UPDATED!!! United vs Top 6 - An Injury/Availability Analysis - Still Happy With 6th?

[Pronewbie]

Anyone who says this kind of data presentation is not useful has got to be kidding themselves.

As for Varane's availability, wasn't he upset with ETH/the club for not willing to extend his fat contract despite being made out of glass? If it's part of nipping player power in the bud and being more fiscally prudent I'm all for it. I just hope he does to do the same to his reunited players. We should be cutting our losses on some of his duds in the summer.

 

[Leftback99]

I applaud your effort to use a statistical analysis to understand our issues, but I believe your conclusion is flawed. % of minutes played does not translate into % of minutes available. What you're proving here is that the team isn't well constructed, that only a handful of players are nailed on starters, and that we rotate a lot - a point you concede when looking at Man City. You also mention that you can't speculate as to why a player wasn't picked and that you can't base it on club announced injuries, because that would be speculation not backed up by data. The problem with that, is that you presuppose that we have a best XI and that whenever available our "best" players will play. Which is also speculation, and arguably a more significant assumption.

Injuries are reported, and data is available to see how many matches a player actually misses because of injuries. The data supports that five players have been out injured for a significant amount of time. Allowing for one game "recovery" in the league per injury - 90 minutes matches not withstanding.

Tyrell Malacia - 0% available
Mason Mount - 21% available
Lisandro Martinez - 29.2% available
Luke Shaw - 37.5% available
Casemiro - 44.8% available

A number of players in your list have not been injured for nearly as much as suggested by their selections.

Garnacho - 100% available
Varane - 83% available
Hojlund - 70% available
Mainoo - 58.3%

Varane was left out of the squad for non-injury related reasons twice. There is an argument to be had as to whether the Casemiro, Martinez, Shaw trio is key to our entire team structure, but injury wise your XI actually looks like this - suspensions are ignored, because honestly that is self inflicted. 100% is indicated by no percentage added.

Onana
Dalot - Varane 83% - Martinez 29% - Shaw 37%
Casemiro 44% - Mainoo 58.3%
Garnacho - Bruno - Rashford
Hojlund 70​

Now, not all of these players were significant last season, when we finished third, so it might be important to look at how much those players have been available this season - and our backups to key positions.

Scott McT 100%
Antony 91% - two matches special leave
Amrabat 87.5%
Eriksen 75%
Maguire 75%
Martial 66%

Which shows that there is primarily one position we've not had the personell to cover because of injuries - which is left back. The XI suggested in OP with second choice backups for long term injuries:

Onana
Dalot Varane Martinez/Maguire Shaw/Malacia
Casemiro/Amrabat Mainoo/Eriksen
Garnacho Bruno Rashford
Hojlund/Martial
​

A well built squad should be able to handle all but the left back issues. Recruitment has clearly been a problem, but at the same time there are players here that should be performing better on the basis of previous performances and ability (arguably a topic for another thread). Squad management is also an issue that could be, and probably should be, scrutinzed.

Good post. No left back has been the main issue for me but it's not enough to excuse how poor our football has been this season.

 

[Borys]

The data provided in the OP is minutes in PL as a % of total available minutes.

In short which players have played the most for their clubs.

I’ve not been suggesting the attacking injuries have been our serious issue. Look at defence and midfield.

Well but in every second sentence you make a reference to injuries, what doesn't seem to be the reason why Garnacho % is so low, same for Varane, Antony was also first choice until recently etc.

So what is the conclusion here, we're 12th in terms of Goals Scored and 6th for Goals Against and this is caused by injuries to the backline and midfield? To be honest if that was the other way around that would make much more sense to me. I am not disputing the fact it does have an impact, but at the same time we have never been a team that builds from the back so that is kind of a weak argument for me.

I like how much effort you put into this, but if you want to blame injuries for us being 6th, then would be better to update the numbers with how many times some key players have been unavailable. I also believe that in some cases you should be showing more than one player per position like mentioned before.

 

[Zed is not dead]

To be fair, both the match thread and post match thread are mostly just emotional vent threads, good or bad.

Yeah fair point

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Good post. No left back has been the main issue for me but it's not enough to excuse how poor our football has been this season.

Which is a fair enough position to have. But at least accepting its a contributing factor is what I’m after here.

Well but in every second sentence you make a reference to injuries, what doesn't seem to be the reason why Garnacho % is so low, same for Varane, Antony was also first choice until recently etc.

So what is the conclusion here, we're 12th in terms of Goals Scored and 6th for Goals Against and this is caused by injuries to the backline and midfield? To be honest if that was the other way around that would make much more sense to me. I am not disputing the fact it does have an impact, but at the same time we have never been a team that builds from the back so that is kind of a weak argument for me.

I like how much effort you put into this, but if you want to blame injuries for us being 6th, then would be better to update the numbers with how many times some key players have been unavailable. I also believe that in some cases you should be showing more than one player per position like mentioned before.

I’ve contextualise the data. And every squad player has been listed in the spoiler section.

The players were listed to keep the data neat and user friendly.

And the conclusion can be whatever you come to.

Mine is that defensive and midfield injuries have meant our build up has been severely impacted and our structure decimated. We don’t have the depth in the squad to deal with those injuries (rightly or wrongly) and so 6th is about right for what we’ve dealt with relative to other clubs above us.

We absolutely are a team that builds from the back. Unquestionably we are.

 

[MadDogg]

Yeah, I've got quite a bit of push back, but I didn't think my comment was all that aggro. I think the OP has done a great job of laying out his point. I just think there are inherent flaws in premise as a whole.

Looking at the Transfermarkt absences stats, there isn't actually that much difference between the injury records of the top six teams. I think it feels more apparent at United because:

• Fans naturally have a great awareness of the problems facing their club
• Sancho has not been considered for selection for pretty much the whole season
• Varane has been overlooked even when fit (as an outsider I can't get my head around this one)
• Mainoo was an unused substitute for five games
• Garnacho, as mentioned above, wasn't trusted as much early on
• Most importantly, United haven't coped with injuries very well.

I think this last point is key. This week I've read a lot about Arsenal having a thin squad this season, pointing to our threadbare bench against West Ham. No major outlet mentioned that we had 7 first team players unavailable. Why? Because we won by six goals. Arsenal, Liverpool and City have all suffered long-term injuries to key players and it's not really discussed. Because they manage to cope with it, it's not really much of a story.

Part of the issue is that it wasn't just our first choice that was injured, but we had our backups injured at the same time as well.

From memory, at one point we were playing our 4th and 6th choice central defenders, despite having five fullbacks in the squad only one of them was fit so had to play our backup DM on the other side, both first team strikers were injured and we were down to our 5th choice right winger. Admittedly the latter two are either our own fault due to starting the season with a known injury to Hojlund and knowing Martial can't be relied on, or three of the right wingers being out due to things besides injury (Greenwood, Sancho and Antony). But what we had in defence was ridiculous. Other than maybe City, I expect we have easily the best defensive depth in the league but almost all of them were injured. Then of course our main DM ahead of them also got injured for half the season. What makes it even worse is that the two most long-term injuries in the defence (well, not counting Malacia) were to our two most important defenders.

The OP isn't perfect and there certainly are some flaws as you put it, so anyone taking it completely at face value isn't getting the right picture. But I think it's fairly good when taken as a general trend. I mean, imagine what your team would look like if you were down to your 4th, 5th and 6th choice players in multiple positions at the same time.

 

[Sarni]

It’s not really availability study but rather usage study though. Garnacho and Varane have been available pretty much all season and I think Hojlund should be slightly over 64% for availability as well.

It’s mostly Shaw, Casemiro and Martinez that we’ve missed, three players that we overplayed massively last year.

 

[RedSky]

I applaud your effort to use a statistical analysis to understand our issues, but I believe your conclusion is flawed. % of minutes played does not translate into % of minutes available. What you're proving here is that the team isn't well constructed, that only a handful of players are nailed on starters, and that we rotate a lot - a point you concede when looking at Man City. You also mention that you can't speculate as to why a player wasn't picked and that you can't base it on club announced injuries, because that would be speculation not backed up by data. The problem with that, is that you presuppose that we have a best XI and that whenever available our "best" players will play. Which is also speculation, and arguably a more significant assumption.

Injuries are reported, and data is available to see how many matches a player actually misses because of injuries. The data supports that five players have been out injured for a significant amount of time. Allowing for one game "recovery" in the league per injury - 90 minutes matches not withstanding.

Tyrell Malacia - 0% available
Mason Mount - 21% available
Lisandro Martinez - 29.2% available
Luke Shaw - 37.5% available
Casemiro - 44.8% available

A number of players in your list have not been injured for nearly as much as suggested by their selections.

Garnacho - 100% available
Varane - 83% available
Hojlund - 70% available
Mainoo - 58.3%

Varane was left out of the squad for non-injury related reasons twice. There is an argument to be had as to whether the Casemiro, Martinez, Shaw trio is key to our entire team structure, but injury wise your XI actually looks like this - suspensions are ignored, because honestly that is self inflicted. 100% is indicated by no percentage added.

Onana
Dalot - Varane 83% - Martinez 29% - Shaw 37%
Casemiro 44% - Mainoo 58.3%
Garnacho - Bruno - Rashford
Hojlund 70​

Now, not all of these players were significant last season, when we finished third, so it might be important to look at how much those players have been available this season - and our backups to key positions.

Scott McT 100%
Antony 91% - two matches special leave
Amrabat 87.5%
Eriksen 75%
Maguire 75%
Martial 66%

Which shows that there is primarily one position we've not had the personell to cover because of injuries - which is left back. The XI suggested in OP with second choice backups for long term injuries:

Onana
Dalot Varane Martinez/Maguire Shaw/Malacia
Casemiro/Amrabat Mainoo/Eriksen
Garnacho Bruno Rashford
Hojlund/Martial
​

A well built squad should be able to handle all but the left back issues. Recruitment has clearly been a problem, but at the same time there are players here that should be performing better on the basis of previous performances and ability (arguably a topic for another thread). Squad management is also an issue that could be, and probably should be, scrutinzed.

