Be funny if Wolves stay up and Bournemouth go down.
Why Man Utd were so bad against Wolves (Tifo)
- Thread starter Scarecrow
- Start date
Be funny if Wolves stay up and Bournemouth go down.
O'Neil had the upper hand tactically. ETH will learn from this moving forward and we'll do better.
This was actually my main analysis point too. I saw time and again players like Shaw, Antony, Garnacho, Martinez beaten for pace, Rashford and Wan Bissaka couldn’t outpace opponents, Fernandez and Mount less intense than the opposition, and Casemiro an out right sorry sight as the game progressed. This looks to me like physical form curve past heavy training, and no tactics or individual qualities are going to look good when every player is constantly half a yard behind their game.
We have tactical puzzles to improve and figure out, but this was much more than that. The las twenty minutes were straight up farcical, and with how measured Ten Hag was in his criticism outwards (no ‘this is not acceptable’ this time), it hints to me that he knew some of the reasons for how bad we were towards the end was not on the players.
At no point in the video does the Tifo guy point out that Mount is playing insanely high during our build up phase meaning Wolves play man for man in our half while not being exposed at the back to the long ball.
You don't play out of that trap by AWB being Xavi, you play out of that trap by having your second central midfielder drop deep, outnumber the pressers, work them into bad spots and then move the ball forward quickly into space. Either they commit more men forward to the press and leave gaps or they have to drop off and give us space to play.
Instead Mount stood up next to Rashford or Garnacho like a wally while Wolves played 5v5 in our own half.
You don't play out of that trap by AWB being Xavi, you play out of that trap by having your second central midfielder drop deep, outnumber the pressers, work them into bad spots and then move the ball forward quickly into space. Either they commit more men forward to the press and leave gaps or they have to drop off and give us space to play.
Instead Mount stood up next to Rashford or Garnacho like a wally while Wolves played 5v5 in our own half.
Really? I won’t go that far.
It’s quite a good analysis. Much better than the garbage you see on the likes of SkySports or Talksport who would much rather talk about the penalty incident for 3hrs than offer any tactical insight.
Totally agree. There were so many times we did not track runners as well. Even AWB was guilty of this and even the Sancho played well offensively he was lazy a couple of times when we needed him to cover. We for sure lacked a sense of urgency. Varane was a rock thankfully.
I think ‘not up for it’ sounds right. ‘Lacklustre’ or ‘half-asleep’ sounds way off though. Rather, we forced things too often, losing the ball and inviting counters. When players are not up to speed (which I don’t think they were) in the first game of the season, at home, it is not motivation, ignition or will to put in effort that is lacking, I think that’s pretty obvious if you know humans. If anything, the players looked distraught and desperate towards the end. I think it’s pretty clear that their bodies couldn’t do what their minds were desperate to, which makes players look laboured, lumbering, imprecise and off pace.
We need a guy like Pierre Emile Højbjerg and he's for sale, rumors say. Him and Casemiro can block the midfield! :-)
I agree that Gary O’Neil is a very good coach, and 4-4-2 is not going to disappear. However, I’m willing to go out and a limb and bet that in three years time, the way United set up on Monday is going to be more usual and succesful than the way Wolves played. I disagree that the game was decided by the best tactics.
What we are crying out for is a centre mid that’s press resistant, able to evade the first line of press to get us out. What’s happened for the last decade is that we pass it around the back four- the ball gets played in to the centre mid and then played straight back to the defenders- we get stuck. We then either play a long ball or it goes out wide to the wingers. Someone like Caciedo would make a massive difference to this team!
Same here.
Fighting or lacklustre, only one of them can be right here. Few individuals did fight but the team as a whole were lacklustre and passive.
This is the kind of toxic positivity and denial of reality that has held us back in recent years. We were woeful just accept it.
Exactly this. All this talk about box midfield but we are yet to find a way to meaningfully play out from the back.
Casemiro really needed to stop fecking about up front and stick to his position. There was a lot of times where Bruno was our deepest midfielder.
There is no change how we play, we played similar last season and got away with it so many times. I was told by many posters on here it was the fixture pile up that caused it.
A new season, same United and I can again this season see 6-0 drubbings away at City / Liverpool, Arsenal as a possibility.
When you watch top teams that challenge for titles, they hardly allow teams like Wolves to get near their own penalty area. We played the whole game, either in possession or out of it in our half.
