"United over-performed last season" is ETH finding excuses or facing facts?

You cannot judge anything on one game, coming back from 2-0 against 2nd place means feck all.

We've played half a season of games.

Amd actually you can judge if the team plays awfully every week then suddenly bursts into life and visibly works harder mid way through a game. You'd be an idiot not to find that somewhat weird/concerning. Especially when it's immediately followed up by the same garbage that preceded it.
 
I don’t have a clue anymore. Rebound seasons with players taking the second season off. Underwhelming badly conceived transfers. Playing McT in every game. Relying on Rashford for all attacking returns. Free transfers and loans for starting positions while rivals keep trying out better players on lower wages for the long term and promptly building around the ones that succeed. It’s not rocket science. Crap owners and infrastructure got us here.

It’s a long road ahead whoever is in charge but at the same time, a club that can spend 70/80 million on a player almost every year should at least have a few really excellent players in their prime and always be pushing hard for the title. Most of these lads are phoning it in 75% of the time this season and look like they hate playing for us. That’s crap management. Our tactics are so predictable. I don’t want the players to be able to easily torch another manager but I cant keep watching this either, it’s filthy. I hope the new guys burn this squad to the ground because these lads aren’t going anywhere and they cost a fecking fortune. Why do we somehow always need a load of new players to just play good football with genuine intensity?

I think Fergie would probably be challenging with this squad especially with everyone fit. I also think he would have managed the Greenwood and Sancho situations far better. He certainly wouldn’t have let the players rest on their laurels like they clearly do here. If you give up or want out you’re out, if you’re not good enough you’re out, as it should be. Where are the standards these days?
 
Last edited:
But who is going to do better? We are such an unrealistic fan base.
Tell me you’ve totally misunderstood my post without telling me you’ve totally misunderstood my post.

This is not an ideal situation. You will not replace EtH with the next long term Manchester United manager imo but if in this vast world Ineos/United are incapable of finding someone to steady the ship then that’s a real big problem. It isn’t mine or your job to throw out names on a forum.

Again, sackings are not ideal situations so you are highly unlikely to get long term ideal solutions in the immediacy but answer this. Has EtH having lost 14 games before the new year done enough to warrant keeping his job on the merits of his work or is the best defence you can make, ‘who is going to do better’?

You‘re 100% correct our fanbase is unrealistic. You don’t continue watching people fail in roles because ‘change is bad’. The Glazers have made historically bad decisions for the club, why people fail to see that this also comes in the form of the people they hire to manage the team is beyond me, EtH was yet another bad managerial appointment. You don’t continue to watch him falter because it didn’t work before, you sack him & do a better job hiring the interim & the next full time coach.
 
it's an interesting question as to how we would be performing with an average injury level. I'm thinking that maybe :

1) EtH's preferred style of play relies on a very stable team learning complex routines that are very vulnerable to changes of personnel. When that goes it turns to mud. On match day you can't really see what the players are even trying to do. Most goals we leak come from organisational or technical errors, not the quality of the opposition football.

2) We have had more injuries than other teams because of
(a) A very very ill advised pre-season tour designed to make money for the Glazer parasites. Commercialism over football.
(b) Worse training facilities than other clubs. Again down to bad owners.
(c) A tendency to rely on old players who are more likely to get injured - Varane, Casemiro, Erikson. Again, caused by bad owners looking for short term fixes.
(d) Martial is made of spider webs and glass. That's not really the Glazers fault but let's blame them anyway. Shaw and Martinez have also struggled ever since injury. Going back to Owen Hargreaves we have had a bad record with rehabilitating injured players.
(e) EtH needs superfit players for his plan so he overtrains them when taken in relation to a-d above

So really EtH is trying to do something and the club structure is not friendly to his plan. Everything he does needs to be judged in the context of that invisible headwind. You could argue that he needs to adapt to the existing circumstances, or be replaced by a pragmatist. But that's exactly what some previous managers did. The only real answer is to fix the club.

That said, Antony, Hojlund and Mount were awful signings for the money. EtH has some responsibility for that but so does the club.
 
Last edited:
But who is going to do better? We are such an unrealistic fan base.