I'd agree with that conclusion. Good post.

 

[Fortitude]

The question was more rhetorical than anything, of course you haven’t. The point is that with very little digging, you’ll find multiple examples of games where the opposition had more absences in those game from their first team squad than we did. That is more poignant information.

To tell the full tale of our results you need to take the minutes share of the opposition on the day. How exactly do the stats you’ve given explain a game like Bournemouth where they had more first teamers absent on that day than we did? What exactly does the fact we’ve consistently had more injuries than other Top 6 teams tell us about games we didn’t win against Newcastle & Spurs when on those days they had more absentees?

We all get the point. ‘United have had more injuries overall than other teams so lack consistency in team choice thus performance’ but as others have pointed out the stats you provide ignore things like EtH choosing not to play certain players.

I’ve not read every post so maybe some people are but I’m not arguing that injuries haven’t been an issue, simply that they are 1 of many symptoms.

I applaud your effort to use a statistical analysis to understand our issues, but I believe your conclusion is flawed. % of minutes played does not translate into % of minutes available. What you're proving here is that the team isn't well constructed, that only a handful of players are nailed on starters, and that we rotate a lot - a point you concede when looking at Man City. You also mention that you can't speculate as to why a player wasn't picked and that you can't base it on club announced injuries, because that would be speculation not backed up by data. The problem with that, is that you presuppose that we have a best XI and that whenever available our "best" players will play. Which is also speculation, and arguably a more significant assumption.

Injuries are reported, and data is available to see how many matches a player actually misses because of injuries. The data supports that five players have been out injured for a significant amount of time. Allowing for one game "recovery" in the league per injury - 90 minutes matches not withstanding.

Tyrell Malacia - 0% available
Mason Mount - 21% available
Lisandro Martinez - 29.2% available
Luke Shaw - 37.5% available
Casemiro - 44.8% available

A number of players in your list have not been injured for nearly as much as suggested by their selections.

Garnacho - 100% available
Varane - 83% available
Hojlund - 70% available
Mainoo - 58.3%

Varane was left out of the squad for non-injury related reasons twice. There is an argument to be had as to whether the Casemiro, Martinez, Shaw trio is key to our entire team structure, but injury wise your XI actually looks like this - suspensions are ignored, because honestly that is self inflicted. 100% is indicated by no percentage added.

Onana
Dalot - Varane 83% - Martinez 29% - Shaw 37%
Casemiro 44% - Mainoo 58.3%
Garnacho - Bruno - Rashford
Hojlund 70​

Now, not all of these players were significant last season, when we finished third, so it might be important to look at how much those players have been available this season - and our backups to key positions.

Scott McT 100%
Antony 91% - two matches special leave
Amrabat 87.5%
Eriksen 75%
Maguire 75%
Martial 66%

Which shows that there is primarily one position we've not had the personell to cover because of injuries - which is left back. The XI suggested in OP with second choice backups for long term injuries:

Onana
Dalot Varane Martinez/Maguire Shaw/Malacia
Casemiro/Amrabat Mainoo/Eriksen
Garnacho Bruno Rashford
Hojlund/Martial
​

A well built squad should be able to handle all but the left back issues. Recruitment has clearly been a problem, but at the same time there are players here that should be performing better on the basis of previous performances and ability (arguably a topic for another thread). Squad management is also an issue that could be, and probably should be, scrutinzed.

It’s good to have OP’s like Benito has gone to the effort of making for the strong counterpoints and discussion as above, it engenders, which is a breath of fresh air in a very stale ongoing conversation.

 

[Gordon Godot]

I'd agree with that conclusion. Good post.

Exactly. We have the most expensive squad ever and an increasingly strong flow of academy players. This whole thread is another pointless excuse for ETH and his under delivering. What is laughable is its also the players not following instructions that leaves us wide open, rather than our appalling team shape that is clearly what the manager wants

 

[BenitoSTARR]

It’s good to have OP’s like Benito has gone to the effort of making for the strong counterpoints and discussion as above, it engenders, which is a breath of fresh air in a very stale ongoing conversation.

I agree. This has been the most enjoyable football discussion I’ve had in some time.

Exactly. We have the most expensive squad ever and an increasingly strong flow of academy players. This whole thread is another pointless excuse for ETH and his under delivering. What is laughable is its also the players not following instructions that leaves us wide open, rather than our appalling team shape that is clearly what the manager wants

Yeah you’re just missing the point here. If you want to moan about Ten Hag please do so in his thread.

 

[Borys]

I applaud your effort to use a statistical analysis to understand our issues, but I believe your conclusion is flawed. % of minutes played does not translate into % of minutes available. What you're proving here is that the team isn't well constructed, that only a handful of players are nailed on starters, and that we rotate a lot - a point you concede when looking at Man City. You also mention that you can't speculate as to why a player wasn't picked and that you can't base it on club announced injuries, because that would be speculation not backed up by data. The problem with that, is that you presuppose that we have a best XI and that whenever available our "best" players will play. Which is also speculation, and arguably a more significant assumption.

Injuries are reported, and data is available to see how many matches a player actually misses because of injuries. The data supports that five players have been out injured for a significant amount of time. Allowing for one game "recovery" in the league per injury - 90 minutes matches not withstanding.

Tyrell Malacia - 0% available
Mason Mount - 21% available
Lisandro Martinez - 29.2% available
Luke Shaw - 37.5% available
Casemiro - 44.8% available

A number of players in your list have not been injured for nearly as much as suggested by their selections.

Garnacho - 100% available
Varane - 83% available
Hojlund - 70% available
Mainoo - 58.3%

Varane was left out of the squad for non-injury related reasons twice. There is an argument to be had as to whether the Casemiro, Martinez, Shaw trio is key to our entire team structure, but injury wise your XI actually looks like this - suspensions are ignored, because honestly that is self inflicted. 100% is indicated by no percentage added.

Onana
Dalot - Varane 83% - Martinez 29% - Shaw 37%
Casemiro 44% - Mainoo 58.3%
Garnacho - Bruno - Rashford
Hojlund 70​

Now, not all of these players were significant last season, when we finished third, so it might be important to look at how much those players have been available this season - and our backups to key positions.

Scott McT 100%
Antony 91% - two matches special leave
Amrabat 87.5%
Eriksen 75%
Maguire 75%
Martial 66%

Which shows that there is primarily one position we've not had the personell to cover because of injuries - which is left back. The XI suggested in OP with second choice backups for long term injuries:

Onana
Dalot Varane Martinez/Maguire Shaw/Malacia
Casemiro/Amrabat Mainoo/Eriksen
Garnacho Bruno Rashford
Hojlund/Martial
​

A well built squad should be able to handle all but the left back issues. Recruitment has clearly been a problem, but at the same time there are players here that should be performing better on the basis of previous performances and ability (arguably a topic for another thread). Squad management is also an issue that could be, and probably should be, scrutinzed.

Very good point. I'd expect a good coach to handle this situation somehow, but if your whole gameplan relies on CB/FBs being world class on the ball, then no wonder we are in trouble. Casemiro is a big miss but he wasn't doing anything in the buildup when available, and was a calamity defensively (albeit not his fault entirely, as the setup didn't help). Recruitment is as much of a problem as coaching, and this is why we are here.

Each element - coaching/injuries/recruitment is a similar weighted factor in our decline this season.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

Very good point. I'd expect a good coach to handle this situation somehow, but if your whole gameplan relies on CB/FBs being world class on the ball, then no wonder we are in trouble. Casemiro is a big miss but he wasn't doing anything in the buildup when available, and was a calamity defensively (albeit not his fault entirely, as the setup didn't help). Recruitment is as much of a problem as coaching, and this is why we are here.

Each element - coaching/injuries/recruitment is a similar weighted factor in our decline this season.

Leaving the world-class etiquette aside for a minute, this isn't a stick to beat ETH with. It's a prerequisite, not a bonus, in today's game to have defenders comfortable on the ball and able to make sensible decisions with it. Whatever faults there are in ETH's plan, there's not a side worth its salt out there in which the defenders/keeper aren't heavily involved in the build-up.

 

[Borys]

Leaving the world-class etiquette aside for a minute, this isn't a stick to beat ETH with. It's a prerequisite, not a bonus, in today's game to have defenders comfortable on the ball and able to make sensible decisions with it. Whatever faults there are in ETH's plan, there's not a side worth its salt out there in which the defenders/keeper aren't heavily involved in the build-up.

Although this is true, you need to set up your team in a way that the defenders will have passing options. Our backline has very little passing options, what make it even more difficult for them to play from the back. This is why Martinez is key, he's elite on the ball, but if your tactic relies on elite players, maybe it's not q very good tactic.

Not to mention when we had a full strength team, ETH ideas and setup were not exactly "convincing" - this is why I mentioned injuries are equal factor to shit tactics and poor recruitment.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

Although this is true, you need to set up your team in a way that the defenders will have passing options. Our backline has very little passing options, what make it even more difficult for them to play from the back. This is why Martinez is key, he's elite on the ball, but if your tactic relies on elite players, maybe it's not q very good tactic.

Not to mention when we had a full strength team, ETH ideas and setup were not exactly "convincing" - this is why I mentioned injuries are equal factor to shit tactics and poor recruitment.

Yes, and more options doesn't mean more players in front of the opposition press (dropping almost next to the defenders). It means having midfielders/wingers that can receive the ball on the half-turn and secure possession under extreme pressure. When you have players who constantly pull away from challenges, players who hide behind the opposition press because they don't (really) want the ball or want to get involved, but they drop way too deep (thus inviting more pressure and leaving gaps where the ball needs to go) because they need space and time to turn, all of this makes life more difficult for everyone. The big difference between Martinez (plus Shaw and Dalot when they are on form) and the rest of the defenders is that he doesn't dither on the ball, thinking about all the things that can go wrong. So, yes, he's picking the kind of passes that you would often expect from one of the highest paid squads in the game. You can blame the manager all you want, but these issues won't go away with the next guy.

