We are an awfully coached team

[Champ]

To answer your question: Yes, that can be true, but is doesn't have to be. As someone said, you don't train Ronaldo to do a fancy flick to then be able to a have free shot on goal. Of course, these things are intertwined on several levels but I think, you are clinging too much on this term "moments of brilliance".

When that term is used, it doesn't necessarily refer to brilliance or excellence or high quality. It is more in contrast to "a well worked goal where a team does a chain of actions to end up with a high scoring chance".
"Moments of brilliance" or "individual brilliance" are more meant to emphasize the "coincidence" or "fate" factor in a goal. It is tricky to describe and I think, the term is a bit misleading in itself but for me, the difference is this: when I sit in front of the TV and I feel the pressure is rising, somebody has overcome the press, now he's executing a through ball to release a winger in space without a defender in front of him and in the middle the striker has started to move into the box, I am getting tense, I can't sit relaxed but will go closer to the screen. This is what I would describe as a "well worked goal" where players took smart decisions and executed a plan. On the contrary is for example Greenwood dribbling close to a packed penalty box, shooting with a low scoring chance, the keeper can't get a hold and Ronaldo takes the rebound.

Individual brilliance isn't necessarily great play or a great piece of skill - it might be just making use of an opportunity resulting from a mistake. Of course no trainer will stop his player do that stuff. But if you are mostly reliant on scoring rebounds, deflections, 30yard screamer, direct freekicks, flying header, goal keeper blunder, VAR decisions (not saying we are relying on that right now), than at some point it will cause you some issues. Any team makes use of these things, they belong to the sport and are part of the highlight reels. And nobody wants United to stop scoring such goals. But, our opponents score other goals as well. Set pieces, tap-ins, third man runs and so on. I am not saying we don't do that occasionally from time to time but the feeling is, that while other teams rely on individual brilliance to 70%, we do to 90%. Which gives us some disadvantages at the end of the day.

This I'll give the time, as it's a decent post with very valid points, as opposed to the other posts too set in their ways.

I cannot deny that we do rely on our 'better' players to dig us out occasionally, but Newcastle, Leeds and West Ham we dominated the game by any metric you'd like to pick up on. The same can be said on a large proportion of our games last season, yet people set in their ways tend to come up with strange takes from games.

Yet these same people claim that the individual errors that lead to the goals we concede are because of our poor coaching, yet the 'individual brilliance' that scores us goals is not because of good coaching.

I doubt that Ole and McKenna etc is out there with Bruno teaching them 30 yard screamers, but I do believe they are out there showing them where they need to be on the pitch, in which case when they get the space for a 30 yard screamer as Bruno did against Newcastle it's probably because they trained to be in that position.
But again, people set in their ways tend to believe this not to be the case.

Talking of teams scoring tap ins, we have scored many of them in Oles reign, we don't rely on individual brilliance. And I disregard your thoughts that a tap in from a shot by an attacking player isnt a sign of good build up play, to me it's clear Greenwood has been coached to shoot whenever he gets an opportunity to do so, so to me us reaping the benefits of him shooting means he is listening and learning.

 

[King Azaz the Unabridged]

The same can be said on a large proportion of our games last season,

It can't, though, or we would have ranked higher on the metrics the people apparently "set in their ways" have repeatedly brought up.

 

[Champ]

It can't, though, or we would have ranked higher on the metrics the people apparently "set in their ways" have repeatedly brought up.

Like what exactly?

 

[::sonny::]

 

[NinjaZombie]

The 2nd Arsenal goal vs Spurs this afternoon is a classic example of what I was talking about earlier - luring the opposition in, beating their press and then when the cutback is made by ESR, Arsenal have an overload in the middle and Aubameyang tucks it away.

We seem to really struggle to draw teams out. I think this is because Maguire and Varane (correctly) don't trust Fred and McTominay.

How many games do we see where 7/8 red shirts smash against a wall of defensive players over and over again, without really creating anything? It's because we're not drawing opponents out from their comfort of "defending deep and in numbers" approach

We used to do this under Fergie. That's why we often times had less possession than the likes of Southampton while playing at home.

 

[stw2022]

Stop with Fergie comparisons. It’s like comparing Des Walker to Ronaldo by pointing to the fact Des also once failed to score against Aston Villa

 

[Robbie Boy]

The absolute feck is that

 

[Greck]

We used to do this under Fergie. That's why we often times had less possession than the likes of Southampton while playing at home.