What areas has Erik excelled at to be the exemplary example in management at United ? Are there managers who will have United be more authoritative in possession undoubtedly, are there managers who will drill attacking rotations so the team find spaces to score more goals undoubtedly, are there managers who will organise and structure the defence so the team concede less goals undoubtedly, are there managers in world football other than Eth who know how to coach a press undoubtedly.

Erik is failing in all the areas that constitutes the teams performances. If the suggestion is for United to find a manager who will win the league by all accounts the scarcity of individuals available with that capability makes it an immeasurable demand and thus I can understand the doom and gloom around identifying a replacement. But this is not the precedent that's in need of change, it is the managerial basics in building a cohesive team.

The sample size with Erik as the manager has been small he's experienced but not in any capacity at the highest level, so the fact many on here have made him a hill to die on is strange. I've said it time and time again he has had just as much to prove as some of the players he's purchased.
 
What areas has Erik excelled at to be the exemplary example in management at United ? Are there managers who will have United be more authoritative in possession undoubtedly, are there managers who will drill attacking rotations so the team find spaces to score more goals undoubtedly, are there managers who will organise and structure the defence so the team concede less goals undoubtedly, are there managers in world football other than Eth who know how to coach a press undoubtedly.

Erik is failing in all the areas that constitutes the teams performances. If the suggestion is for United to find a manager who will win the league by all accounts the scarcity of individuals available with that capability makes it an immeasurable demand and thus I can understand the doom and gloom around identifying a replacement. But this is not the precedent that's in need of change, it is the managerial basics in building a cohesive team.
The things he did at Ajax you mean?
 
What areas has Erik excelled at to be the exemplary example in management at United ? Are there managers who will have United be more authoritative in possession undoubtedly, are there managers who will drill attacking rotations so the team find spaces to score more goals undoubtedly, are there managers who will organise and structure the defence so the team concede less goals undoubtedly, are there managers in world football other than Eth who know how to coach a press undoubtedly.

Erik is failing in all the areas that constitutes the teams performances. If the suggestion is for United to find a manager who will win the league by all accounts the scarcity of individuals available with that capability makes it an immeasurable demand and thus I can understand the doom and gloom around identifying a replacement. But this is not the precedent that's in need of change, it is the managerial basics in building a cohesive team.

The sample size with Erik as the manager has been small he's experienced but not in any capacity at the highest level, so the fact many on here have made him a hill to die on is strange. I've said it time and time again he has had just as much to prove as some of the players he's purchased.
I think its tough to tell if the areas he's failed at is predominantly down to his poor coaching or down to factors beyond is control.

He's undoubtedly making some errors, but I think any manager that is still growing in their career, albeit with top potential, will make their own mistakes on the way. Unless your suggestion is to get someone top drawer, in which case you're pretty much only talking about Ancelotti.
 
The things he did at Ajax you mean?

But is unable to do in a more competitive environment and by his own admission is incapable of doing. If I run a successful limited business with 50 employees, it doesn't validate me having the capability to run a fortune 500 with stakeholders, investors and greater capital.
 
But is unable to do in a more competitive environment and by his own admission is incapable of doing. If I run a successful limited business with 50 employees, it doesn't validate me having the capability to run a fortune 500 with stakeholders, investors and greater capital.
He said the players he has right now are not suited to that Ajax style, and I think he's pointing specifically at the likes of Bruno and Rashford in that evaluation.
 
He is not right, because we OVERACHIEVED last season in terms of trophy and 3rd place. This was a combination of 3 factors:
a) Rashford and Casemiro OVERPERFORMING (meaning nobody was expecting them to continue playing on this level throught the season/multiple seasons)
b) a bit of luck in the cup
c) key opponents having issues and underperforming

We actually performed on a high level only for like half a season 22/23, but since the Carabao final we've been UNDERPERFORMING as a team and individuals. Current "achievements" (results) is a good reflection of our performances. The problem with Ten Hag is he saw us performing very badly against shit teams and did nothing to change the "system", so current situation is not really a surprise - we fold against any decent team and with a bit of bad luck we can lose against anyone. Just as in September/November with were barely getting results.
 
When the manager's start getting this defensive you know the end is nigh.