 

[Brunsama]

I really rated Ten Hag’s time at Ajax, particularly the fact that he built 2 very good teams that played dominant football in 2 slightly different styles - and he didn’t let the loss of his best players severely impact the project.

Imagine my disappointment with the way he has set the team up here. Yes we have had injuries, I get it. But the way he is setting up the team right now is inexcusable. It’s baffling to be frank.

There’s 1 rule in football that any fan/pro/anyone can tell you for certain, and that’s not to give the opposition too much space - regardless of the quality of players. You can sit deep and stay compact, you can be compact in the middle of the pitch or you can press high and squeeze.

We play a system that gives the opponent a chasm to operate in the middle of the pitch, it makes no sense to me. Our system appears to be 5 players build up deep in our own half, while 5 other players push right up against our opponents back line. If we succeed in build up we try to create a transitional opportunity for the front 5. Without going into too much detail, this system is basically the antithesis of retaining possession and leads to a lack of territory and control in buildup.

Going the other way, when the opposition builds up, our front 4 (sometimes 5) presses high while the back line sits deep. It’s lunacy. Our press is beaten time and time again and the chasm in the middle of the pitch is there for all to see again and again. How many times can you remember the opposition running straight through us, or scoring a cut back to the edge of our box this season? You can’t count them. Just look at how many shots we have faced this season, even to Newport County!

I say all of that to say this: our injury record has been crap this season and it limits the heights of what we can achieve, sure. It does not however excuse terrible performances in 97% of our games. It’s the system. In fact, the players we have had available are much better than this system in my opinion. ETH has a lot to answer for.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

But you’re asking me to analyse why we lost one particular game? That’s not a trend it’s a single data point?

No. I highlighted a few games & delved into one in particular. That is not a single data point.

I told you the question was rhetorical but you’d rather get semantic over me asking you to do something I told you I haven’t than address the multiple examples I have given you where our injuries have been no worse than our opposition & we still lost/drew.

We’re going round in circles here. No one is debating the injuries, you’ve just been challenged on their relevance in multiple ways. I’ve asked questions as have others that you haven’t answered so let’s just say I’ve read what you wrote & thank you for your time putting the numbers together, I’ve took a cursory glance at a few games which make me believe our injuries on multiple occasions actually haven’t been as bad as the opposition on the day so am struggling to see the overall relevance.

Thanks again.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

It’s good to have OP’s like Benito has gone to the effort of making for the strong counterpoints and discussion as above, it engenders, which is a breath of fresh air in a very stale ongoing conversation.

Indeed.

You can challenge counterpoints with your own though. Per above, I don’t think anyone is arguing that we haven’t had more injuries, it’s good to see the stats but it’s quite obvious even without them but as others have said they far from tell the entire story but a part of it.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

Nobody disputes our win/loss record, but that seems to be the only stat some people can understand or will discuss. This thread adds more context to those results with factual information. You can choose to ignore the information because it somewhat threatens what you want to believe , but it doesn’t change the informations relevance.

Most of the more emotive lads cant or won’t discuss the information, they just keep telling us how they feel and quoting completely different things that ETH is doing wrong. It’s ridiculous.

This really isn’t rocket science and some of you are still banging a drum of nonsense, quite often arguing things nobody is saying.

The same way no one is disputing we’ve had more injuries than our counterparts. Our win/loss record is a factual information. You can choose to ignore the information because it somewhat threatens what you want to believe , but it doesn’t change the informations relevance.

I’d be far more interested in a conversation about the use of this factual information rather than further comments on ‘emotive lads’ & you telling me what other fans think/feel. It’s almost as if you are banging a drum of nonsense, quite often arguing things nobody is saying.

Your response isn’t actually aimed at a poster but a group of them.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

No. I highlighted a few games & delved into one in particular. That is not a single data point.

I told you the question was rhetorical but you’d rather get semantic over me asking you to do something I told you I haven’t than address the multiple examples I have given you where our injuries have been no worse than our opposition & we still lost/drew.

We’re going round in circles here. No one is debating the injuries, you’ve just been challenged on their relevance in multiple ways. I’ve asked questions as have others that you haven’t answered so let’s just say I’ve read what you wrote & thank you for your time putting the numbers together, I’ve took a cursory glance at a few games which make me believe our injuries on multiple occasions actually haven’t been as bad as the opposition on the day so am struggling to see the overall relevance.

Thanks again.

Ah ok that’s me misunderstanding your intention there then apologies.

I have said here a few times the injuries aren’t the sole issue and the purpose of this was to highlight we have actually had it worse than the other top 6. As I say I haven’t done the research into other sides yet but it’s something that has been made easier thanks to the resources shared by others.

As for why I believe we’re losing I would say variance, tactics, personnel not suited to certain roles being key issues and overall squad composition from years of mismanagement from an overall footballing perspective. Or lack of clear vision perhaps. Which I don’t think is fair to levy at our managers necessarily.

There was a really lovely post by a newbie about Man City and why they work mentioning how all of their CB options are in the 90th percentile for passing and the only one we have is Martinez. I think that plays a massive role in how we play. We want to build up from the back so to do that we need elite players that can do that.

We also apart from Mainoo and Mount don’t have midfielders happy taking a ball on the back foot and turning into space. Bruno doesn’t have the physicality for it, it’s not in Casemiro’s nature and McTominay and others need their first touch usually before turning and driving so that’s a factor.

I will look back at your posts and respond in depth later.

 

[Gator Nate]

If you read most post match thread, people really expect us to play like prime Barcelona

And every opponent played like relegation fodder, regardless of our own play. This is particularly true of our defense - no attack we face would normally get any shots off against any other opponent.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

Very good point. I'd expect a good coach to handle this situation somehow, but if your whole gameplan relies on CB/FBs being world class on the ball, then no wonder we are in trouble. Casemiro is a big miss but he wasn't doing anything in the buildup when available, and was a calamity defensively (albeit not his fault entirely, as the setup didn't help). Recruitment is as much of a problem as coaching, and this is why we are here.

Each element - coaching/injuries/recruitment is a similar weighted factor in our decline this season.

Yeah sort of plays into my point too: feels like ETH requires these elite technicians at every single position to pull off the style he has in his head of what “will work”, and if one cog is out of place none of it works and he resorts to full pragmatism.

For example a few times a game we’ll pull off some montage worth build up play where we suck in another team to press us in our own third just to ping 4 first time passes in succession and be on the break bearing down on their own box. But that level of play requires such perfect and precise execution that even the best teams would struggle to do consistently, and often it tends to be too risky as it only takes of our players misplacing a pass or touch for us to be left wide open and conceding chances. And that’s just sort of a microcosm of my entire issue with ETH’s current tactical vision: everything relies so heavily on individual quality with how high risk we look to play that it often turns matches into basketball games where we are relying on our goalscorers to come out ahead of the other teams.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Yeah sort of plays into my point too: feels like ETH requires these elite technicians at every single position to pull off the style he has in his head of what “will work”, and if one cog is out of place none of it works and he resorts to full pragmatism.

For example a few times a game we’ll pull off some montage worth build up play where we suck in another team to press us in our own third just to ping 4 first time passes in succession and be on the break bearing down on their own box. But that level of play requires such perfect and precise execution that even the best teams would struggle to do consistently, and often it tends to be too risky as it only takes of our players misplacing a pass or touch for us to be left wide open and conceding chances. And that’s just sort of a microcosm of my entire issue with ETH’s current tactical vision: everything relies so heavily on individual quality with how high risk we look to play that it often turns matches into basketball games where we are relying on our goalscorers to come out ahead of the other teams.

I think he’s compromised on this though as much as possible.

I do however like this post from you because I think I now understand your view better from it.

And I agree that the perfect version of Ten Hags United will have a much higher technical ceiling and floor than this current side. Our pursuit of De Jong, Kane and Mount (yes Mount) shows that Ten Hag values players who are comfortable on the ball. Mount and Mainoo for example are the only midfielders we have comfortable on the half turn and we’ve been without both for a significant portion of the season now so it does affect our build up and attack.

If we don’t have the CB to ping the ball (Martinez) into a midfielder capable of accepting and using the pass to drive forward (Mainoo/Mount) then our attack is slower and blunted as we can’t work through the lines well enough.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

@Valencia Shin Crosses read this please.

While I'm no expert in football statistics, these are my thoughts on what I think is working for City (as an example) when I looked at their individual player stats:

Ederson - In the bottom 2% of goal kicks taken across top 5 leagues in Europe. He's also in the bottom 10% for passes over 40 yards.

Ake, Dias, Stones, Akanji, Walker, Gvardiol - Every single one of those 6 players are at 90+ percentile for passing. If you look at our players, only Martinez is up there with that group, so a good place to start would be those ball playing CBs and FBs. 1 or 2 of these City players are also excellent at progressive carries.

Rodri - leads every stat when it comes to passing, and is also 99th percentile for progressive passes and carries. Case while he's great with the defensive side of things (top percentiles across Europe for tackles, blocks, clearances and aerial duals), is well behind in progressive passing and ball carrying.

Bernardo - Also great with his progressive passes and carries, while being in the 98th percentile both for passes attempted and passes completed. Mainoo might still get there but he doesn't impose himself in a game in that same way yet.

De Bruyne (Small sample size with him this season admittedly) - Also in the top of Europe in his passing stats (passes attempted, progressive passes, progressive carries, take ons and touches in the attacking penalty area). He is 99th percentile for progressive passes received, which shows how well everyone behind him works to get the ball safely to him while being higher up the pitch (And how good he is at receiving). Bruno on the other hand is the only midfielder in our team that is in the 99th percentile for progressive passes but is only in the 25th percentile for progressive passes received and is well behind KdB in those other areas I mentioned earlier, while being ahead in the defensive actions - Which means, he's not able to play a proper No 10 role with this team as he doesn't have the right profile of midfielders/defenders behind him that are ball carriers and most of the time, he's got to do his progressive passing from behind the half way line.