I don't know about that. Under SAF lesser teams played the entire game in their box at Old trafford. The one exception was the final season or two where he employed some really defensive tactics in the league but asided that many younger fans didn't even know what it was like to have a worse team have a go at us till Moyes came along and wrecked the fear factor. Having a go at us became a common phrase that season. The norm before that among lower to midtable teams was to park the bus when playing us.

 

[Foxbatt]

To answer your question: Yes, that can be true, but is doesn't have to be. As someone said, you don't train Ronaldo to do a fancy flick to then be able to a have free shot on goal. Of course, these things are intertwined on several levels but I think, you are clinging too much on this term "moments of brilliance".

When that term is used, it doesn't necessarily refer to brilliance or excellence or high quality. It is more in contrast to "a well worked goal where a team does a chain of actions to end up with a high scoring chance".
"Moments of brilliance" or "individual brilliance" are more meant to emphasize the "coincidence" or "fate" factor in a goal. It is tricky to describe and I think, the term is a bit misleading in itself but for me, the difference is this: when I sit in front of the TV and I feel the pressure is rising, somebody has overcome the press, now he's executing a through ball to release a winger in space without a defender in front of him and in the middle the striker has started to move into the box, I am getting tense, I can't sit relaxed but will go closer to the screen. This is what I would describe as a "well worked goal" where players took smart decisions and executed a plan. On the contrary is for example Greenwood dribbling close to a packed penalty box, shooting with a low scoring chance, the keeper can't get a hold and Ronaldo takes the rebound.

Individual brilliance isn't necessarily great play or a great piece of skill - it might be just making use of an opportunity resulting from a mistake. Of course no trainer will stop his player do that stuff. But if you are mostly reliant on scoring rebounds, deflections, 30yard screamer, direct freekicks, flying header, goal keeper blunder, VAR decisions (not saying we are relying on that right now), than at some point it will cause you some issues. Any team makes use of these things, they belong to the sport and are part of the highlight reels. And nobody wants United to stop scoring such goals. But, our opponents score other goals as well. Set pieces, tap-ins, third man runs and so on. I am not saying we don't do that occasionally from time to time but the feeling is, that while other teams rely on individual brilliance to 70%, we do to 90%. Which gives us some disadvantages at the end of the day.

Let me make it easy for you. . Maradona's goal vs England.Or the one Giggs scored in the FA Cup. Yes a lot of individual goals are not at that level but I agree with you that a well worked goal means a goal being scored after great passing movements. We usually do not score these kinds of goals.

 

[Foxbatt]

I don't know about that. Under SAF lesser teams played the entire game in their box at Old trafford. The one exception was the final season or two where he employed some really defensive tactics in the league but asided that many younger fans didn't even know what it was like to have a worse team have a go at us till Moyes came along and wrecked the fear factor. Having a go at us became a common phrase that season. The norm before that among lower to midtable teams was to park the bus when playing us.

Not only the bus. They would park their coach and the cars and we would still break them down. A couple of points. We had players up front who could hold the ball. We then played behind them who could open up defences. One of the reason is that we play high tempo and move the ball around. Everyone knew what they are supposed to do. If we break out it is rarely that they player who started the break out scores. He always passed it someone in a better position.

 

[Dominos]

Spoiler: Video

Neville: "they don't play well enough as a team to win the league. You need to be a unit in possession and out of possession. When you only deliver in moments, those moments won't go for you in certain games. You need patterns of play, you need a way of playing."

 

[The Firestarter]

Spoiler: Video

Neville: "they don't play well enough as a team to win the league. You need to be a unit in possession and out of possession. When you only deliver in moments, those moments won't go for you in certain games. You need patterns of play, you need a way of playing."

Oh noes did he really say the p of p words? Dead to me.

 

[Mickson]

Spoiler: Video

Neville: "they don't play well enough as a team to win the league. You need to be a unit in possession and out of possession. When you only deliver in moments, those moments won't go for you in certain games. You need patterns of play, you need a way of playing."

How's that possible? Patterns of play don't exist according to top reds.

 

[mav_9me]

Who knew Gary Neville was a "hipster"

 

[R'hllor]

Ah yes hipster, anyone remembers a thread from last season about how Ole is taking a dump on hipster managers in CL grp stage, that went well at the end.