A few weeks back it was we have a big squad to cope with injuries, and now it's "we have injuries"

Earlier, last season we performed to our potential and played "fecking good football", and now we "over-performed last season"

Is now just sitting and waiting for us to sack him and hand him his big payout.
 
When the manager's start getting this defensive you know the end is nigh.

A few weeks back it was we have a big squad to cope with injuries, and now it's "we have injuries"

Earlier, last season we performed to our potential and played "fecking good football", and now we "over-performed last season"

Is now just sitting and waiting for us to sack him and hand him his big payout.
I don't think we will make any changes at the moment, and I doubt we will spend much money.
 
He said the players he has right now are not suited to that Ajax style, and I think he's pointing specifically at the likes of Bruno and Rashford in that evaluation.

But its easier to isolate distinct elements of a style and compound it with an identity. For example Pep doesn't play the Tiki-taka style he did with Barcelona but his philosophy is still in tact of controlling the possession. The style of play with City is not reminiscent with Barcelona but the managers ideology is still transferable. We have seen managers with lesser players move across clubs and still not lose their narrative of management.

How much of Eth's success at Ajax was down to his coaching as opposed to the culture and ethos of the club ? When players come through that system they are educated / indoctrinated around the model of play with Cruyff's revolution. As I've stated what's questionable is many are willing to live and die on certainty with this manager. Neutrality is important to be objective 18 months in and there are still uncertainties with what this team is doing and what does a Eth team look like in 24 months with a 600+ million investment.
 
But its easier to isolate distinct elements of a style and compound it with an identity. For example Pep doesn't play the Tiki-taka style he did with Barcelona but his philosophy is still in tact of controlling the possession. The style of play with City is not reminiscent with Barcelona but the managers ideology is still transferable. We have seen managers with lesser players move across clubs and still not lose their narrative of management.

How much of Eth's success at Ajax was down to his coaching as opposed to the culture and ethos of the club ? When players come through that system they are educated / indoctrinated around the model of play with Cruyff's revolution. As I've stated what's questionable is many are willing to live and die on certainty with this manager. Neutrality is important to be objective 18 months in and there are still uncertainties with what this team is doing and what does a Eth team look like in 24 months with a 600+ million investment.
Very true, and this forum is split with those massively against him and then those who are more entrenched in their views to back him.

That said - how can we really evaluate a manager that has not really had a fit and dependable center back pairing all seasons, injuries being rotated across 4-5 center backs every week? If we park the Casemiro / Eriksen extended absences and other random misses here and there, I feel having that much of a defensive problem will not be a fair reflection on any manager. This is parking Ten Hag to one side, of course.

I'm not trying to say ETH is massive by the way. It's a genuine question. When Liverpool had their defensive crisis they were really bad, when Arsenal lost Saliba last year they bottled the league. When Tottenham lost VDV and Romero for a spell they got 1 point in 15. When City lost Rodri + KDB they looked like half the team. I wonder how not having any CBs that can be depended on for fitness for the entire season thus far is affecting a coach.
 
I don't think we will make any changes at the moment, and I doubt we will spend much money.

You are likely right. Sitting with their fingers crossed and hoping for a miracle, i..e for ETH to improve, would be on brand for the club's useless management.

There are 18 league games left and a cup still in play to try to turn this disastrous season into somewhat respectful. However, expecting anything competent from the Glazers and their merry band of buffoons is a fool's paradise.
 
Its irrelevant. He's 2 seasons and £400 million in. The team still looks a mess. Only the injuries are an excuse.
 
Seriously, bring up the Redcafe predictions for what our season would be last year. I feel like a majority of these posts claiming we didn't overachieve will have posts that directly contradict themselves. Comes across as pathetic from some of the fans.

Saying that we overachieved, doesn't mean you support Ten Hag btw. It's just an acknowledgement of facts. Same reason why he should probably leave. He clearly hasn't done a good job this season.
Ah, the Redcafe predictions. If we finish 7th this season, what do you think predictions would be like for the next season? If a new guy comes in next season, reaching top 4 would not be "overachieving" in any way. Using our worst (not including this one) season as our baseline is stupid. ETH is just using it to make himself look better and buy more time.
 
Are folk reading too much into this?