From their usual wide attackers - Doku, Grealish, Alvarez and Foden are high up in those passing/carrying stats. Rashford is well below par in these stats, and Garnacho only excels in progressive carries plus touches in attacking pen. area. Alvarez and Doku are high up in the tackles stat (Above 80th percentile), while Rashy for example in the 4th and 5th percentile respectively for tackles and interceptions (None of the City wide players this season are below the 40th percentile in at least one of these stats) Garna at least is doing well with interceptions and Antony for all his faults is high up with his defensive contributions. It's painfully obvious we need wide attackers who can carry the ball, make progressive passes and can put those tackles/interceptions in.

Haaland - Decent pass accuracy for a CF, and takes a lot of touches in the box (90th percentile). Hojlund on the other hand takes far less touches in the box (50th percentile), but is well ahead of Haaland in terms of ball carries and take ons. He is also quite high for progressive passes received (78th percentile, whereas Haaland is in the 12th percentile). I think what this shows is that Hojlund is not able to be a fully functioning centre forward in this team, he has to do a lot of the ball carrying in the final third - Whereas he should just be the final piece of the puzzle, that is able to do some passing, but is there solely to score goals.

Putting all this together, if we want to play with more control, I think we need CBs/FBs who are able to pass progressively, while also carrying the ball well. The midfield 3 themselves need to be passing and carrying the ball to a high standard. This composed spine of the team allows our GK to play short/flat passes to distribute the ball. The ability to pass well with composure then leads to more possession, and less defensive actions required from the midfield and defence. The wide attackers also need to pass more often, pass more accurately, pass progressively, carry the ball forwards more often, and contribute defensively at a high level (Either via tackles or interceptions). Our CF then just needs to make more runs into the box, and utilise the passing abilities of the wide players / FBs / midfielders to have more effective touches inside the box. I think Rasmus, Garna, Kobbie, Bruno, Shaw, Licha, Dalot, Onana, Mount are all capable of playing this way. I'm just not convinced with the rest of our squad - Case, Varane, and Rashford just needs to get replaced for cheaper/younger options that suit this kind of football more. Perhaps Bruno needs to go as well, but I think he will improve with better players around him - I don't see him necessarily as the biggest problem, but if he is, he will get found out next to those better players quite quickly. Then we need better squad options who are also good at passing and ball carrying - This means Maguire, Lindelof, AWB, McTominay, Antony, Sancho, Greenwood all need selling. That's 10 players to sell and then 4 defenders, 3 midfielders, and around 3 wide players to add.

10 years of mismanagement + two bad decisions by ETH/Murtogh on Antony and Case (Good player but not for us imo) results in this mess, hope that INEOS themselves see that the squad still needs a lot of work. Oldest player we signed during the Gill/Fergie era was RVP so I hope we return to that policy when we buy from outside, and I hope some more of our youth players will also help us bridge this gap.

If City (regrettably) are the standard you can see how every player they have helps their style with excellent individual quality suited to the teams needs.

If we want to play modern football we need a squad full of certain profiles. Now when City, Arsenal or Liverpool get injuries they’ve had the structure in place to have the right kind of profiles in the squad to play to a similar standard and manner. Of course some injuries would be more impactful than others see Liverpool losing Van Dijk or City losing Rodri.

Do we have that squad? And if not is that Ten Hags fault or a wider cultural issue?

Then we could argue well Ten Hag has to develop that style of play but how do you do that without the right personnel?

We could then argue well is Ten Hag the right manager for this current squad? But then if he’s not who is capable of getting them to play modern football without them being the archetypal modern player?

 

[BenitoSTARR]

In fact @AFC NimbleThumb what points do you think I haven’t answered and I’ll answer them as best I can because I’ve given you an answer as far as I can see but maybe I’ve not been clear enough in explaining myself?

 

[noodlehair]

Based on a discussion in the Erik Ten Hag thread I present in my view the biggest reason we've failed to perform consistently at a high level whilst other teams haven't suffered as much in the top 6.

Each side in the Top 6 (Liverpool, City, Arsenal, Spurs, Villa and United) have been broken down player by player into their % mins in the PL also with their (in my opinion) best XI and a brief comment as to how this looks in terms of key player losses and who has played in their stead. It also take a small look into the future in some cases with current injuries.

75% or above
50% to 74%
0% to 49%
* = GK or additional circumstance (e.g. Loan)

Liverpool
Alisson 88%
Trent 75% Van Dijk 89% Konate 53% Robertson 40%
Mac Allister 68%
Jones 43% Szobozslai 77%
Salah 81% ____________ Díaz 69%
Núñez 66%​

The only position up for debate here is Jones but as you can see Liverpool's overall availability taking into account rotations is healthy. The best players, Salah, Van Dijk, Alisson, Szobozslai and Trent all have played at least 3/4 of the PL season minutes to date with Robertson and Thiago arguably the only significant players absent through injury for a longer period. The rest of the squad has been used more in rotation as and when. Joe Gomez is the player who I wouldn't consider in the strongest XI but has played more minutes than Robertson. Injury wise Matip is ACL so out for the season, Szobozsali has a hamstring issue but could be back next week and Thiago is unlikely to return anytime soon but its not a 'big big injury', Trent has a knee issue unsure if he will or won't play on it and Salah has a thigh injury but could return this week.

Spoiler: Liverpool Full Squad PL Mins %

Alisson 88%
Kelleher 13%*
Adrian 0%*

TAA 75%
Bradley 7%

Van Dijk 89%
Konate 53%
Joe Gomez 54%
Matip 36%
Quansah 16%

Robertson 40%
Tsimikas 31%

Mac Allister 68%
Endo 38%
Bajcetic 0%


Szoboszlai 77%
Jones 43%
Thiago 0%
Gravenberch 38%

Salah 81%
Diaz 69%
Jota 47%
Gakpo 43%
Elliot 26%

Doak 1%

Núñez 66%

Manchester City
Ederson 92%
Walker 92% Dias 76% Ake 66% Gvardiol 71%
Rodri 83%
De Brunye 11% Bernardo 73%
Foden 90% Haaland 72% Doku 52%​

Now there could be arguments made for the inclusion of several players here such is the strength in depth of the Man City squad but even allowing for any change you'd choose to make the only long term injuries have been De Brunye (massive of course) and Stones. The rest have been used in rotation as you would expect with a squad as strong as City's. I'd say they are the 2nd least affected side by injuries in the top 6. The only positions I consider up for debate in this starting XI are Doku and Ake. Álvarez is actually the most played outfield player with 94% mins played and would be the one to replace De Brunye in the most played XI. Currently no players are significantly injured Kovacic has a knock, Gvardiol being assessed and Grealish a hip issue being assessed.

Spoiler: Man City Full Squad PL Mins %

Ederson 92%
Ortega 8%*
Carson 0%*

Walker 92%
Lewis 22%

Dias 76%
Aké 66%
Stones 29%
Akanji 64%

Gvardiol 71%
Gomez 1%

Rodri 83%
Kovacic 42%
Nunes 30%


De Brunye 11%
Bernardo Silva 73%

Foden 90%
Doku 52%
Grealish 34%
Bobb 6%

Haaland 72%
Álvarez 94%

Arsenal
Raya 83%
White 84% Saliba 100% Gabriel 84% Zinchenko 66%
Rice 96%
Ødegaard 87% Havertz 67%
Saka 92% Jesus 51% Martinelli 72%
​

Arsenal's first choice XI feels a bit more clear cut but I would accept an argument for Partey over Havertz. Regardless you can see they've had their best XI available the majority of the season the only exception being Jesus who still have over 1/2 the available minutes for Arsenal. Partey and Timber stand out as longer injuries to squad players but beyond that they've not been hit too badly. Saliba 100% is mind boggling considering his role! Timber is expected back April, Zinchenko has a calf issue but could be back this week, Partey has a hamstring issue no idea when back, Vieira is back in the next few weeks and Jesus has a knee problem but could be back within days too.

Spoiler: Arsenal Full Squad PL Mins %

Raya 83%
Ramsdale 21%
Hein 0%*

White 84%
Tomiyasu 29%
Soares 1%

Saliba 100%
Gabriel 84%
Timber 2%
Kiwor 20%

Zinchenko 66%

Rice 96%
Partey 12%
Jorginho 23%
Elneny 1%

Ødegaard 87%
Havertz 67%
Vieira 11%
Smith Rowe 10%

Martinelli 72%
Trossard 38%

Saka 92%
Nelson 6%

Jesus 51%
Nketiah 47%

Tottenham Hotspur
Vicario 100%
Porro 96% Romero 71% van de Ven 60% Udogie 82%
Sarr 59% Bissouma 58%
Kulusevski 86% Maddison 53% Son 80%
Richardson 59%
​

The Spurs midfield pairing is very much up for debate so argue amongst yourselves as to who you'd swap in but this myth of Spurs injuries have been as bad across the season just isn't statistically true. They have absolutely been impacted by losing Maddison but beyond that the loss isn't anywhere near our levels. They are I'd say the 2nd most affected by injuries out of the top 6. No major injuries to report currently but Lo Celso back this week, Solomon out for the foreseeable with knee issues and Sessegnon no idea.

Spoiler: Tottenham Full Squad PL Mins %

Forster 0%*
Austin 0%*
Whiteman 0%*

Porro 96%
Royal 36%

Romero 71%
van de Ven 60%
Dragusin 2*
Dier* 11%

Udogie 82%
Davies 42%
Sessengnon 0%

Sarr 59%
Bissouma 58%
Bentacur 19%
Højbjerg 45%
Skipp 26%

Maddison 53%
Lo Celso 19%

Son 80%
Kulusevski 86%
Johnson 61%
Solomon 9%
Gil 9%

Richarlison 59%
Véliz 2%
Werner* 14% (approx of season) 88% (since loan)

Aston Villa
Martinez 96%
Konsa 93% Carlos 54% Torres 70%
Cash 69% Kamara 77% Luiz 91% Digne 71%
McGinn 95%
Diaby 68% Watkins 98%
​

Aston Villa are very hard to pin to a formation so I've tried my best to show what I believe is in Emery's mind the best mix of players in roughly the right places. So don't shoot me! The only notable lower % player is Carlos but with Konsa able to play RCB/CB and Cash they've rotated well. Diaby has been rotated with Bailey for their pacey outlet option so overall looking very healthy with key players like Martinez, Konsa, Luis, McGinn and Watkins all in the 90+% bracket. Mings is long term injured but not a player any Villa fan would consider in their best XI. They have more recently picked up injuries and I would expect them to struggle more now with Kamara and Cash out. Kamara is out long term knee, Buendia is in recovery (knee) our for the season likely, Mings similar, Konsa likely out for 3/4 weeks.

Spoiler: Aston Villa Full Squad PL Mins %

Martinez 96%
Olsen* 4%
Gauci* 0%

Konsa 93%
Cash 69%
Kesler Hayden 0%

Torres 70%
Carlos 54%
Mings 1%
Lenglet 32%
Chambers 0%
Hause 0%

Digne 71%
Moreno 29%

Kamara 77%
Luiz 91%
McGinn 95%
Ramsey 30%
Tielemans 34%
Iroggebunam 1%

Diaby 68%
Bailey 50%
Zainolo 26%
Buendia 0%
Rogers 5%

Watkins 98%
Durán 8%

Manchester United
Onana 100%
Dalot 89% Varane 42% Martinez 26% Shaw 43%
Casemiro 42% Mainoo 36%
Garnacho 66% Bruno 96% Rashford 76%
Højlund 64%
​

Now we can debate Dalot vs AWB, I've gone Dalot because he's had the most minutes and so as not to be accused of trying to hide high % playing 'starters', and I've opted Varane over Maguire but I'd argue Varane is better and it's only a 5% difference in minutes share.

When you consider Mainoo's minutes would likely have gone to Mount while injured we've been really royally fecked over by injuries. Look at us compared to the top 6 sides.

Dealing with some level of injury is absolutely to be expected but 5 of what many would consider our best XI haven't played more than 57% of our PL matches so far this season. Our best CB has missed 3/4 of the season so far and looks to be missing even more. And we've been without our best midfield pairing for 64% of the season. Now add in Champions League, League Cup and FA cup fixtures and you can see why we might have found it difficult.

The impact injuries have had on our defence is unprecedented we have one player (Dalot) who has been able to play 50%+ of our games.

In midfield due to injuries and fitness we've had to rely on McTominay for 56% of our game time but with the squad back and fit you can see his role is reduced to clutch player (impact sub).

Our record since having most players back has been 4 wins in 4. But we have Martinez out until April earliest, Martial out till April, Malacia expected back end of Feb/Early march, Shaw hopefully back this weekend. Mount also back hopefully next week. Wan Bissaka out for the foreseeable.

Spoiler: United Full Squad PL Mins %

Onana 100%
Bayindir 0%*
Heaton 0%*

AWB 41%
Dalot 89%

Martinez 26%
Maguire 47%
Varane 42%
Lindelof 44%
Evans 41%
Kambwala 12%

Shaw 43%
Malacia 0%

Casemiro 42%
Amrabat 32%

Mainoo 36%
McTominay 56%
Eriksen 39%

Fernandes 96%
Mount 19%

Rashford 76%
Garnacho 66%
Antony 43%
Diallo 2%

Højlund 64%
Martial 21%

Thoughts?

Its interesting to look at like that and isn't without some credit, but I also think it is over simplifying things.

Varane and Shaw for example have a history of being injury prone. If you choose to rely on players who are injured a lot, you don't get to throw the unlucky card around when they get injured a lot.

Mainoo until he returned from injury wouldn't have been in the starting 11 graphic for us. That would only leave Casemiro and Martinez in red, and we weren't playing much better at the start of the season when Casemiro was fit and had Mount/Mctominay playing in front of him.

The bit that is hard to ignore is more or less every defender on the full squad list for United being in red. When you consider we have 2 capable full backs on each side, and 3 capable centrebacks plus Shaw who can fill in adequately there, that's a hard thing to plan for or not be impacted by. Even accounting for Shaw and Varane, you'd still expect to be fielding 100-75% of a capable defence most or every week. We've rarely been above 50% imo. We've had Lindelof and Amrabat starting at LB, or Dalot filling in there, and Evans playing regularly at CB.

But again it seems to happen to us for a prolonged spell almost every year where as other teams it will be a one off freak one season in 10, and sooner or later you can't keep putting it down to bad luck.

 

[SER19]

Based on a discussion in the Erik Ten Hag thread I present in my view the biggest reason we've failed to perform consistently at a high level whilst other teams haven't suffered as much in the top 6.

Each side in the Top 6 (Liverpool, City, Arsenal, Spurs, Villa and United) have been broken down player by player into their % mins in the PL also with their (in my opinion) best XI and a brief comment as to how this looks in terms of key player losses and who has played in their stead. It also take a small look into the future in some cases with current injuries.

75% or above
50% to 74%
0% to 49%
* = GK or additional circumstance (e.g. Loan)

Liverpool
Alisson 88%
Trent 75% Van Dijk 89% Konate 53% Robertson 40%
Mac Allister 68%
Jones 43% Szobozslai 77%
Salah 81% ____________ Díaz 69%
Núñez 66%​

The only position up for debate here is Jones but as you can see Liverpool's overall availability taking into account rotations is healthy. The best players, Salah, Van Dijk, Alisson, Szobozslai and Trent all have played at least 3/4 of the PL season minutes to date with Robertson and Thiago arguably the only significant players absent through injury for a longer period. The rest of the squad has been used more in rotation as and when. Joe Gomez is the player who I wouldn't consider in the strongest XI but has played more minutes than Robertson. Injury wise Matip is ACL so out for the season, Szobozsali has a hamstring issue but could be back next week and Thiago is unlikely to return anytime soon but its not a 'big big injury', Trent has a knee issue unsure if he will or won't play on it and Salah has a thigh injury but could return this week.

Spoiler: Liverpool Full Squad PL Mins %

Alisson 88%
Kelleher 13%*
Adrian 0%*

TAA 75%
Bradley 7%

Van Dijk 89%
Konate 53%
Joe Gomez 54%
Matip 36%
Quansah 16%

Robertson 40%
Tsimikas 31%

Mac Allister 68%
Endo 38%
Bajcetic 0%


Szoboszlai 77%
Jones 43%
Thiago 0%
Gravenberch 38%

Salah 81%
Diaz 69%
Jota 47%
Gakpo 43%
Elliot 26%

Doak 1%

Núñez 66%

Manchester City
Ederson 92%
Walker 92% Dias 76% Ake 66% Gvardiol 71%
Rodri 83%
De Brunye 11% Bernardo 73%
Foden 90% Haaland 72% Doku 52%​

Now there could be arguments made for the inclusion of several players here such is the strength in depth of the Man City squad but even allowing for any change you'd choose to make the only long term injuries have been De Brunye (massive of course) and Stones. The rest have been used in rotation as you would expect with a squad as strong as City's. I'd say they are the 2nd least affected side by injuries in the top 6. The only positions I consider up for debate in this starting XI are Doku and Ake. Álvarez is actually the most played outfield player with 94% mins played and would be the one to replace De Brunye in the most played XI. Currently no players are significantly injured Kovacic has a knock, Gvardiol being assessed and Grealish a hip issue being assessed.

Spoiler: Man City Full Squad PL Mins %

Ederson 92%
Ortega 8%*
Carson 0%*

Walker 92%
Lewis 22%

Dias 76%
Aké 66%
Stones 29%
Akanji 64%

Gvardiol 71%
Gomez 1%

Rodri 83%
Kovacic 42%
Nunes 30%


De Brunye 11%
Bernardo Silva 73%

Foden 90%
Doku 52%
Grealish 34%
Bobb 6%

Haaland 72%
Álvarez 94%

Arsenal
Raya 83%
White 84% Saliba 100% Gabriel 84% Zinchenko 66%
Rice 96%
Ødegaard 87% Havertz 67%
Saka 92% Jesus 51% Martinelli 72%
​

Arsenal's first choice XI feels a bit more clear cut but I would accept an argument for Partey over Havertz. Regardless you can see they've had their best XI available the majority of the season the only exception being Jesus who still have over 1/2 the available minutes for Arsenal. Partey and Timber stand out as longer injuries to squad players but beyond that they've not been hit too badly. Saliba 100% is mind boggling considering his role! Timber is expected back April, Zinchenko has a calf issue but could be back this week, Partey has a hamstring issue no idea when back, Vieira is back in the next few weeks and Jesus has a knee problem but could be back within days too.

Spoiler: Arsenal Full Squad PL Mins %

Raya 83%
Ramsdale 21%
Hein 0%*

White 84%
Tomiyasu 29%
Soares 1%

Saliba 100%
Gabriel 84%
Timber 2%
Kiwor 20%

Zinchenko 66%

Rice 96%
Partey 12%
Jorginho 23%
Elneny 1%

Ødegaard 87%
Havertz 67%
Vieira 11%
Smith Rowe 10%

Martinelli 72%
Trossard 38%

Saka 92%
Nelson 6%

Jesus 51%
Nketiah 47%

Tottenham Hotspur
Vicario 100%
Porro 96% Romero 71% van de Ven 60% Udogie 82%
Sarr 59% Bissouma 58%
Kulusevski 86% Maddison 53% Son 80%
Richardson 59%
​

The Spurs midfield pairing is very much up for debate so argue amongst yourselves as to who you'd swap in but this myth of Spurs injuries have been as bad across the season just isn't statistically true. They have absolutely been impacted by losing Maddison but beyond that the loss isn't anywhere near our levels. They are I'd say the 2nd most affected by injuries out of the top 6. No major injuries to report currently but Lo Celso back this week, Solomon out for the foreseeable with knee issues and Sessegnon no idea.

Spoiler: Tottenham Full Squad PL Mins %

Forster 0%*
Austin 0%*
Whiteman 0%*

Porro 96%
Royal 36%

Romero 71%
van de Ven 60%
Dragusin 2*
Dier* 11%

Udogie 82%
Davies 42%
Sessengnon 0%

Sarr 59%
Bissouma 58%
Bentacur 19%
Højbjerg 45%
Skipp 26%

Maddison 53%
Lo Celso 19%

Son 80%
Kulusevski 86%
Johnson 61%
Solomon 9%
Gil 9%

Richarlison 59%
Véliz 2%
Werner* 14% (approx of season) 88% (since loan)

Aston Villa
Martinez 96%
Konsa 93% Carlos 54% Torres 70%
Cash 69% Kamara 77% Luiz 91% Digne 71%
McGinn 95%
Diaby 68% Watkins 98%
​

Aston Villa are very hard to pin to a formation so I've tried my best to show what I believe is in Emery's mind the best mix of players in roughly the right places. So don't shoot me! The only notable lower % player is Carlos but with Konsa able to play RCB/CB and Cash they've rotated well. Diaby has been rotated with Bailey for their pacey outlet option so overall looking very healthy with key players like Martinez, Konsa, Luis, McGinn and Watkins all in the 90+% bracket. Mings is long term injured but not a player any Villa fan would consider in their best XI. They have more recently picked up injuries and I would expect them to struggle more now with Kamara and Cash out. Kamara is out long term knee, Buendia is in recovery (knee) our for the season likely, Mings similar, Konsa likely out for 3/4 weeks.

Spoiler: Aston Villa Full Squad PL Mins %

Martinez 96%
Olsen* 4%
Gauci* 0%

Konsa 93%
Cash 69%
Kesler Hayden 0%

Torres 70%
Carlos 54%
Mings 1%
Lenglet 32%
Chambers 0%
Hause 0%

Digne 71%
Moreno 29%

Kamara 77%
Luiz 91%
McGinn 95%
Ramsey 30%
Tielemans 34%
Iroggebunam 1%

Diaby 68%
Bailey 50%
Zainolo 26%
Buendia 0%
Rogers 5%

Watkins 98%
Durán 8%

Manchester United
Onana 100%
Dalot 89% Varane 42% Martinez 26% Shaw 43%
Casemiro 42% Mainoo 36%
Garnacho 66% Bruno 96% Rashford 76%
Højlund 64%
​

Now we can debate Dalot vs AWB, I've gone Dalot because he's had the most minutes and so as not to be accused of trying to hide high % playing 'starters', and I've opted Varane over Maguire but I'd argue Varane is better and it's only a 5% difference in minutes share.

When you consider Mainoo's minutes would likely have gone to Mount while injured we've been really royally fecked over by injuries. Look at us compared to the top 6 sides.

Dealing with some level of injury is absolutely to be expected but 5 of what many would consider our best XI haven't played more than 57% of our PL matches so far this season. Our best CB has missed 3/4 of the season so far and looks to be missing even more. And we've been without our best midfield pairing for 64% of the season. Now add in Champions League, League Cup and FA cup fixtures and you can see why we might have found it difficult.

The impact injuries have had on our defence is unprecedented we have one player (Dalot) who has been able to play 50%+ of our games.

In midfield due to injuries and fitness we've had to rely on McTominay for 56% of our game time but with the squad back and fit you can see his role is reduced to clutch player (impact sub).

Our record since having most players back has been 4 wins in 4. But we have Martinez out until April earliest, Martial out till April, Malacia expected back end of Feb/Early march, Shaw hopefully back this weekend. Mount also back hopefully next week. Wan Bissaka out for the foreseeable.

Spoiler: United Full Squad PL Mins %

Onana 100%
Bayindir 0%*
Heaton 0%*

AWB 41%
Dalot 89%

Martinez 26%
Maguire 47%
Varane 42%
Lindelof 44%
Evans 41%
Kambwala 12%

Shaw 43%
Malacia 0%

Casemiro 42%
Amrabat 32%

Mainoo 36%
McTominay 56%
Eriksen 39%

Fernandes 96%
Mount 19%

Rashford 76%
Garnacho 66%
Antony 43%
Diallo 2%

Højlund 64%
Martial 21%

Thoughts?

Brilliant work, was hoping somebody could put somethnig like this together. Weve had a terrible, freak first half to the season and can only hope it balances out

 

[711]

I don't know if any stats can support to disprove this, but comparing us to City I think that when one of our first choices doesn't play it is generally because of injury, and there is a big drop-off in replacement; whereas when one of City's first choices doesn't play it is often to rest someone because they can, their replacement is almost as good. With City even if a player is injured their replacement hardly weakens them anyway. So I would say the op's original assertations are even stronger than the stats suggest.

 

[TomSkalle]

@Valencia Shin Crosses read this please.



If City (regrettably) are the standard you can see how every player they have helps their style with excellent individual quality suited to the teams needs.

If we want to play modern football we need a squad full of certain profiles. Now when City, Arsenal or Liverpool get injuries they’ve had the structure in place to have the right kind of profiles in the squad to play to a similar standard and manner. Of course some injuries would be more impactful than others see Liverpool losing Van Dijk or City losing Rodri.

Do we have that squad? And if not is that Ten Hags fault or a wider cultural issue?

Then we could argue well Ten Hag has to develop that style of play but how do you do that without the right personnel?

We could then argue well is Ten Hag the right manager for this current squad? But then if he’s not who is capable of getting them to play modern football without them being the archetypal modern player?

ETH has purchased players for £380M
This over 8 players.
Do you really think he was planning to play reactive fotball with those? Like he does now?
And he is bad at it as well.

Try to guess how many of those actually fits into a ball playing team?
All of them

The problem is that he has done bad transfers, either they are old, and dont have the legs for it, injury prone, or just not good enough.
Thats why he isnt playing modern fotball.
His fault. Nobody else.

You need to stop trying to make him into something he isnt.
He has been bad so far. Its that simple.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

I applaud your effort to use a statistical analysis to understand our issues, but I believe your conclusion is flawed. % of minutes played does not translate into % of minutes available. What you're proving here is that the team isn't well constructed, that only a handful of players are nailed on starters, and that we rotate a lot - a point you concede when looking at Man City. You also mention that you can't speculate as to why a player wasn't picked and that you can't base it on club announced injuries, because that would be speculation not backed up by data. The problem with that, is that you presuppose that we have a best XI and that whenever available our "best" players will play. Which is also speculation, and arguably a more significant assumption.

Injuries are reported, and data is available to see how many matches a player actually misses because of injuries. The data supports that five players have been out injured for a significant amount of time. Allowing for one game "recovery" in the league per injury - 90 minutes matches not withstanding.

Tyrell Malacia - 0% available
Mason Mount - 21% available
Lisandro Martinez - 29.2% available
Luke Shaw - 37.5% available
Casemiro - 44.8% available

A number of players in your list have not been injured for nearly as much as suggested by their selections.

Garnacho - 100% available
Varane - 83% available
Hojlund - 70% available
Mainoo - 58.3%

Varane was left out of the squad for non-injury related reasons twice. There is an argument to be had as to whether the Casemiro, Martinez, Shaw trio is key to our entire team structure, but injury wise your XI actually looks like this - suspensions are ignored, because honestly that is self inflicted. 100% is indicated by no percentage added.

Onana
Dalot - Varane 83% - Martinez 29% - Shaw 37%
Casemiro 44% - Mainoo 58.3%
Garnacho - Bruno - Rashford
Hojlund 70​

Now, not all of these players were significant last season, when we finished third, so it might be important to look at how much those players have been available this season - and our backups to key positions.

Scott McT 100%
Antony 91% - two matches special leave
Amrabat 87.5%
Eriksen 75%
Maguire 75%
Martial 66%

Which shows that there is primarily one position we've not had the personell to cover because of injuries - which is left back. The XI suggested in OP with second choice backups for long term injuries:

Onana
Dalot Varane Martinez/Maguire Shaw/Malacia
Casemiro/Amrabat Mainoo/Eriksen
Garnacho Bruno Rashford
Hojlund/Martial
​

A well built squad should be able to handle all but the left back issues. Recruitment has clearly been a problem, but at the same time there are players here that should be performing better on the basis of previous performances and ability (arguably a topic for another thread). Squad management is also an issue that could be, and probably should be, scrutinzed.

@Laurencio
I said I’d come back to this and I will. You’re fast becoming one of my favourite new (I think you’re new) posters. I think this is just a brilliant post so I’m not going to try and poke holes here.

My follow up to this would be do you think our squad is as well constructed as Arsenal, City and Liverpool to deal with those injuries.

So let’s say we only really lost:
Mount
Mainoo
Shaw
Martinez
Casemiro

What does that take out of our squad do you feel that can/cant be replaced?

 

[BenitoSTARR]

ETH has purchased players for £380M
This over 8 players.
Do you really think he was planning to play reactive fotball with those? Like he does now?
And he is bad at it as well.

Try guess how many of those actually fits into a ball playing team?
All of them

The problem is that he has done bad transfers, either they are old, and dont have the legs for it, injury prone, or just not good enough.
Thats why he isnt playing modern fotball.
His fault. Nobody else.

You need to stop trying to make him into something he isnt.
He has been bad so far. Its that simple.

The club made those purchases.

I like Casemiro but he wasn’t the one we wanted and the difference between him and De Jong is stark in terms of profile.

His signings (but he’s not responsible for the fee the club negotiating team is and that is a massive point)

1. Martinez - Our best CB possibly player
2. Antony - Had his chance unlikely to succeed here
3. Casemiro* - Good but wasn’t the profile of FDJ
4. Malacia - Rotation and cheap
5. Eriksen - Free
6. Dubravka - Loan
7. Weghorst - Loan
8. Butland - Loan
9. Sabitzer - Loan
10. Mount - Unlucky with injury too early to judge but Ten Hag likes him clearly
11. Onana - Growing into the role despite defence changing every week
12. Højlund - Showing the signs of being a top young player
13. Evans - Free and come on…
14. Bayindir - Good back up
15. Amrabat - Loan
16. Reguilón - Loan

So of that list I’d say you can call ETH signings:

• Martinez
• Antony
• Mount
• Onana
• Højlund
• Casemiro* at a push

A manager is never solely responsible for transfers this isn’t FIFA.

 

[TomSkalle]

The club made those purchases.

I like Casemiro but he wasn’t the one we wanted and the difference between him and De Jong is stark in terms of profile.

His signings (but he’s not responsible for the fee the club negotiating team is and that is a massive point)

1. Martinez - Our best CB possibly player
2. Antony - Had his chance unlikely to succeed here
3. Casemiro* - Good but wasn’t the profile of FDJ
4. Malacia - Rotation and cheap
5. Eriksen - Free
6. Dubravka - Loan
7. Weghorst - Loan
8. Butland - Loan
9. Sabitzer - Loan
10. Mount - Unlucky with injury too early to judge but Ten Hag likes him clearly
11. Onana - Growing into the role despite defence changing every week
12. Højlund - Showing the signs of being a top young player
13. Evans - Free and come on…
14. Bayindir - Good back up
15. Amrabat - Loan
16. Reguilón - Loan

So of that list I’d say you can call ETH signings:

• Martinez
• Antony
• Mount
• Onana
• Højlund
• Casemiro* at a push

A manager is never solely responsible for transfers this isn’t FIFA.

Casemiro and Eriksen was his buys as well. Do you know how much salary these guys are on, are you delusional?
Malacia was his buy, dont even start. He is a young player ETH insisted taking with him.
Manager isnt responsible??
I mean, what??

Come to think of it, im done with this thread, it just seems you keep pulling things out of your #¤& as you go along.
Waste of time.
You have no grasp of reality at all.
Sorry, im done.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

@Valencia Shin Crosses read this please.



If City (regrettably) are the standard you can see how every player they have helps their style with excellent individual quality suited to the teams needs.

If we want to play modern football we need a squad full of certain profiles. Now when City, Arsenal or Liverpool get injuries they’ve had the structure in place to have the right kind of profiles in the squad to play to a similar standard and manner. Of course some injuries would be more impactful than others see Liverpool losing Van Dijk or City losing Rodri.

Do we have that squad? And if not is that Ten Hags fault or a wider cultural issue?

Then we could argue well Ten Hag has to develop that style of play but how do you do that without the right personnel?

We could then argue well is Ten Hag the right manager for this current squad? But then if he’s not who is capable of getting them to play modern football without them being the archetypal modern player?

I don’t think City is the best example because

A.) Pep is the best coach of all time when it comes to actually IMPROVING technicality in players far past what they’ve previously shown. Combine that with his obsessive nature when it comes to drilling the nuances of how he wants his players to position themselves between each other in possession and you’ll get a bunch of technical players that have a good amount of easy passes/options available to them.

B.) We all know they have the freedom (especially now) to fire funds at transfers every summer and are fine if they don’t work out.

As far as whether or not we have that squad of ideal profiles/technicality etc, it’s quite clear we don’t. One of United’s biggest failures of the past decade is failing to prioritize technical quality enough in each signing they make. But I don’t think Ten Hag has really shown he’s able to quite identify the profiles either. Now we can blame Murtough and the old guard for transfers sure, but some of that blame also has to go to ETH seeing as he demanded a level of control over transfer as well when he was hired here and by all accounts we’ve managed to get a good percentage of his targets (FdJ and Kane being the obvious misses). But barring Hojlund, he’s yet to make a signing that made real sense profile wise compared to his vision for how he seemingly wants us to play. Even Martinez (his clear “best” signing) isn’t the ideal CB for a team looking to play high in space and press relentlessly to create turnovers, because Licha isn’t as good defending high and wide physically as other teams CB’s even though he might make up for it with his wizardry on the ball and world class anticipation. Its why Arsenal preferred him as a more defensive LB to play that Zinchenko role instead of playing in the middle of the defense where he’d be asked to defend far more space against counters.

Likewise, it’s never felt like ETH has had the urgency to expunge many of the failures of past administrations players to get more of those “ideal” profiles in. Instead he’s tried to fit square pegs into round holes with many of them. Now none of us know whether that’s a directive from those above him, or his own decisions, but it’s quite clear either way that so far it’s been spotty results at best. So if I have a manager that hasn’t quite shown himself to be adept at identifying what he really needs player wise in the transfer market nor within his own squad, do I really want to trust him with another summer of “getting his own players in”? Is it really that difficult to find a manager that can come in and immediately stamp his footprint on the squad to get them playing an obvious/executed style (whether it’s good to watch or not)? For example, I don’t think Ange is some elite manager by any means, but he’s a great example of coming in and immediately imprinting a clear style on a squad that’s repeatable even with lackluster options and not all “ideal profiles”.

So we are left with:
1. A team that can only play “good football” when every single first choice player is available and in decent form, and otherwise are forced to scratch and claw our way through games. I had no issue with that last year as it was his first year/in 4 competitions/lack of competent striker/we needed results. But it feels even watching our first choice team this year that the formula is pretty similar apart from now moving to a single pivot (which seems like a questionable decision considering the lack of athleticism in our midfield options and Casemiro’s rapidly declining legs).

2. A manager that seemingly doesn’t quite know what he wants as far as qualities to add to his team, and either is okay with the players he has in the squad or is unable to bring the hammer down and rid himself of them. I find it difficult to trust that manager through a 3rd consecutive season, even with what will seemingly be an elite recruitment structure we are bringing in, because he hasn’t shown to be a coach capable thus far of drilling in enough repeatable actions/tactics into the current side where I can go “yeah he’s fecked up a bit with his signings but the formula is there and INEOS will fill in the rest this summer”. Right now (as I’ve stated before) I’m open to the idea IF there’s notable progress and success not just with results but moreso the performances in the run in. But I’m extremely skeptical/doubtful that the level of progress I’d like to see will even occur.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Casemiro and Eriksen was his buys as well. Do you know how much salary these guys are on, are you delusional?
Malacia was his buy, dont even start. He is a young player ETH insisted taking with him.
Manager isnt responsible??
I mean, what??

Come to think of it, im done with this thread, it just seems you keep pulling things out of your #¤& as you go along.
Waste of time.
You have no grasp of reality at all.
Sorry, im done.

Eriksen is a free (but actually was brilliant for us last season).

Does Ten Hag also give them contracts?

Malacia a back up LB ok let’s call him ETH buy. He’s been a good back up last season but got a terrible injury. Is that ETHs fault?

Do you believe a manager is responsible for signing players?

I don’t think City is the best example because

A.) Pep is the best coach of all time when it comes to actually IMPROVING technicality in players far past what they’ve previously shown. Combine that with his obsessive nature when it comes to drilling the nuances of how he wants his players to position themselves between each other in possession and you’ll get a bunch of technical players that have a good amount of easy passes/options available to them.

B.) We all know they have the freedom (especially now) to fire funds at transfers every summer and are fine if they don’t work out.

As far as whether or not we have that squad of ideal profiles/technicality etc, it’s quite clear we don’t. One of United’s biggest failures of the past decade is failing to prioritize technical quality enough in each signing they make. But I don’t think Ten Hag has really shown he’s able to quite identify the profiles either. Now we can blame Murtough and the old guard for transfers sure, but some of that blame also has to go to ETH seeing as he demanded a level of control over transfer as well when he was hired here and by all accounts we’ve managed to get a good percentage of his targets (FdJ and Kane being the obvious misses). But barring Hojlund, he’s yet to make a signing that made real sense profile wise compared to his vision for how he seemingly wants us to play. Even Martinez (his clear “best” signing) isn’t the ideal CB for a team looking to play high in space and press relentlessly to create turnovers, because Licha isn’t as good defending high and wide physically as other teams CB’s even though he might make up for it with his wizardry on the ball and world class anticipation. Its why Arsenal preferred him as a more defensive LB to play that Zinchenko role instead of playing in the middle of the defense where he’d be asked to defend far more space against counters.

Likewise, it’s never felt like ETH has had the urgency to expunge many of the failures of past administrations players to get more of those “ideal” profiles in. Instead he’s tried to fit square pegs into round holes with many of them. Now none of us know whether that’s a directive from those above him, or his own decisions, but it’s quite clear either way that so far it’s been spotty results at best. So if I have a manager that hasn’t quite shown himself to be adept at identifying what he really needs player wise in the transfer market nor within his own squad, do I really want to trust him with another summer of “getting his own players in”? Is it really that difficult to find a manager that can come in and immediately stamp his footprint on the squad to get them playing an obvious/executed style (whether it’s good to watch or not)? For example, I don’t think Ange is some elite manager by any means, but he’s a great example of coming in and immediately imprinting a clear style on a squad that’s repeatable even with lackluster options and not all “ideal profiles”.

So we are left with:
1. A team that can only play “good football” when every single first choice player is available and in decent form, and otherwise are forced to scratch and claw our way through games. I had no issue with that last year as it was his first year/in 4 competitions/lack of competent striker/we needed results. But it feels even watching our first choice team this year that the formula is pretty similar apart from now moving to a single pivot (which seems like a questionable decision considering the lack of athleticism in our midfield options and Casemiro’s rapidly declining legs).

2. A manager that seemingly doesn’t quite know what he wants as far as qualities to add to his team, and either is okay with the players he has in the squad or is unable to bring the hammer down and rid himself of them. I find it difficult to trust that manager through a 3rd consecutive season, even with what will seemingly be an elite recruitment structure we are bringing in, because he hasn’t shown to be a coach capable thus far of drilling in enough repeatable actions/tactics into the current side where I can go “yeah he’s fecked up a bit with his signings but the formula is there and INEOS will fill in the rest this summer”. Right now (as I’ve stated before) I’m open to the idea IF there’s notable progress and success not just with results but moreso the performances in the run in. But I’m extremely skeptical/doubtful that the level of progress I’d like to see will even occur.

I’m not saying Ten Hag is as good as Pep so let’s just make that clear before anyone claims that’s my argument.

A) Ten Hag is widely reported to be obsessed in training too.

B) Then if we’re playing catch up to a club like that surely a bit more time is needed?

Im glad we agree on the lack of technical quality but Ten Hag is widely reported to have wanted FDJ for example. I also think while you have a point on some aspects of Martinez he’s easily a positive.

It’s also not as easy for him to say sell all these players and get me new ones. Our FFP is tight so unlike other clubs we can’t just sign a new RB or CB every season if the old one don’t suit us quite right. That inability to move out the wrong profile has to sit with a director of football or a wider overseer of the squad.

The formula is similar because we haven’t had the players to change the formula due to injury.

Im very hopeful that INEOS will put in the structure to finally give either Ten Hag or future managers the tools for them to be successful. I’d hope that could be with Ten Hag but if someone else then great too.

Again for what it’s worth really liked this post of yours too. We disagree but I now can see and understand your point well enough that it’s entirely reasonable to feel that way. So thanks for taking the time.

 

[Zed is not dead]

I don’t think City is the best example because

A.) Pep is the best coach of all time when it comes to actually IMPROVING technicality in players far past what they’ve previously shown. Combine that with his obsessive nature when it comes to drilling the nuances of how he wants his players to position themselves between each other in possession and you’ll get a bunch of technical players that have a good amount of easy passes/options available to them.

B.) We all know they have the freedom (especially now) to fire funds at transfers every summer and are fine if they don’t work out.

As far as whether or not we have that squad of ideal profiles/technicality etc, it’s quite clear we don’t. One of United’s biggest failures of the past decade is failing to prioritize technical quality enough in each signing they make. But I don’t think Ten Hag has really shown he’s able to quite identify the profiles either. Now we can blame Murtough and the old guard for transfers sure, but some of that blame also has to go to ETH seeing as he demanded a level of control over transfer as well when he was hired here and by all accounts we’ve managed to get a good percentage of his targets (FdJ and Kane being the obvious misses). But barring Hojlund, he’s yet to make a signing that made real sense profile wise compared to his vision for how he seemingly wants us to play. Even Martinez (his clear “best” signing) isn’t the ideal CB for a team looking to play high in space and press relentlessly to create turnovers, because Licha isn’t as good defending high and wide physically as other teams CB’s even though he might make up for it with his wizardry on the ball and world class anticipation. Its why Arsenal preferred him as a more defensive LB to play that Zinchenko role instead of playing in the middle of the defense where he’d be asked to defend far more space against counters.

Likewise, it’s never felt like ETH has had the urgency to expunge many of the failures of past administrations players to get more of those “ideal” profiles in. Instead he’s tried to fit square pegs into round holes with many of them. Now none of us know whether that’s a directive from those above him, or his own decisions, but it’s quite clear either way that so far it’s been spotty results at best. So if I have a manager that hasn’t quite shown himself to be adept at identifying what he really needs player wise in the transfer market nor within his own squad, do I really want to trust him with another summer of “getting his own players in”? Is it really that difficult to find a manager that can come in and immediately stamp his footprint on the squad to get them playing an obvious/executed style (whether it’s good to watch or not)? For example, I don’t think Ange is some elite manager by any means, but he’s a great example of coming in and immediately imprinting a clear style on a squad that’s repeatable even with lackluster options and not all “ideal profiles”.

So we are left with:
1. A team that can only play “good football” when every single first choice player is available and in decent form, and otherwise are forced to scratch and claw our way through games. I had no issue with that last year as it was his first year/in 4 competitions/lack of competent striker/we needed results. But it feels even watching our first choice team this year that the formula is pretty similar apart from now moving to a single pivot (which seems like a questionable decision considering the lack of athleticism in our midfield options and Casemiro’s rapidly declining legs).

2. A manager that seemingly doesn’t quite know what he wants as far as qualities to add to his team, and either is okay with the players he has in the squad or is unable to bring the hammer down and rid himself of them. I find it difficult to trust that manager through a 3rd consecutive season, even with what will seemingly be an elite recruitment structure we are bringing in, because he hasn’t shown to be a coach capable thus far of drilling in enough repeatable actions/tactics into the current side where I can go “yeah he’s fecked up a bit with his signings but the formula is there and INEOS will fill in the rest this summer”. Right now (as I’ve stated before) I’m open to the idea IF there’s notable progress and success not just with results but moreso the performances in the run in. But I’m extremely skeptical/doubtful that the level of progress I’d like to see will even occur.

I mean the bolded part is pretty much true for every manager

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

I mean the bolded part is pretty much true for every manager

Is it? Because I just mentioned Ange right after that who also had a load of injures yet spurs style was pretty consistent. The aforementioned City can play their entire youth and reserve team yet the approach is the same even if results aren’t always as stellar.

 

[Zed is not dead]

Is it? Because I just mentioned Ange right after that who also had a load of injures yet spurs style was pretty consistent. The aforementioned City can play their entire youth and reserve team yet the approach is the same even if results aren’t always as stellar.

For all the talk about Ange, he plays pretty much a chaotic approach with a super high line. He gets credit for racking up points early in the season where they had games they won that could’ve easily gone the other way. The narrative around him would be very different otherwise.

City can play some very boring games when they don’t have their key performers for prolonged periods of time, where they revert to handball -like football where they just pass it around waiting for a miracle.

Liverpool last season played like garbage when they had injuries.

Newcastle this season have put in very inconsistent performances too because of their injuries.

Barca and Real this season too have been hit by injuries and their football can be pretty ugly at times as well.

So yeah, virtually every coach needs their strongest side to play the best brand of football they want.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

For all the talk about Ange, he plays pretty much a chaotic approach with a super high line. He gets credit for racking up points early in the season where they had games they won that could’ve easily gone the other way. The narrative around him would be very different otherwise.

City can play some very boring games when they don’t have their key performers for prolonged periods of time, where they revert to handball -like football where they just pass it around waiting for a miracle.

Liverpool last season played like garbage when they had injuries.

Newcastle this season have put in very inconsistent performances too because of their injuries.

Barca and Real this season too have been hit by injuries and their football can be pretty ugly at times as well.

So yeah, virtually every coach needs their strongest side to play the best brand of football they want.

I think you’re confusing applauding results or pure montage worthy football with my desire for a system and style to be in place that’s repeatable regardless if a few players might be injured.

I don’t really care that Ange had them top of the league for a bit as much as I’m noting that he almost instantly put them into a system and style that produced good execution and pleasing football even after they were hit injuries. Same with City. Yes it’s boring, but it’s largely the same system and principles being repeated even if slightly less effective without KDB or Rodri providing the world class touch to the game.

Real Madrid isn’t a great example because they’ve largely been the most adaptable squad and club in modern football game to game (which is why they have been unbelievable in the UCL year after year).

But because we have a CB and LB missing for most of the year, many are willing to excuse almost 5 months straight of being dominated by lesser sides coupled with some of the worst results in club history over a short period. It got to the point that we just ceded attempting any sort of control or normal attacking patterns and moved to playing like stoke city in 2012 having McTominay box crash constantly hoping to bag a goal. If a managers system is that fragile, then the system itself is flawed.

 

[Zed is not dead]

I think you’re confusing applauding results or pure montage worthy football with my desire for a system and style to be in place that’s repeatable regardless if a few players might be injured.

I don’t really care that Ange had them top of the league for a bit as much as I’m noting that he almost instantly put them into a system and style that produced good execution and pleasing football even after they were hit injuries. Same with City. Yes it’s boring, but it’s largely the same system and principles being repeated even if slightly less effective without KDB or Rodri providing the world class touch to the game.

Real Madrid isn’t a great example because they’ve largely been the most adaptable squad and club in modern football game to game (which is why they have been unbelievable in the UCL year after year).

But because we have a CB and LB missing for most of the year, many are willing to excuse almost 5 months straight of being dominated by lesser sides coupled with some of the worst results in club history over a short period. It got to the point that we just ceded attempting any sort of control or normal attacking patterns and moved to playing like stoke city in 2012 having McTominay box crash constantly hoping to bag a goal. If a managers system is that fragile, then the system itself is flawed.

City playing boring football is their equivalent of dropping deep and waiting it out.

Ange « style » is said to be recognizable only because he has wins, there’s a real bias because they’ve played some very bad football at times where the only recognizable pattern was « play a suicidal high line ».

You talk about us giving up control but never did the coach say he wanted United to be a team in control, he literally said the opposite, transition team. Which means that his football of coming out the back to then quickly attack can easily turn into chaos if the personnel to get the ball out from the back is missing or not technically good enough.
The style is easy to spot, he wants a 3-2-4-1 on the ball with one of the full backs tucking in midfield with the DM to form a box shape with the two pressing 8s. The aim is not control but to play as high up the pitch as possible, even at the cost of defensive balance. It’s possible when you have a specific kind of defenders.
If anything Ten Hag is too stubborn to try something more balanced, which leads to the kind of incomprehensible football we play.

EDIT: we didn’t only have a CB and LB missing for 5 months though. Our covers were missing and in some instances even our 3rd choices were missing

 

[TomSkalle]

I think you’re confusing applauding results or pure montage worthy football with my desire for a system and style to be in place that’s repeatable regardless if a few players might be injured.

I don’t really care that Ange had them top of the league for a bit as much as I’m noting that he almost instantly put them into a system and style that produced good execution and pleasing football even after they were hit injuries. Same with City. Yes it’s boring, but it’s largely the same system and principles being repeated even if slightly less effective without KDB or Rodri providing the world class touch to the game.

Real Madrid isn’t a great example because they’ve largely been the most adaptable squad and club in modern football game to game (which is why they have been unbelievable in the UCL year after year).

But because we have a CB and LB missing for most of the year, many are willing to excuse almost 5 months straight of being dominated by lesser sides coupled with some of the worst results in club history over a short period. It got to the point that we just ceded attempting any sort of control or normal attacking patterns and moved to playing like stoke city in 2012 having McTominay box crash constantly hoping to bag a goal. If a managers system is that fragile, then the system itself is flawed.

Its not that they dont understand, they dont want to understand.
But kudos for trying.