A new season, same United and I can again this season see 6-0 drubbings away at City / Liverpool, Arsenal as a possibility.
When you watch top teams that challenge for titles, they hardly allow teams like Wolves to get near their own penalty area. We played the whole game, either in possession or out of it in our half.
The game was on a platter for Wolves and they didn't take advantage. We had a few chances and converted one. So we won. Wolves were worse as they didn't score.
What I noticed, and have done so much before although a bit less last season... when we are in possession everything is so slow, no one is moving quickly for a pass, no fast 1-2's, no quick runners in behind, no sense of urgency at all.
Hopefully this just cobwebs that will clear out because most other teams would have battered us.
What I noticed, and have done so much before although a bit less last season... when we are in possession everything is so slow, no one is moving quickly for a pass, no fast 1-2's, no quick runners in behind, no sense of urgency at all.
Hopefully this just cobwebs that will clear out because most other teams would have battered us.
Hold on, where in my post did I say we played well? We played terrible, but that doesn't mean the players didn't try and it was a hard fought win. Wolves were far the better team but that doesn't mean the players didn't try hard, otherwise we wouldn't have won.
The reason the team played terrible, is mainly due to being rusty, lacking fitness, lacking preparation and being disorganised. We are not the first team to play poor in the first game, it sometimes takes teams a few games to get up and running.
Everyone in this thread just wants to have a knee jerk reaction and a moan, which is the common theme on this forum.
That's never been his game and is a waste of his talents, to accommodate Mason Mount?
Think the front 3 need to do better, it’s not just the midfield. Garnacho still has a way to go in his defensive duties despite being very exciting with his attacking play (not v wolves though) hoping for an improved performance on Saturday!
Wolves overloaded the midfield, and it worked. Direct runs two or three times through the middle, almost leading to goals. We were very very sloppy, gave the ball away alot, and some of our passing was very poor. The fact we came away with, as the Americans like to put it, the "W" , is a testament to how poor wolves were. We cannot have another game like that. A better team would have battered us. There is no need for any sort of deep analysis if you watched the match. Pretty obvious where we were awful.
The worst thing is our lack of movement. Nobody was creating runs.
The worst thing is our lack of movement. Nobody was creating runs.
Last edited:
I put it down to bring first match of the season, so I cut the team a bit of slack, the team is much better than they performed.
That superman midfielder would still need to receive the ball from players behind him who are willing and able to make a progressive pass to him. He would also need to pass the ball to players ahead of him able to receive the ball in other ways than just ahead of them and into space and, after doing that, not lose it or dither and kill any momentum. The midfield doesn't exist on its own. Keep searching for that elusive skeleton key that will magically unlock all doors and you will never find the solutions to anything.
But “awful” doesn’t really capture where the problems lay. Onana and the back line weren’t awful. In midfield we were not dominant, but we weren’t awful. Where awfulness, which appears to be an actual word, lay was on the front line. No need to beat a dead horse, but all of Garnacho, Rashford and Antony were worse than awful. Their energy was high, but their creativity and productivity were shocking.
How we address this is a topic for another thread, but if you want to understand why we were awful you need look no further than the front line…which, as it happens, was our albatross all last season.
How we address this is a topic for another thread, but if you want to understand why we were awful you need look no further than the front line…which, as it happens, was our albatross all last season.
This does a far better job in explaining the issues than the TIFO video did.
For me, I think people are being a bit harsh, as I also feel we didn't do enough in preseason to implement this system. We spent way too many games having variations between a 4231 and this new 433. In addition, Onana coming in seems to have changed our plan in terms of build up.
Our build up was an issue, but I think we were good for the most part last season in this area. I think the team hasn't adapted quickly enough which is why players were out of position. Luckily we won, so the issues can be identified and fixed without it bearing a cost.
Last edited:
I agree with you. I don't think as a whole the players were awful. I think tactically, they suffered to adapt to the shape we would like to have, due to the additions and recent change in shape.
Where we were actually poor was in attack. That had nothing to do with shape. They had the space and time to attack and couldn't make correct decisions time and time again. Our weakest performers on Monday were Garnacho and Casemiro. Casemiro was isolated at times, but his work in the build up, his positioning, and his attempts to move further up the pitch were poor. Garnacho destroyed our attacks over and over again. However due to both being favoured members of our team, noone wants to criticize them individually and would rather blame Mount or the team as a whole.