 

[Foxbatt]

Basically he is saying what a lot of us have been saying here. We play as individuals and we would continue to win some games because of individual players. He also mentioned that Chelsea, City and Liverpool play as a team. Now after 2 and half years if we are unable to play as a team with those world class players then what on earth is going on?

 

[Womp]

 

[nainaisson]

Ole should watch a few of Gary's games managing Valencia to learn what real top management looks like.

 

[Chairman Steve]

Ah yes hipster, anyone remembers a thread from last season about how Ole is taking a dump on hipster managers in CL grp stage, that went well at the end.

Did they change the dictionary definition for ‘hipster’ to mean good and talented or something? I feel like any alternative to OGS is either hipster or dinosaur to some people.

 

[Schmeichel's Cartwheel]

Ah yes hipster, anyone remembers a thread from last season about how Ole is taking a dump on hipster managers in CL grp stage, that went well at the end.

Ole winning against PSG & Leipzig isn’t really that surprising. His game is counter attack. That’s really all he knows how to coach. Both teams adapted for the return games & beat us. Plan B, Tuchel & Nagelsmann demonstrated it, Ole never has.

 

[mav_9me]

Ole should watch a few of Gary's games managing Valencia to learn what real top management looks like.

Another throwaway comment which brings nothing to the discussion.

Maybe Gary should watch your coaching clinics to understand football eh? See how useful that is.

 

[King Azaz the Unabridged]

Like what exactly?

We were fourth-best in the league in expected goals last season, sixth after removing penalties. We failed to score in 8 out of 38 games. 15 of our 73 goals came in 2 games. We won just over half our games, or three more games than the previous season (or two more than Moyes+Giggs, for reference). None of that suggests we dominated most games by any metric.

Like I said, these have all been discussed over and over in this thread by multiple people. Your last few posts tell me you've likely seen all this discussion but are choosing not to engage so you can just place every person criticizing the coaching in this thread in the same bucket of people "set in their ways" that aren't worth your time.

 

[Foxbatt]

Ole should watch a few of Gary's games managing Valencia to learn what real top management looks like.

Or Gary should have watched Cardiff so he would understand how not to manage a football club?

 

[Yagami]

The absolute feck is that

Yaya Touré’s secret Twitter account confirmed

 

[elmo]

Did they change the dictionary definition for ‘hipster’ to mean good and talented or something? I feel like any alternative to OGS is either hipster or dinosaur to some people.

I mean Sammsky was claiming Varane was one of those hipster defender compared to Maguire and Lindelof about 2 seasons back.

 

[Desert Eagle]

Patterns of play existence confirmed by Gary Neville.

 

[Cnaiür urs Skiötha]

The general consensus among a majority of us seems to be that we lack in the management/coaching department and that we should win the big trophies with the players we have.
Basically I agree with that, but I am not sure if we are not overrating our players a little bit.
Especially the balance of our squad does not seem right. Too many players who are too selfish or try too hard to play killer passes. I mean it is fine for our number 9 to try and shoot whenever there is a possibility but the others should concentrate more on keep the ball moving and work for the build-up.
On the other hand we got a bunch who seem a bit slow, do not have such a great first touch or are not as mobile as it might be necessary in the long run. Matic, Maguire, AWB, Fred, McTominay...
Not saying that they are bad, not at all. I just tend to think when I see all these players on the pitch together that I am not that surprised that we do not see that kind of fast and fluid football that is necessary to create enough clear cut chances.
This is further highlighted by the fact that our coaching prefers these kind of players. It almost seems as if players like Donny and Sancho have been brought in because they were integral parts of teams playing great and modern football, but Ole and Co do not really have an idea what to do with them. If Ole could swap them for Haaland and Kane he would immediately do it I am afraid...
Things got further complicated by the last minute signing of Ronaldo - something that judged seperately on its own is fantastic, but makes constructing the best starting 11 even more complicated. Especially for our coaching team who are just overwhelmed by the task at hand it seems.

 

[justsomebloke]

So far this PL season:

Goals scored: 13, tied for 2nd
xG: 11.44, 3rd
(fewest) Goals allowed: 5, tied for 5th
xGA: 6.81 (8th)
Points: 13, tied for 2nd
Mathematically projected points from record: 74
xPts: 11.36 (5th)

Last season:

Goals scored: 73 (2nd)
xG: 63.17 (4th)
(fewest) goals allowed: 44 (5th)
xGA: 41.92 (4th)
Points: 74 (2nd)
xPts: 65.6 (4th)

Bottom line: Not much of a change from last season really, except we seem to allow more scoring chances (though without doing worse in the number of goals we allow). That's where we are, so far. If that's where we still are when the season ends, that's not good. But we're just 6 games in, it's still early. And it's not regression at least. If this was as bad as it got this season, then we'll be fine.