I saw the headline and thought "yeah he is finished"

Then listened to the interview and didn't quite read into it what the headline suggests and some folk on here are arguing.

The headline is obviously that we over achieved/performed and it's being used as a type of "we were crap but got lucky" end of quote.

But he is saying we over achieved last season and are under achieving this season. Which to me sounds about right
 
Very true, and this forum is split with those massively against him and then those who are more entrenched in their views to back him.

That said - how can we really evaluate a manager that has not really had a fit and dependable center back pairing all seasons, injuries being rotated across 4-5 center backs every week? If we park the Casemiro and other random misses here and there, I feel having that much of a defensive problem will not be a fair reflection on any manager. This is parking Ten Hag to one side, of course.

I'm not trying to say ETH is massive by the way. It's a genuine question. When Liverpool had their defensive crisis they were really bad, when Arsenal lost Saliba last year they bottled the league. When Tottenham lost VDV and Romero for a spell they got 1 point in 15. When City lost Rodri + KDB they looked like half the team. I wonder how not having any CBs that can be depended on for fitness for the entire season thus far is affecting a coach.

In being objective and including Eth's first season the team was still in parts aimless with intent. There was a mixture tactically last season of pragmatism and hot potato possession play. The manager never refined anything for a sustained period. Injuries did undo rival teams but the credibility for the managers is once injured players return it's back to the norm. I'm highlighting uncertainty with Erik because there is no norm, even Ange in his squads present dysfunctionality is being praised in the media for it. We know what we get with a fully fit Spurs squad which is something he's achieved in next to no time because he is dictating the managerial narrative.

It's the lack of perceivable philosophy that is throwing Erik's coaching credentials into question. It wasn't discernable last season without injuries and it's not understood this season with. I'm totally willing overlooking short term in favour of the long term but the managers made no investment in something that stands the test of time. That is the issue.
 
Progress obviously isn’t only ever linear and he might have a case there but either way, he won’t come out of this looking good (it’ll sound like excuses) stating that out in the open - especially at how bad our current malaise/situation and underperformance is.
 
In being objective and including Eth's first season the team was still in parts aimless with intent. There was a mixture tactically last season of pragmatism and hot potato possession play. The manager never refined anything for a sustained period. Injuries did undo rival teams but the credibility for the managers is once injured players return it's back to the norm. I'm highlighting uncertainty with Erik because there is no norm, even Ange in his squads present dysfunctionality is being praised in the media for it. We know what we get with a fully fit Spurs squad which is something he's achieved in next to no time because he is dictating the managerial narrative.

It's the lack of perceivable philosophy that is throwing Erik's coaching credentials into question. It wasn't discernable last season without injuries and it's not understood this season with. I'm totally willing overlooking short term in favour of the long term but the managers made no investment in something that stands the test of time. That is the issue.
Yeah, I think the issue is also that Ten Hag wanted to transcend our style this season with that direct , quick transitional play. But we havent really seen it, since last year that wasnt the approach and this year he's been short changed with injuries.

You might be right, but we're going to find out very soon now. For the first time he's said to judge him when his players are back, and he has said the key ones are back this month.
 
Yeah, I think the issue is also that Ten Hag wanted to transcend our style this season with that direct , quick transitional play. But we havent really seen it, since last year that wasnt the approach and this year he's been short changed with injuries.

You might be right, but we're going to find out very soon now. For the first time he's said to judge him when his players are back, and he has said the key ones are back this month.

I'm happy he's made that admission because now he's accountable even above giving him the benefit of the doubt. This January - March period is perhaps the most important of his career at present.
 
This is all about lowering expectations because TH is looking at a squad that is lacking ability or conviction.
 


14 out of those 21 losses came this season. We probably did overachieve a little last year, but it's not something I want to hear from a United manager.
 
Very true, and this forum is split with those massively against him and then those who are more entrenched in their views to back him.

That said - how can we really evaluate a manager that has not really had a fit and dependable center back pairing all seasons, injuries being rotated across 4-5 center backs every week? If we park the Casemiro / Eriksen extended absences and other random misses here and there, I feel having that much of a defensive problem will not be a fair reflection on any manager. This is parking Ten Hag to one side, of course.