This video is so much better than the TIFO one, which seemed to focus on the first 15 minutes, extrapolating from there. This video also seemed to understand what went wrong much better, and therefore offer alternatives and remedies, whereas the TIFO one didn't get that deep.
Toxic positivity? Is that an actual thing?
Too simplistic talking about tactics only - whilst the setup wasnt right the player performances were dire.
When you give the ball away 81 times you are going to struggle.
Question I have is why in the name of Cantona did Ten Hag not change our midfield setup halfway through that first half, or at halftime
I know Shaw started playing as a orthodox full back rather than inverted but why not have Bruno or Mount drop back to add protection/control or change things.
Still questions about Ten Hag's in game management
Spurs and Maddison in particular looked good at weekend. We need to solve these problems rather than hope to survive them
When you give the ball away 81 times you are going to struggle.
Question I have is why in the name of Cantona did Ten Hag not change our midfield setup halfway through that first half, or at halftime
I know Shaw started playing as a orthodox full back rather than inverted but why not have Bruno or Mount drop back to add protection/control or change things.
Still questions about Ten Hag's in game management
Spurs and Maddison in particular looked good at weekend. We need to solve these problems rather than hope to survive them
It's what the negative Nellies like to use to make it sound like being a miserable defeatist is a more noble way to carry on
That Wolves had so many transition moments, it came down to the idea of winning the ball deep in their half, more than once we tried with multiple United players and some how instead of winning the ball or at least just fouling in of not winning the ball, we let the player get passed and when that happened, there was wide open green space all around for them to run into.
On the attacking side, it seemed like we didn't know. how to adapt to the Wolves press/setup. Allowed for Onana and the defenders to have the ball but, there no attempts to play the ball over the top or seemed to have few options or movement in midfield and just beyond midfield.
From watching on TV it was hard to tell if there was any space behind when our defenders/keeper had the ball because the TV shot was close in on that side. Same for what kind of movement the attacking players were making for them to get on the ball. When it went out wide, both Garnacho and Antony were lacking in decision making. Garnacho for his part tried to do what has worked so well so far in being able to take on his marker one on one but, Semedo shut him down. Antony still lacks consistency in creating dangerous moments/passes.
Rashford as CF doesn't work unless he has room to run in behind, seemed like we didn't even try play balls into him to hold up and bring others in. Bruno and Mount were being completely marked out and I think there should have been an effort to have them both look to come deep instead and at least bring their markers up, that way there might have been space for our 3 attackers in between and forced their CBs to come up and then have the space in behind.
On the attacking side, it seemed like we didn't know. how to adapt to the Wolves press/setup. Allowed for Onana and the defenders to have the ball but, there no attempts to play the ball over the top or seemed to have few options or movement in midfield and just beyond midfield.
From watching on TV it was hard to tell if there was any space behind when our defenders/keeper had the ball because the TV shot was close in on that side. Same for what kind of movement the attacking players were making for them to get on the ball. When it went out wide, both Garnacho and Antony were lacking in decision making. Garnacho for his part tried to do what has worked so well so far in being able to take on his marker one on one but, Semedo shut him down. Antony still lacks consistency in creating dangerous moments/passes.
Rashford as CF doesn't work unless he has room to run in behind, seemed like we didn't even try play balls into him to hold up and bring others in. Bruno and Mount were being completely marked out and I think there should have been an effort to have them both look to come deep instead and at least bring their markers up, that way there might have been space for our 3 attackers in between and forced their CBs to come up and then have the space in behind.
It's fecking nonsense or is it going over my head?It's what the negative Nellies like to use to make it sound like being a miserable defeatist is a more noble way to carry on
I agree to an extent. I think fans see other teams and managers and forget that tactics and progress are week to week and aren't automatic like football manager. Our players can take time to adapt to even the slightest tweaks. Our manager can make mistakes based on systems he has tried before. The premier league might also present different issues to past systems that may require tweaking. Progress and tactical success aren't linear. Ten Haag can make an error tactically, that doesn't mean he's a bad manager.