 

[justsomebloke]

The general consensus among a majority of us seems to be that we lack in the management/coaching department and that we should win the big trophies with the players we have.
Basically I agree with that, but I am not sure if we are not overrating our players a little bit.
Especially the balance of our squad does not seem right. Too many players who are too selfish or try too hard to play killer passes. I mean it is fine for our number 9 to try and shoot whenever there is a possibility but the others should concentrate more on keep the ball moving and work for the build-up.
On the other hand we got a bunch who seem a bit slow, do not have such a great first touch or are not as mobile as it might be necessary in the long run. Matic, Maguire, AWB, Fred, McTominay...
Not saying that they are bad, not at all. I just tend to think when I see all these players on the pitch together that I am not that surprised that we do not see that kind of fast and fluid football that is necessary to create enough clear cut chances.
This is further highlighted by the fact that our coaching prefers these kind of players. It almost seems as if players like Donny and Sancho have been brought in because they were integral parts of teams playing great and modern football, but Ole and Co do not really have an idea what to do with them. If Ole could swap them for Haaland and Kane he would immediately do it I am afraid...
Things got further complicated by the last minute signing of Ronaldo - something that judged seperately on its own is fantastic, but makes constructing the best starting 11 even more complicated. Especially for our coaching team who are just overwhelmed by the task at hand it seems.

That's probably only true if you define "us" as "the people who post on these threads".

 

[Forevergiggs1]

to me it's clear Greenwood has been coached to shoot whenever he gets an opportunity to do so, so to me us reaping the benefits of him shooting means he is listening and learning.

Watching the AV game I have to say I agree with this but even though he's got a great shot on him I can't see how it's advantageous to the team when he's ignoring one of the greatest scorers of all time on one side and a prestigious scorer in Bruno on the other. Greenwood is 19 hears of age. Putting that amount of pressure on the lad isn't going to help his development and is detrimental to the team. It was pretty easy to see the frustration from both Ronaldo and Bruno which will do Greenwoods confidence no good at all.

In the last couple of games the instructions seem to have been shoot on sight and it doesn't matter how many pairs of legs are in the way or how far from the goal a player is, which is pure Sunday league stuff when with the players we have we should be cutting teams open but as that would require coaching of the highest level I can see why it isn't being implemented.

 

[romufc]

How can a manager be in charge for 3 years and have no method of playing.

Every game, we look vunerable at the back with 2 DM's, we cannot really create good scoring chances.

We cannot play football, the reason we struggle in so many games is that we do no impose ourselves. We have a chance they have a chance, this is not sustainable football because more often than not teams outplay us.

This season, I have seen Wolves, Southampton, Aston Villa, West Ham outplay us. We want to win the league?

 

[justsomebloke]

How can a manager be in charge for 3 years and have no method of playing.

Every game, we look vunerable at the back with 2 DM's, we cannot really create good scoring chances.

We cannot play football, the reason we struggle in so many games is that we do no impose ourselves. We have a chance they have a chance, this is not sustainable football because more often than not teams outplay us.

This season, I have seen Wolves, Southampton, Aston Villa, West Ham outplay us. We want to win the league?

1. We do have a method of playing. Obviously.
2. It's hard to tell what we "look like " to you, but at least we are not by most measures particularly vulnerable at the back. That of course is by measures such as how many goals we actually allow and xGA.
3. We create more good scoring chances than almost all other teams. Again on the basis of real things like goals scored, xG etc.
4. We can obviously play football, given that we were the second best team in the PL last season and is currently 4th.
5. All of this would suggest that we have a certain ability to "impose ourselves".
6. All of this would also heavily suggest that it's self-evidently absurd to state that "more often than not teams outplay us".
7. As you have apparently also seen "Wolves, Southampton, Aston Villa, West Ham outplay us", this all leads towards the same conclusion, which is that the problem here is probably your vision.

 

[Lentwood]

We used to do this under Fergie. That's why we often times had less possession than the likes of Southampton while playing at home.

I think it's fair to say though that the game has moved on since then, plus, we had far, far superior individuals.

We might have a 'good' team now, but for most of SAFs time in charge (PL era), we had world class players in nearly every position.

