Let's address a couple of points :-
"Amorim doesn't have the players to play this system"
In order to know whether someone is able to play in this system, they must first actually play games in the system; and with only four training sessions completed on tactical and system work, it's naive to assume that they can't until they have all the instruction and details in how to operate within the system and their specific role in it. Players aren't cogs; they're multi-faceted and multi-purpose professional football players. There's no such thing as a "wing-back" or a "full-back". There's only players that play well as a wing-back or a full-back. Just because someone has always played somewhere, it doesn't mean that they will always play there. You must permit Amorim the space and the time to get the repetitions and the training in so that each player can be assessed accurately.
"Amorim needs to go back to four-at-the-back"
He does not need to go back to four-at-the-back. Firstly, the xG conceded and the shots per game with four-at-the-back was tremendously bad under ten Hag. It was also bad under previous managers. It would be a naive decision to revert back to a previous setup that has demonstrably failed time and time again. Secondly, Amorim is unfamiliar with this interpretation of his philosophy. You cannot just ask him to start training a 4-2-3-1 or a 4-3-3 base with his system if he himself has never done so. Now is not the time to experiment with familiar philosophies and unfamiliar profiles. Furthermore, he cannot just teach someone else's system. His ideas in the build-up, in the transitions, in the possession, in the various phases of the game are explicitly tied to his idea about player profiles and roles.
"It's obvious that it's not working so far"
I would argue that, if you pay attention to the underlying performance statistics, that it's not so binary as you would like to think. Under ten Hag, with four-at-the-back, we conceded the 2nd most shots per game in the entire league. Under Amorim, until recently, Amorim went seven games registering under 1xG conceded, which includes games vs. City and Arsenal. Of course, we can cite very poor results in part, however, the statistics tell us that we've been conceding infinitely more goals than the data suggests we should, which is in part a result of a lot of individual mistakes and the opposition taking advantage of every opportunity afforded at a rate way above their own xG production. One also only has to look at the sample within those seven games to see that we conceded so few touches in our 18 yard box. This is not a mistake, or a coincidence. The system itself is very good; the application is inconsistent because we have had no training sessions in which to understand it to any significant degree.
Like Amorim said; if he reverts to something like what they've been playing under ten Hag, then he'll have to delay the learning for a season, and then the process will only be delayed down the line only for us to be in the same position then as now. But at least if he persists with the new system, those that are truly compatible will be kept, and those who aren't will be dispensed with, leaving us with a summer transfer window knowing already who will, and who won't fit his footballing vision.
Time to put your money where your mouth is. For years you've been talking about a manager coming in with a distinct identity, and someone who sticks to his identity. Under ten Hag you got adaptable. Under ten Hag you got someone who compromised for the sake of the squad available, and it didn't work. Had ten Hag tried to implement something akin to his Ajax philosophy, then who knows where we'd be. If Rangnick had persisted with trying to implement his Leipzig philosophy, then who knows where we'd be. Let the man get his ideas across in his own way, in his own time.