What we saw on monday was a result of players not adapting or being able to succeed in the new build up phase. We saw Shaw and Casemiro struggling to get into midfield positions to provide options. We saw our Martinez spring forward and leave our defence exposed due to the width seperating our back 3. We saw Mount and Bruno struggle to provide support deeper. We saw Varane struggle to find options in possession. All of these issues seemed operational, not due to a lack of ability, but rather due to not fully getting into position or shape in time. That can happen in a new system. If we continue to struggle to adapt, ETH will make a move, potentially dropping either Mount or Bruno deeper.
Is TIFO a new queue? I was only aware of FIFO and LIFO
Definitely, that gaping hole in the midfield separating our attack and defence was clear. I'm hoping its just teething issues with the change in tactics as I'd be very surprised if Erik isn't aware of it
It's true that we looked undercooked, which in itself is a concern now that the season has started. This is the manager's responsibility. Now, i won't say that people should not have concerns about the shape of the midfield, but it's wrong to discuss the midfield in isolation. There are players behind them and there are players ahead of them. Then there's also what we try to achieve on the pitch as a team.
I chuckled a bit at Statman Dave's video when i saw that his grand solution was to drop Bruno (or Mount) deeper and get AWB to receive the ball between the lines. Because... you know, he has the first touch and the play-making ability to be a facilitator in those areas. If only life in general was that simple.
This doesn't mean that the cries for a more typical #8 next to Casemiro are baseless. But what does that mean when it comes to the attacking shape? Shaw will have to keep the width on the left and initiate plays in the attacking half. He's adequate for the job, but he is neither a play-maker nor an enforcer in those areas. And that's not the biggest issue. We are basically losing his greatest asset, his ball carrying abilities in the build-up. It also means that Rashford will have to play a bit more centrally in the left half-space. Again, it's not where he wants to receive the ball. He wants to run with the ball into those areas, but he prefers to get the ball out wide. You solve one problem and you create others further up the pitch.
Then there's the other issue. United don't have that Hazard-type player to do a Conte, aka keep the low block and use the sides to move the ball forward and create as many isolation plays as you can. Whoever plays on the wings needs a lot of help. Which is the basic idea behind Mount and Bruno. It's very risky and may backfire on ETH badly, but it's still an idea to play football on the front foot. Have a look at the goal we scored: We get nothing out of the corner, but we don't fall back. Our deepest players are Bruno and Eriksen (with AWB). Lose the second ball and Wolves have an open field to run into. We press correctly and they hoof the ball. Eriksen wins the second ball, but we lose possession. Casemiro and Varane press together and win it back. They both stay in the box and Bruno/AWB have read the potential overload with Eriksen and Antony on the right. Why am i saying this? When you play a high line and you commit players forward, there's not a midfielder that can save you, if you don't operate as a unit off the ball. Caicedo/Gundogan/Modric would have been just another player frantically running back.
There were problems with the shape, but they go beyond what most people choose to focus on. There's a lot of "i'll do my thing and let the rest adjust to how i want to play" going on. For a long time. But that's not a discussion for this thread.
I see what you are saying. I saw that too, a bit of individualism. I will say though that I didn't see much of that after the first few weeks of last season.
I do also agree with you on our attacking. The difference is that I think as a team we are not yet used to attacking and pressing as high as we tried to do against Wolves. We didn't have enough games or use the same attacks or shapes in preseason. We also played against Arsenal, Real Madrid and Dortmund, so we didn't actually have games where we played teams seeking to combat our attacks with defensive shapes. The Leeds game came really early and the Lens game was pretty disjointed. What was quite obvious was that the defence were overthinking things, both on the ball and off the ball. Spaces were too wide, movements were too slow and passing was too hesitant. I wouldn't even call it a management issue, it's a change in shape that we haven't had time to adapt to. Our keeper who is paramount to this, came later in the window. So it makes sense. I think we will adapt to this over the next few weeks, our fans just need to be patient and see how it works.
https://x.com/hemmenkees/status/1691855645325099221?s=46&t=3cSPEXx54yOkvLX_Hq8XPw
https://x.com/hemmenkees/status/1691840974979289556?s=46&t=3cSPEXx54yOkvLX_Hq8XPw
We were good without the ball in the first half and really should have created far more from our pressing.
https://x.com/hemmenkees/status/1691840974979289556?s=46&t=3cSPEXx54yOkvLX_Hq8XPw
We were good without the ball in the first half and really should have created far more from our pressing.
Last edited: