it, we got torn apart week after week by very average sides and destroyed by the good one's, culminating in Solskjaer getting the sack at Christmas. Many at the time, myself included, highlighted Solskjaer's lack of coaching experience and suggested that a better coach COULD have coached these players to play a more progressive style.

We saw Ralf Rangnick arrive in January on an interim basis and we all expected to see a high-line and aggressive, pressing football. This happened for about 25 minutes in Ralf's first game versus Crystal Palace and then we never saw it again. Like Solskjaer, Rangnick stuck to the more progressive style and slowly but surely, as soon as we started to play better sides, we got absolutely torn apart again. "Yes but Ralf hasn't coached a side in a decade" argued many of our fans, " and his backroom team lacked top-level experience". "That's why we failed to implement this more progressive style".

So...here we are now, 6-months later...another new manager in the hot-seat, this time a successful, modern-day manager who is widely regarded as an excellent 'coach'. Once again, ETH has attempted to implement a progressive system and once again, we have been absolutely savaged by two very limited sides. So what's the problem now? How many more managers do we need to go through before we realise this is a road to nowhere?

At this point, it is clear to me that we do not have the squad to play possession-based, progressive pressing football with a high-line. Continuing to try to do this with the likes of De Gea, Ronaldo, McTominay, Fred, Dalot etc...is footballing suicide. We are turning-up and playing right into our opponents hands by playing a system that actually nullifies any strengths we might have and exacerbates the weaknesses. It should be abandoned, the line should be dropped, we should forget the idea of a press and we should go back to looking to hit teams on the break.

Now, at this point, I am expecting a flood of responses about how 'this is not the United way' or how 'we'll never get anywhere doing this' but I think that badly misses the point. This team are just not capable of playing a 'progressive' style. Ronaldo is 37, Varane and Maguire are 29. De Gea is 30. McTominay and Fred are 26 and 28. Shaw is 26. These are predominantly senior internationals who have been playing football their entire lives...the phrase 'can't teach an old dog new tricks' has never been more apt. We could have Pep, Klopp and Nagelsmann in charge...it wouldn't make any difference. Pep couldn't coach Joe Hart to be a progressive GK any more than he could coach DDG, so he got rid, and quickly.

IF we decide that we do ultimately want to play this progressive, aggressive style, we need a new squad. Simple as that. However, we're not Man City or Chelsea, who through their purchase by a Sugar Daddy could change their entire squad in three windows. It's going to take us several windows to get from this squad to a new squad. I believe the choice is very, very simple...do we want to spend the next few seasons getting absolutely spanked by the likes of Brentford, Watford and Brighton playing 'modern' football...or do we want nice, pleasant 3rd/4th/5th place finishes and the odd cup run with an 'old-fashioned' style?

Of course, the goal is, whilst we stabilise, we add quality players in the right positions who CAN play progressive football...so that in two or three seasons, we have a young, hungry squad capable of doing what Arsenal have done and transitioning from a fairly outdated style to a much more modern style based on young, hungry, aggressive players.

Hey, I only just got around to reading this and just before that I posted a short comment in the ETH thread. What you’ve said here is exactly what was in my mind.

 

[Dion]

I'm not sure, there's a definite difference between how we approached the last two games and the naivety that was on display against Brighton and especially Brentford.

We're playing long towards pace a lot more often, which is a good way to bypass some of the midfield build up problems and use our attacking players. It takes the spotlight off DeGea and his weaknesses. There aren't the same gaps between midfield and defence as in the early games, we are far more compact and I would not say we pressed much.

I think it's going to depend a lot on the opposition and whether we're at home or away.

Playing over the press is something all progressive teams do, it's part of the reason Ederson and Alisson are so important to their clubs. Ten Hag actually said we were supposed to do that in the 4-0 game.

 

[largelyworried]

Thanks for listening Erik

Lets grind-out top four playing this kind of solid, effective, counter-attacking style and worry about being "progressive" when we have a squad full of elite players.

Point remains, low-block and counter is always the most effective way to pick up a solid number of points because its the easiest way to play football.

Last game our strikers pressed loads from the front during our best spell when we scored, and today we built up extensively from the back which led to the goal, two of things you said we shouldn't do. But sure, he did what you said.

 

[b82REZ]

Thanks for listening Erik

Lets grind-out top four playing this kind of solid, effective, counter-attacking style and worry about being "progressive" when we have a squad full of elite players.

Point remains, low-block and counter is always the most effective way to pick up a solid number of points because its the easiest way to play football.

We didn't play counterattacking football today...

 

[glazed]

We didn't play counterattacking football today...

We pretty mch sat back after the goal and let then come at us. We were trying to counter attack but we weren't too effective.

And I didn't see DdG try to play it out from the back a single time. Whch means ETH has given up on him and he's going to get binned in the next 12 months