I'm not trying to say ETH is massive by the way. It's a genuine question. When Liverpool had their defensive crisis they were really bad, when Arsenal lost Saliba last year they bottled the league. When Tottenham lost VDV and Romero for a spell they got 1 point in 15. When City lost Rodri + KDB they looked like half the team. I wonder how not having any CBs that can be depended on for fitness for the entire season thus far is affecting a coach.

There still has to be something you can cling on to, i guess. And for the most part of the post-Ferguson era, that something has never been there. The funny (or weird) part is that, one way or the other, a considerable percentage of posters on here can, at some point, tell that this is the case. Then, they go to war with another chunk of people who, more than anything else, want to believe that there's a light at the end of the tunnel.

Fun fact for those who like to delve into statistics: Since 2016-17, United have finished above Klopp's Liverpool in the final PL table three times (2017-18, 2020-21 & 2022-23). To add some context, that's actually in half (3) out of the last six seasons this has happened. These seasons are considered by United fans to be some of the most hopeful times for the club since SAF's retirement: Mourinho's 81 points season, Solskjaer's 2nd place and ETH's inaugural season at the helm. Still, on all three occasions, the xPTS models were telling us that Liverpool should have finished above United. We didn't have to wait long, things always go back to normal pretty quick for both clubs. The underlying stats show that their baseline under Klopp has a higher ceiling than our over-performance. This is what good managers bring to the table. Another example, Arsenal will probably not match their 84 points tally this season but, halfway through the season, the xPTS models indicate that they still are an 80-points (or in the thereabouts) side despite Arteta's tinkering with their midfield. The basis of a good team is there.

I still remember that a few jumped at me when i argued, in the expectations thread at the start of the season, that our goal should be to gain just a few more points but with more convincing performances. Stability/progress isn't about moving from over-performing to massively over-performing. It's about having a safety platform that can keep you within striking distance from the top when you're having a bad or a transitional season/period. Mourinho first, then Solskjaer and now ETH look like poker players who have aggressively gone all-in, hoping to ride their luck (like Conte did at Chelsea) when everyone could not just call their bluff, but also held better hands themselves. Why's that, we can only speculate. Perhaps, it's the pressure at United to push for the title after a certain period of time that forces their hand. Or a board that's neither willing nor capable to oversee massive changes. Or their own incompetence to provide such a baseline. Maybe it's all these things combined.
 
It's a fact we over-performed according to expectations, at least up until winning the cup. But you also have to keep in mind other teams under-performed, mainly Liverpool and Tottenham. Chelsea as well, but they are shit now, too. Our stats at the end likely wouldn't have been enough to finish as we did. Our defense was better, but our attack was as sterile as it is now.

And you are supposed to improve the second season. Something this manager has thoroughly failed to do, not in the least because of his horrific recruitment. So, when competitions increases we get what's happening now - getting shit on by pretty much everyone and sitting 7th with a negative GD.
 
This is all about lowering expectations because TH is looking at a squad that is lacking ability or conviction.

A squad in which he's played a big part in peppering with even worse players than were there when he'd arrived. If he had of signed even one decent RW or striker it'd be making a difference but honestly a Liverpool fan couldn't have signed worse players this past summer if he was determined to ruin the club.
 
ETH says his team over-performed last season, which means our "real" position should have been 4th or 5th or 6th. ETH says we are underperforming this season and we are 7th, so our "real" position should be 6th or 5th or 4th.

So, ETH admits that he has spent 400 million and the proper position for this team he has assembled is no better than 4th to 6th, which is about the same as before spending 400 million!

One of the reporters should have asked him "Do you think you are a better manager than Ole? ".
 
When they desperately try and defend their actions with comments on why this season is a disaster to previous ones, you know the writing is on the wall for managers. I now hope Ratcliffe brings his own manager in, in the summer. The signings, the lack of a style of play, the we dominated spiel every interview, win lose or draw, is the signs of a man out his depth.
 
But is unable to do in a more competitive environment and by his own admission is incapable of doing. If I run a successful limited business with 50 employees, it doesn't validate me having the capability to run a fortune 500 with stakeholders, investors and greater capital.

A better comparison would be to switch those two around. Ajax was well run while he was there. United is the sh!tshow.