Also, at least half of the league were cannon-fodder for a side as good as we were. They would turn up to OT already beaten, because they lacked the quality, the tactical nous, the fitness levels and the belief to seriously think about beating us. It wasn't a case of 'if' we would win, it was 'how many' most weeks.

Nowadays, you play a side like Villa at home, and they turn up believing they can get something. Why wouldn't they? They have a team of international footballers and they have one of the highest net-spends in world football over the last 5/6 years.

Personally, I think there is a big issue with football right now. I think it's too easy to just defend deep and counter, and something needs to be done to address the imbalance (kind of like the 'bat vs ball' debate in cricket). That's another argument though, and we need to work out how to break down these teams, not talk about rule changes!

 

[romufc]

1. We do have a method of playing. Obviously.
2. It's hard to tell what we "look like " to you, but at least we are not by most measures particularly vulnerable at the back. That of course is by measures such as how many goals we actually allow and xGA.
3. We create more good scoring chances than almost all other teams. Again on the basis of real things like goals scored, xG etc.
4. We can obviously play football, given that we were the second best team in the PL last season and is currently 4th.
5. All of this would suggest that we have a certain ability to "impose ourselves".
6. All of this would also heavily suggest that it's self-evidently absurd to state that "more often than not teams outplay us".
7. As you have apparently also seen "Wolves, Southampton, Aston Villa, West Ham outplay us", this all leads towards the same conclusion, which is that the problem here is probably your vision.

1. What is our method of play? Passing it around CB's?
2. xGA wins you titles? In games against these teams we have actually looked really vunerable, if you watch games instead of reading xGA, xG and those stats, its called the eye test.
3. We barely created good chances, how many times did their keeper make a save?
4. Impose means you go in and dominate games, I suggest you watch top teams play, then you will know what it takes to be one.
5. Wolves had the better chance to win the game, DDG bailed us out, how many chances can you recall against them? Southampton had the better chances, DDG bailed us out. Aston Villa, we got lucky Ramsey fell before he took his shot, Targett blazed a tap in over. We barely created a chance.

Finishing 2nd when other teams imploded, crashing out the CL and no where near the top is not what I want as a United fan.

After 3 years in charge if the best our manager is do is finish 2nd and win nothing, can't even get out CL groups, tells me time is up when you cant even beat teams at home.

 

[justsomebloke]

1. What is our method of play? Passing it around CB's?
2. xGA wins you titles? In games against these teams we have actually looked really vunerable, if you watch games instead of reading xGA, xG and those stats, its called the eye test.
3. We barely created good chances, how many times did their keeper make a save?
4. Impose means you go in and dominate games, I suggest you watch top teams play, then you will know what it takes to be one.
5. Wolves had the better chance to win the game, DDG bailed us out, how many chances can you recall against them? Southampton had the better chances, DDG bailed us out. Aston Villa, we got lucky Ramsey fell before he took his shot, Targett blazed a tap in over. We barely created a chance.

Finishing 2nd when other teams imploded, crashing out the CL and no where near the top is not what I want as a United fan.

After 3 years in charge if the best our manager is do is finish 2nd and win nothing, can't even get out CL groups, tells me time is up when you cant even beat teams at home.

The point is you totally jump off the cliff in making hugely exaggerated claims that obviously are not valid. We have no method of play, can't create scoring chances, can't defend, are outplayed by most and generally can't play football. If that was even remotely close to the reality, we would self-evidently not finish 2nd last season, and we also wouldn't be 4th now.

It's possible to make criticisms of the team and the manager without resorting to such silly hyperbole.

Newsflash: It's possible to have more than one thought in your head at the same time. And it's possible to watch the game and form an impression and consider stats. There's not actually a rule that says you can only do one or the other. And irrespective of that, you can at the very least run the most rudimentary reality check there is, which is ask yourself if the picture you're painting adds up to something that is more or less consistent with the actual fecking results.

 

[romufc]

The point is you totally jump off the cliff in making hugely exaggerated claims that obviously are not valid. We have no method of play, can't create scoring chances, can't defend, are outplayed by most and generally can't play football. If that was even remotely close to the reality, we would self-evidently not finish 2nd last season, and we also wouldn't be 4th now.

It's possible to make criticisms of the team and the manager without resorting to such silly hyperbole.

Would you not agree that we are a real eye sore to watch?

If we don't get an early goal, the game seems to coast away until we get to 70 mins and realise oh wait, we are struggling here.

 

[justsomebloke]

Would you not agree that we are a real eye sore to watch?

If we don't get an early goal, the game seems to coast away until we get to 70 mins and realise oh wait, we are struggling here.

I'm not happy currently, no. In addition to a central midfield that at best looks marginalised, we haven't found the structure and rhytm and coherence to our game in the attacking third. Which we have had in the past. I'm guessing that has to do with integrating Ronaldo and Sancho, and not having Rashford, which is a huge change. But whatever it is, I hope it can be solved quickly.

It is what it is. But what it is isn't something anywhere near as bad as you're painting it.

 

[the_answer]

1. We do have a method of playing. Obviously.
2. It's hard to tell what we "look like " to you, but at least we are not by most measures particularly vulnerable at the back. That of course is by measures such as how many goals we actually allow and xGA.
3. We create more good scoring chances than almost all other teams. Again on the basis of real things like goals scored, xG etc.
4. We can obviously play football, given that we were the second best team in the PL last season and is currently 4th.
5. All of this would suggest that we have a certain ability to "impose ourselves".
6. All of this would also heavily suggest that it's self-evidently absurd to state that "more often than not teams outplay us".
7. As you have apparently also seen "Wolves, Southampton, Aston Villa, West Ham outplay us", this all leads towards the same conclusion, which is that the problem here is probably your vision.

If I might jump into the conversation:
Obviously Ole is working with the team and we also have a certain way of play.

We are good defending in a low block, we are good going into space and we have a good roaming forward play. we allow our star players freedom to do as fit.
BUT our method of play is too 1dimensional and not intricate enough. We can do better. We have to do better to win the league and CL.
If you watch City and then us. You will find that city can always create those wingers pulling back and tap in goals. We cant.
We do not press as hard as Klopps teams and we dont have the tiki taka of the old Barca.

Its not good enough for our ambitions. (We are together with Madrid probably the biggest club in the world).
We have a great squad. We have the arguably GOAT.

We should aim for someone who is truely ELITE in their coaching (Pep, Klopp, Tuchel...)

It is not bad, but being "not bad" and top 4 shouldnt be our ambition. Not with this squad.

 

[justsomebloke]

If I might jump into the conversation:
Obviously Ole is working with the team and we also have a certain way of play.

We are good defending in a low block, we are good going into space and we have a good roaming forward play. we allow our star players freedom to do as fit.
BUT our method of play is too 1dimensional and not intricate enough. We can do better. We have to do better to win the league and CL.
If you watch City and then us. You will find that city can always create those wingers pulling back and tap in goals. We cant.
We do not press as hard as Klopps teams and we dont have the tiki taka of the old Barca.

Its not good enough for our ambitions. (We are together with Madrid probably the biggest club in the world).
We have a great squad. We have the arguably GOAT.

We should aim for someone who is truely ELITE in their coaching (Pep, Klopp, Tuchel...)

It is not bad, but being "not bad" and top 4 shouldnt be our ambition. Not with this squad.

No it shouldn't - and it isn't. I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks that's where Man Utds ambition should end.

By and large, I agree we need to be better than we currently are. There are issues that need to be resolved, and clearly the team we have this season hasn't hit its full potential yet. But we'll see. And I think it's simplistic to argue we need "an elite manager", as if it was a positional upgrade we were talking about. It's not as straightforward as that with managers, and we've just had two of those, which you'd think made that point. But still lots of United fans have talked themselves into that corner.

 

[romufc]

No it shouldn't - and it isn't. I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks that's where Man Utds ambition should end.

By and large, I agree we need to be better than we currently are. There are issues that need to be resolved, and clearly the team we have this season hasn't hit its full potential yet. But we'll see. And I think it's simplistic to argue we need "an elite manager", as if it was a positional upgrade we were talking about. It's not as straightforward as that with managers, and we've just had two of those, which you'd think made that point. But still lots of United fans have talked themselves into that corner.

I do agree it isnt as easy as hiring an elite manager because we have tried with Jose and LVG.
Obviously, I want Ole to win us something but in my opinion, I cannot see it happening. He has done a very good job building the team and getting it here but im afraid it looks like his ceiling.

When teams go to Chelsea, Liverpool, City they are scared, they are starved of the ball, they struggle to get a foot hold in the game.

I take this weekend as an example, do you think Villa deserved the win? I would say so