Why so many knee-jerk reactions and negativity 7 games in?

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

I like your post, quite a lot, but you jump to a few conclusions that are quite the overreach I would say.

First of all, of course an objective system will always work better than a free flowing one, it's been proven over and over again in the last 10 to 20 years.
.....

In the last 10 years a free flowing none regimented system similar to Fergie's secured a 3 peat champions league run for Zidane. A thing no regimented system has done since the 70s.......

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

One could argue that the game hasn't evolved at all and sadly don't have the ability to respond more today after this post but lets look at the rudimentary elements of each of the big clubs in England and former counterparts in European Football.

Guardiola - Pep was a defensive midfielder who played under Cruyff at Barcelona, he won the Champions League and the Spanish League Titles getting 263 apperances in Barcelona's first team during that time. Cruyff believed in total football, today he would be considered an objective system manager who's belief in the "cog" system of footballers fluidly adapting into and from one role to another would cause nightmares with the current city team. Guardiola himself has taken that style of total football to what many would consider it's natural progressive end (certainly in the modern game) and enjoys the same such success as his former manager. Is Pep's style so drastically different from that of 1992 that it cannot be beaten? No, in fact those of you old enough to remember 1991 properly will know how easily contained by the right players it could be. Yet Barcelona were in this period considered one of the finest teams in world football, indeed when Pep took over at the Nou Camp and re-encouraged the age old total football style with Messi, Iniesta and Xavi they went on to win everything they could once more. Like it or not, we tried to bring some of that same total football style to Manchester United under van Gaal. You might say to yourself that van Gaal is old and past it but in truth he isn't, he was given a side that didn't understand how to play total football, tried to teach them and massively failed because the fans were up in arms long before total football could be achieved. Given Louis van Gaal couldn't bring total football to Manchester United in the past 10 years, I think it's safe to say that with the current crop of players we're unlikely to find a total football style manager who does well at the club. I could be wrong, but I don't think that I am.

Klopp - Jurgen Klopp was never a great footballer, he himself says so, quoted as saying "I had fourth-division feet and a first-division head", his masters thesis was indeed vaunted by Liverpool fans for the ending "You'll never walk alone", yet lets take this professional walker, defender and striker into the footballing world. His style is reminiscent of Paisley. defensive in shape, well ordered passes with players who are granted limited but clear directions. It is unsurprising that the Liverpool faithful took to the manager who has rightly or wrongly, placed the ability to win at the foremost and style of play takes a back seat. Unsurprisingly Liverpools last great managers all did the same, Shankley, Dalglish and a Fat Spanish Waiter all of whom took the same interesting tactical choices. Argue all you like but I'd say that Beardsley, Barnes, Owen, Fowler, Hypia, Gerrard, McMannaman and plenty of others would slide into this Liverpool side quite easily, their style and their formation would suit those players much in the same way as it does todays Salah, Mane or Firmino. This defensively astute, uncompromising style of hit them on the break has been employed throughout the years and has always been found out eventually. Liverpool indeed are still overly reliant on their strong defensive backline with van Dijk to actually perform well, otherwise as we saw last year, chaos ensues. We tried this with Moyes and it went terribly wrong, most certainly we could operate this way more successfully now however with Maguire and Varane but the fans would quickly turn on any manager who tried to play the "Liverpool" way at Manchester United.

Tuchel - Another nothing of a player here, yet Tuchel takes inspiration from two teams that will probably surprise. Tuchel was a defender, thus it shouldn't be a surprise that his biggest and best achievements in the game come directly from defensive excellence. Unsurprisingly Tuchel takes massive reference from Mourinho, those who remember the Portuguese man in his original Chelsea stint will know that aside from slow, boring, park the bus football, Mourinho was a man who came with files. Tuchel is the same, at least for me. His dull insipid football empties the joy from the room, stifling professionals with drone like methodical passing until finally a mistake is made and his team are able to capitalise. Unsurprisingly with better players, these mistakes are pounced upon quicker and with a big bullish forward at the top, goals are scored. We can see the transition from Mourinho to Tuchel in their choices of first team players, For Kante we can change to Essien, Makelele or before Mourinho we can look to Ranieri with Desailly, For Christiensen we have Terry or Carvalho, must I remind everyone of Babayaro? We can even see it in their attacking players, Guðjohnsen, Drogba, Lukaku, Lampard, Zola, Cole. Guess as usual it depends on style, but for Chelsea this is how they have played for almost 30 years now with very few other changes working out well in the long term for them. Again we tried this, we brought in Mourinho to do it for christ sake. We as fans hated the football. our players didn't respond to the training well and despite what many fans say now... we wanted him gone firstly because it was dull. Yes he caused chaos elsewhere but we knew that going in, the football wasn't right for us though and bringing in a modern version of the same doesn't change that.


Edit:

Can I just point out, I didn't say that Sir Alex didn't have a style of play. I said his style of play was well established as a counter attacking team that looked to a composite midfield of a defensive minded midfielder (usually someone more willing to get stuck in) and a more sprightly youthful attacking midfielder who could link with wingers and his strikers. He evolved from a 4-4-2 into a 4-3-2-1 and opened fluid dynamic football where he could and had the individual players to do so. It is unsurprising that in his biggest games he was called dull by many opposition fans who accused Sir Alex of removing the ability of teams to play "good" football by inserting a "bully" to break up their more dimensional football. Yet to suggest he micro managed his footballers was, is and always has been a lie. Clearly there are those who read what I wrote and thought, okay he's just defending Ole, but as I said in a follow up. I don't care. Ferguson attempted to play fast counter attacking football at its core and whilst I think Ole is trying to achieve the same, I'd accept that he isn't totally there yet. Neither was Ferguson when he first arrived in 86 and it took him until 91 to start showing what he could do. For the first time since his departure we are starting to see the same elements of player choices as Sir Alex made consistently. We aren't there yet and I realise that for most fans time is of the essence, but for me it isn't. I'm not going anywhere and I'm sure as hell that the club isn't either. I can wait. So when I think back and remember Kinky, McClair, Robson and Sharpe and look to the start of what we have today, I'm not that worried. Maybe I should be, but I'm not.

These are similar to my sentiments are well

 

[jamesjimmybyrondean]

I'd use them as a standard if United had been as stable and as equipped as their clubs are personnel wise and it was just our manager's ability holding us back all these 7 post Fergie years.

I can respect that view. I just don't agree and here is why:

In my view we have not been able to mount ANY sort of threatening title challenge because we lacked the equipment and singular direction for these 7 post Fergie years. Hence unlike most people, even though I have no love for Mourinho I agreed with his sentiment that finishing second to that record setting City with what we had, and what our other top 4 rivals had, was his biggest coaching achievement. Just like last season. In my view we finished in 2nd with fourth place personnel.

Yet right no we almost have a team that can actually make a threatening challenge. But our spine is currently still setting
. De gea is back from the cold, Varane is getting used to eiterh Magurie/Lindeloff, Mctominay/Fred have to get used to operating as a sole defensive pivot with Pogba or DVB, (now that Rashford is back). Not to mention CR7 is our new lead center forward. Even the player we bought to solve our low block issue Sancho, hasn't had the chance to bed into his true role yet. That is why I'm not as pessimistic as some are with ours tarts. Especially because we are 2 points off top spot and now are facing teams that are not low block teams. Which suits our current state far more

The question I asked was if you think the quality of our style of play is up to the standards of Klopp and Pep. If i understand correctly you're saying Ole has never had the players to implement a style of play up to the standard of Pep or Klopp and now that he does, we need the players to gel before we can see it? What gives you the impression that we will see a style of play that's up to the quality of Pep and Klopp when the players we got adapt?

 

[Bebestation]

I've said this before but I'll say it again, some people, many people on this forum and across our fan base want United to play with an objective system. They want player X to pass to player Y in a certain situation, to move from place A to place B when given the ball whilst player Z moves to another location waiting for the ball to be given by player Y who only has player Z in his mind. There is room in these forms of systems for some player expression, but that expression is for the most part muted for efficient play style. There are some really important things to remember with this concept though and the first most important of them being that in a system such as this, every player is simply a cog in a wheel, easily replaced for another system player who can come into the game and perform an exact role which compliments or shifts the behaviour of the other cogs on the field in a certain situation. Players know that at 1-0 down with a shift from player Y to player P their system has moved to either a more defensive or more offensive setup which informs them of the behaviours they are to employ in the oncoming phases of the game.

If this is the style of play that you're looking for then I'm unsurprised when there are those who call for the end of Ole's time at Manchester United, he doesn't coach this way and likely never will.

There is of course another system of play, in this form of system the players are given their starting roles and encouraged to remain in certain areas of the field, A left back for instance will be encouraged to either sit back and wait for the opponent to drive forwards before engaging with them and setting up a counter, or asked to drive up the field for width allowing the left winger, inverted winger, inside forward et al to cause problems in the middle of the pitch. In this system the behaviours of certain players are coached individually, each behaviour in set to allow for expression and as many have put it on the forum causes teams to look like they're waiting for individual brilliance to come up with something special.

During Sir Alex's time as a manager he employed the secondary system. Irwin and Neville were never instructed directly that they MUST give the ball to Giggs or Beckham respectively, instead they were encouraged to play to their strengths as players with the knowledge that each respective player on the pitch would do their bit to open space, drive the ball forwards, or simply score goals (Hughesm Berbatov and van Nistelrooj come to mind here). In truth. there were times during Sir Alex's career that fans and other coaches alike called this system archaic and demanded a modern adaptation of this game to a more formulated structure. These calls were mostly from those who enjoyed tiki taka football or Wenger's passing setup at Arsenal, yet it was never part of the makeup of a Manchester United side. We are, were and developed as a counter-attacking team with strong wingers and a central block that remained stoic throughout a 38 game season. There were good and bad games but the fans knew that through 38 games, quality would no doubt shine through and the team would be there or there abouts at the end of the season.

Sir Alex had issues with Guardiola, Wenger, Mourinho and plenty of others who played football in the more efficient first style, he in time developed certain counter measures for each team or would come to reflect on decisions he could have made instead. Mourinho at Chelsea saw the emergence of Darren Fletcher as the most prominent midfielder to counter balance Essien, whilst Evra and Brown were considered regularly as wingbacks to stretch his team against Terry and Carvalho or negate Ashley Cole who bombed through much of Europe at the time. With Wenger in the early years the force of Keane was used in the centre of the park to create issues between a Vieira and Petit centre line that sat back to spread the ball to Parlour and leave Wright with no options further forward. In fact, Keane became such an important part of this game every year that it would lead to much of the player base elevating Keane to legendary status. When Arsenal moved to Fabregas later in Wengers time, Keane who had got older and no longer had the legs, was still employed in many Arsenal games this time to shadow and bully Fabregas who was the essential pivot. Keane's simple elegance in these games was his ability to remove a central part of the system team's development through the pitch. Isolation of these players would often leave the team devoid of answers, make them (certainly arsenal) look bulliable and mean that Ferguson's trust in his players core abilities would often pay dividends as they carved out wins despite the odd hick up. To further this point on Arsenal, when Carrick signed, the majority of fans didn't want the signing because our midfield was going to be forced to play into these teams more often, gifting them the ball and hitting them on the counter in new ways as we no longer had the central piece of the puzzle we had relied upon for 10 years. As for Guardiola, Ferguson is noted as saying his regret here is still not using Park, in fact Ferguson believes that the use of Park against Messi would have done exactly the same thing as we had seen Keane do against Fabregas years earlier. Messi might be a skillful player, one that looks like the ball is glued to his feet, yet if Park had been employed effectively, the pivot would have been broken up and allowed for United to counter more effectively have neutralised their biggest threat. Whilst many of us (myself included) may disagree that Messi was the only problem on that field, it is no doubt comforting that Sir Alex believed it to be our biggest issue.

There is nothing wrong with either system, in fact both systems have through out time been shown to be effective in different leagues and with different managers but both styles have their place. Ole grew up at Manchester United and watched Sir Alex adopting these tactics and gaining results for a long time, despite the more methodical systems around him. It isn't unreasonable to believe that his style and concept of football management was grown from this and certainly when watching the game on a Saturday I personally see more of the second type of football on show than the first and I for one don't have issues with that, even if it means that sometimes we lose games where we should win.

We have no divine right to win the league, we are a football club that has been managed by a plethora of talented managers who play system football, be they the Doc, Atkinson, van Gaal or Mourinho none stuck. They didn't fit with the club, they didn't fit with the fans and they don't fit with our brand. Ole might not win the league, hell we might spend the next 10 years fighting for 2nd place but I very much doubt it. Yes we have issues playing against a low block formation, for many this is because we have yet to find the player who can be our Carrick, Scholes, Ince or Keane... hell even a Fletcher might do it. Yet there are those who complain that we still aren't a system team, we don't have the chess like proficiency of City, Liverpool or Chelsea and they wonder if we ever will. I don't think it's needed, nor do I think it's wanted by many of us. We want to see individual players come out and make things happen, we want the thrill of Ronaldo, Giggs, Kanchelskis bombing down the wings making things happen and we don't want to give up on a manager that wants that too just because results don't always favour us. The replacement of Fred in particular will be a massive change for United today, personally I think a partnership of Rice and McTomminay would do exactly what we want and need in this way and will be slightly upset if as seems likely, we don't get him.

The knee jerk isn't knee jerk though, people are now completely divided on style lines having spent so much time being coached via the media that system play is the only viable solution and those managers who employ something else are archaic, old fashioned managers that cannot win. Strange how head to head though, each of those system teams are nullified on a regular by our team, it is instead those in the middle of the league which cause United so many problems. Someone needs to step up and thus far we have failed to either sign or create someone who has done just that in the centre of our midfield, it'll come, it always does. Until then, enjoy the wins and rue the losses but blaming our manager seems at least to me, silly.

Beautiful post.

I hope it makes some people itchy.

 

[imamuppet]

Pep took 1 season to change City and dominate

Klopp after 2/3 season got CL final, consistently playing good football.

You post that with no context

Carry on

 

[AndySmith1990]

I've said this before but I'll say it again, some people, many people on this forum and across our fan base want United to play with an objective system. They want player X to pass to player Y in a certain situation, to move from place A to place B when given the ball whilst player Z moves to another location waiting for the ball to be given by player Y who only has player Z in his mind. There is room in these forms of systems for some player expression, but that expression is for the most part muted for efficient play style. There are some really important things to remember with this concept though and the first most important of them being that in a system such as this, every player is simply a cog in a wheel, easily replaced for another system player who can come into the game and perform an exact role which compliments or shifts the behaviour of the other cogs on the field in a certain situation. Players know that at 1-0 down with a shift from player Y to player P their system has moved to either a more defensive or more offensive setup which informs them of the behaviours they are to employ in the oncoming phases of the game.

If this is the style of play that you're looking for then I'm unsurprised when there are those who call for the end of Ole's time at Manchester United, he doesn't coach this way and likely never will.

There is of course another system of play, in this form of system the players are given their starting roles and encouraged to remain in certain areas of the field, A left back for instance will be encouraged to either sit back and wait for the opponent to drive forwards before engaging with them and setting up a counter, or asked to drive up the field for width allowing the left winger, inverted winger, inside forward et al to cause problems in the middle of the pitch. In this system the behaviours of certain players are coached individually, each behaviour in set to allow for expression and as many have put it on the forum causes teams to look like they're waiting for individual brilliance to come up with something special.

During Sir Alex's time as a manager he employed the secondary system. Irwin and Neville were never instructed directly that they MUST give the ball to Giggs or Beckham respectively, instead they were encouraged to play to their strengths as players with the knowledge that each respective player on the pitch would do their bit to open space, drive the ball forwards, or simply score goals (Hughesm Berbatov and van Nistelrooj come to mind here). In truth. there were times during Sir Alex's career that fans and other coaches alike called this system archaic and demanded a modern adaptation of this game to a more formulated structure. These calls were mostly from those who enjoyed tiki taka football or Wenger's passing setup at Arsenal, yet it was never part of the makeup of a Manchester United side. We are, were and developed as a counter-attacking team with strong wingers and a central block that remained stoic throughout a 38 game season. There were good and bad games but the fans knew that through 38 games, quality would no doubt shine through and the team would be there or there abouts at the end of the season.

Sir Alex had issues with Guardiola, Wenger, Mourinho and plenty of others who played football in the more efficient first style, he in time developed certain counter measures for each team or would come to reflect on decisions he could have made instead. Mourinho at Chelsea saw the emergence of Darren Fletcher as the most prominent midfielder to counter balance Essien, whilst Evra and Brown were considered regularly as wingbacks to stretch his team against Terry and Carvalho or negate Ashley Cole who bombed through much of Europe at the time. With Wenger in the early years the force of Keane was used in the centre of the park to create issues between a Vieira and Petit centre line that sat back to spread the ball to Parlour and leave Wright with no options further forward. In fact, Keane became such an important part of this game every year that it would lead to much of the player base elevating Keane to legendary status. When Arsenal moved to Fabregas later in Wengers time, Keane who had got older and no longer had the legs, was still employed in many Arsenal games this time to shadow and bully Fabregas who was the essential pivot. Keane's simple elegance in these games was his ability to remove a central part of the system team's development through the pitch. Isolation of these players would often leave the team devoid of answers, make them (certainly arsenal) look bulliable and mean that Ferguson's trust in his players core abilities would often pay dividends as they carved out wins despite the odd hick up. To further this point on Arsenal, when Carrick signed, the majority of fans didn't want the signing because our midfield was going to be forced to play into these teams more often, gifting them the ball and hitting them on the counter in new ways as we no longer had the central piece of the puzzle we had relied upon for 10 years. As for Guardiola, Ferguson is noted as saying his regret here is still not using Park, in fact Ferguson believes that the use of Park against Messi would have done exactly the same thing as we had seen Keane do against Fabregas years earlier. Messi might be a skillful player, one that looks like the ball is glued to his feet, yet if Park had been employed effectively, the pivot would have been broken up and allowed for United to counter more effectively have neutralised their biggest threat. Whilst many of us (myself included) may disagree that Messi was the only problem on that field, it is no doubt comforting that Sir Alex believed it to be our biggest issue.

There is nothing wrong with either system, in fact both systems have through out time been shown to be effective in different leagues and with different managers but both styles have their place. Ole grew up at Manchester United and watched Sir Alex adopting these tactics and gaining results for a long time, despite the more methodical systems around him. It isn't unreasonable to believe that his style and concept of football management was grown from this and certainly when watching the game on a Saturday I personally see more of the second type of football on show than the first and I for one don't have issues with that, even if it means that sometimes we lose games where we should win.

We have no divine right to win the league, we are a football club that has been managed by a plethora of talented managers who play system football, be they the Doc, Atkinson, van Gaal or Mourinho none stuck. They didn't fit with the club, they didn't fit with the fans and they don't fit with our brand. Ole might not win the league, hell we might spend the next 10 years fighting for 2nd place but I very much doubt it. Yes we have issues playing against a low block formation, for many this is because we have yet to find the player who can be our Carrick, Scholes, Ince or Keane... hell even a Fletcher might do it. Yet there are those who complain that we still aren't a system team, we don't have the chess like proficiency of City, Liverpool or Chelsea and they wonder if we ever will. I don't think it's needed, nor do I think it's wanted by many of us. We want to see individual players come out and make things happen, we want the thrill of Ronaldo, Giggs, Kanchelskis bombing down the wings making things happen and we don't want to give up on a manager that wants that too just because results don't always favour us. The replacement of Fred in particular will be a massive change for United today, personally I think a partnership of Rice and McTomminay would do exactly what we want and need in this way and will be slightly upset if as seems likely, we don't get him.

The knee jerk isn't knee jerk though, people are now completely divided on style lines having spent so much time being coached via the media that system play is the only viable solution and those managers who employ something else are archaic, old fashioned managers that cannot win. Strange how head to head though, each of those system teams are nullified on a regular by our team, it is instead those in the middle of the league which cause United so many problems. Someone needs to step up and thus far we have failed to either sign or create someone who has done just that in the centre of our midfield, it'll come, it always does. Until then, enjoy the wins and rue the losses but blaming our manager seems at least to me, silly.

That's all well and good, however in the end you're basically laying the blame of our poor performances at the feet of our midfield. We made three big money signings during the summer, therefore if midfield is as much of a gkaring weakness as you (and others) make out, it should have been identified by the manager and prioritised.

I remain skeptical as to how much it would actually have improved us though. We were crying out for a defender, and after buying one of the best around we still leak goals. We were crying out for a right winger. We buy one who is highly rated and we still struggle to create.

For me the issues go beyond midfield and there's a clear weakness in the tactical and coaching side. That's nothing to do with being "coached via the media" but is there for all to see when watching our matches.

 

[Flytan]

Drivel is drivel. My opinions don't have to be gospel truth for me to call out drivel for what it is. A moon can never be a sun

Just because YOU can't see one, Doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Youa re not the seeing standard of the universe


Most of the world thought there earth was flat too at some point. They were also wrong


You guys bend over back wards to give him no credit. Lie repeatedly that he has made zero progress since he took over. On top of repeating the easily debunk-able myth that he is tactically clueless and has no plan and supposedly is responsible for United still being unable to challenge since Fergie lett . On top of calling anyone that challenges your blatant hypocrisy and lack of an actual plan beyond your inane desire to just want him gone as 'ole inners". Or worse people who lack standard as opposed to your majestic ones.

Id that doesn't count as hate.Then I should just call it a special brand of insanity....


There it is again., Insisting on giving Ole no credit
Varane explains how Solskjaer convinced him to join Manchester United


how is this actually a serious statement to make? Plus over the top disrespect for the man? Have you seen ANYONE argue that players would riot when Solksjaer was to leave if he fail to achieve this season?
Furterh still., why would ANY player not want to give a new manager a chance? Unless it was you or I picked form the street to become head coach?

You really think a lot of yourself. I'm sorry but essentially everything you're saying is just delusion based on some romantic notion that United need "one of their own in charge". If Ole was anyone but Ole people like you wouldn't waste their breath trying to create poetry or whatever you're trying to do to defend his mediocrity.

I bend over backwards to give him no credit? I gave him plenty of credit when he came in after Mourinho's toxicity. But he should have left at the end of the season. The very reason he was brought it according to reporters was "to bring a smile to the fans" after a period of toxicity. He did that great. But the romantic notion of appointing him manager before the end of the season probably cost us titles. Point is the owners have invested far too much into this squad and the club pays way too much money to mediocre players (some of which he insists to keep at the club for no reason) to not see trophies. Of course it could get worse. Ole is the perfect mediocre manager. He smiles and nods and says everything right and the squad is too good to finish worse than 4th. Problem with that is, you need a manager to get more out of a squad than the sum of its' parts and despite spending more money than all of our recent managers there's no sign of winning a trophy anywhere near. In fact I'd say we've actually fallen further behind other clubs despite the massive investment because the board and fans such as yourself are too cowardly to admit Ole won't get us anywhere.

So yes keep multi-quoting and spewing out nice quotes, we'll never win anything with him in charge and fans like you who continue to support him despite the obvious flaws identified by nearly everyone in world football will keep setting this club further behind.

And yes, you quote a United interview. What do you expect him to say other than he wants to play for the manager? Maybe he did, but do you really think any player in world football sees Pep, Klopp, Zidane, and Conte and goes "yeah let me play for the guy who got Cardiff relegated". They don't. It's just nice sentiment that is exaggerated in every interview when a player joins. Sancho did it. Ronaldo did it. Varane did it.

Also I'm not sure how I'm being a hypocrite even though you keep calling me one. I've thought he was mediocre since the end of his interim season and have said many other managers would have a better chance of winning trophies here. The only thing I said about him keeping his job is that he's done enough in the eyes of the current board to keep it, not in my eyes. Also let's just glance over the whole fanbase being okay with the nepotism when it comes to this club. If anyone is a hypocrite it's people like you who hold Ole to lower standards just because he used to play here.

 

[imamuppet]

I've said this before but I'll say it again, some people, many people on this forum and across our fan base want United to play with an objective system. They want player X to pass to player Y in a certain situation, to move from place A to place B when given the ball whilst player Z moves to another location waiting for the ball to be given by player Y who only has player Z in his mind. There is room in these forms of systems for some player expression, but that expression is for the most part muted for efficient play style. There are some really important things to remember with this concept though and the first most important of them being that in a system such as this, every player is simply a cog in a wheel, easily replaced for another system player who can come into the game and perform an exact role which compliments or shifts the behaviour of the other cogs on the field in a certain situation. Players know that at 1-0 down with a shift from player Y to player P their system has moved to either a more defensive or more offensive setup which informs them of the behaviours they are to employ in the oncoming phases of the game.

If this is the style of play that you're looking for then I'm unsurprised when there are those who call for the end of Ole's time at Manchester United, he doesn't coach this way and likely never will.

There is of course another system of play, in this form of system the players are given their starting roles and encouraged to remain in certain areas of the field, A left back for instance will be encouraged to either sit back and wait for the opponent to drive forwards before engaging with them and setting up a counter, or asked to drive up the field for width allowing the left winger, inverted winger, inside forward et al to cause problems in the middle of the pitch. In this system the behaviours of certain players are coached individually, each behaviour in set to allow for expression and as many have put it on the forum causes teams to look like they're waiting for individual brilliance to come up with something special.

During Sir Alex's time as a manager he employed the secondary system. Irwin and Neville were never instructed directly that they MUST give the ball to Giggs or Beckham respectively, instead they were encouraged to play to their strengths as players with the knowledge that each respective player on the pitch would do their bit to open space, drive the ball forwards, or simply score goals (Hughesm Berbatov and van Nistelrooj come to mind here). In truth. there were times during Sir Alex's career that fans and other coaches alike called this system archaic and demanded a modern adaptation of this game to a more formulated structure. These calls were mostly from those who enjoyed tiki taka football or Wenger's passing setup at Arsenal, yet it was never part of the makeup of a Manchester United side. We are, were and developed as a counter-attacking team with strong wingers and a central block that remained stoic throughout a 38 game season. There were good and bad games but the fans knew that through 38 games, quality would no doubt shine through and the team would be there or there abouts at the end of the season.

Sir Alex had issues with Guardiola, Wenger, Mourinho and plenty of others who played football in the more efficient first style, he in time developed certain counter measures for each team or would come to reflect on decisions he could have made instead. Mourinho at Chelsea saw the emergence of Darren Fletcher as the most prominent midfielder to counter balance Essien, whilst Evra and Brown were considered regularly as wingbacks to stretch his team against Terry and Carvalho or negate Ashley Cole who bombed through much of Europe at the time. With Wenger in the early years the force of Keane was used in the centre of the park to create issues between a Vieira and Petit centre line that sat back to spread the ball to Parlour and leave Wright with no options further forward. In fact, Keane became such an important part of this game every year that it would lead to much of the player base elevating Keane to legendary status. When Arsenal moved to Fabregas later in Wengers time, Keane who had got older and no longer had the legs, was still employed in many Arsenal games this time to shadow and bully Fabregas who was the essential pivot. Keane's simple elegance in these games was his ability to remove a central part of the system team's development through the pitch. Isolation of these players would often leave the team devoid of answers, make them (certainly arsenal) look bulliable and mean that Ferguson's trust in his players core abilities would often pay dividends as they carved out wins despite the odd hick up. To further this point on Arsenal, when Carrick signed, the majority of fans didn't want the signing because our midfield was going to be forced to play into these teams more often, gifting them the ball and hitting them on the counter in new ways as we no longer had the central piece of the puzzle we had relied upon for 10 years. As for Guardiola, Ferguson is noted as saying his regret here is still not using Park, in fact Ferguson believes that the use of Park against Messi would have done exactly the same thing as we had seen Keane do against Fabregas years earlier. Messi might be a skillful player, one that looks like the ball is glued to his feet, yet if Park had been employed effectively, the pivot would have been broken up and allowed for United to counter more effectively have neutralised their biggest threat. Whilst many of us (myself included) may disagree that Messi was the only problem on that field, it is no doubt comforting that Sir Alex believed it to be our biggest issue.

There is nothing wrong with either system, in fact both systems have through out time been shown to be effective in different leagues and with different managers but both styles have their place. Ole grew up at Manchester United and watched Sir Alex adopting these tactics and gaining results for a long time, despite the more methodical systems around him. It isn't unreasonable to believe that his style and concept of football management was grown from this and certainly when watching the game on a Saturday I personally see more of the second type of football on show than the first and I for one don't have issues with that, even if it means that sometimes we lose games where we should win.

We have no divine right to win the league, we are a football club that has been managed by a plethora of talented managers who play system football, be they the Doc, Atkinson, van Gaal or Mourinho none stuck. They didn't fit with the club, they didn't fit with the fans and they don't fit with our brand. Ole might not win the league, hell we might spend the next 10 years fighting for 2nd place but I very much doubt it. Yes we have issues playing against a low block formation, for many this is because we have yet to find the player who can be our Carrick, Scholes, Ince or Keane... hell even a Fletcher might do it. Yet there are those who complain that we still aren't a system team, we don't have the chess like proficiency of City, Liverpool or Chelsea and they wonder if we ever will. I don't think it's needed, nor do I think it's wanted by many of us. We want to see individual players come out and make things happen, we want the thrill of Ronaldo, Giggs, Kanchelskis bombing down the wings making things happen and we don't want to give up on a manager that wants that too just because results don't always favour us. The replacement of Fred in particular will be a massive change for United today, personally I think a partnership of Rice and McTomminay would do exactly what we want and need in this way and will be slightly upset if as seems likely, we don't get him.

The knee jerk isn't knee jerk though, people are now completely divided on style lines having spent so much time being coached via the media that system play is the only viable solution and those managers who employ something else are archaic, old fashioned managers that cannot win. Strange how head to head though, each of those system teams are nullified on a regular by our team, it is instead those in the middle of the league which cause United so many problems. Someone needs to step up and thus far we have failed to either sign or create someone who has done just that in the centre of our midfield, it'll come, it always does. Until then, enjoy the wins and rue the losses but blaming our manager seems at least to me, silly.

Please just promote this person

He understands what is to be Manchester United.

Beautiful post.

I hope it makes some people itchy.

I think it already has

 

[fps]

Lots of sad people living vicariously. Nothing more than that.

 

[Ali Dia]

I've said this before but I'll say it again, some people, many people on this forum and across our fan base want United to play with an objective system. They want player X to pass to player Y in a certain situation, to move from place A to place B when given the ball whilst player Z moves to another location waiting for the ball to be given by player Y who only has player Z in his mind. There is room in these forms of systems for some player expression, but that expression is for the most part muted for efficient play style. There are some really important things to remember with this concept though and the first most important of them being that in a system such as this, every player is simply a cog in a wheel, easily replaced for another system player who can come into the game and perform an exact role which compliments or shifts the behaviour of the other cogs on the field in a certain situation. Players know that at 1-0 down with a shift from player Y to player P their system has moved to either a more defensive or more offensive setup which informs them of the behaviours they are to employ in the oncoming phases of the game.

If this is the style of play that you're looking for then I'm unsurprised when there are those who call for the end of Ole's time at Manchester United, he doesn't coach this way and likely never will.

There is of course another system of play, in this form of system the players are given their starting roles and encouraged to remain in certain areas of the field, A left back for instance will be encouraged to either sit back and wait for the opponent to drive forwards before engaging with them and setting up a counter, or asked to drive up the field for width allowing the left winger, inverted winger, inside forward et al to cause problems in the middle of the pitch. In this system the behaviours of certain players are coached individually, each behaviour in set to allow for expression and as many have put it on the forum causes teams to look like they're waiting for individual brilliance to come up with something special.

During Sir Alex's time as a manager he employed the secondary system. Irwin and Neville were never instructed directly that they MUST give the ball to Giggs or Beckham respectively, instead they were encouraged to play to their strengths as players with the knowledge that each respective player on the pitch would do their bit to open space, drive the ball forwards, or simply score goals (Hughesm Berbatov and van Nistelrooj come to mind here). In truth. there were times during Sir Alex's career that fans and other coaches alike called this system archaic and demanded a modern adaptation of this game to a more formulated structure. These calls were mostly from those who enjoyed tiki taka football or Wenger's passing setup at Arsenal, yet it was never part of the makeup of a Manchester United side. We are, were and developed as a counter-attacking team with strong wingers and a central block that remained stoic throughout a 38 game season. There were good and bad games but the fans knew that through 38 games, quality would no doubt shine through and the team would be there or there abouts at the end of the season.

Sir Alex had issues with Guardiola, Wenger, Mourinho and plenty of others who played football in the more efficient first style, he in time developed certain counter measures for each team or would come to reflect on decisions he could have made instead. Mourinho at Chelsea saw the emergence of Darren Fletcher as the most prominent midfielder to counter balance Essien, whilst Evra and Brown were considered regularly as wingbacks to stretch his team against Terry and Carvalho or negate Ashley Cole who bombed through much of Europe at the time. With Wenger in the early years the force of Keane was used in the centre of the park to create issues between a Vieira and Petit centre line that sat back to spread the ball to Parlour and leave Wright with no options further forward. In fact, Keane became such an important part of this game every year that it would lead to much of the player base elevating Keane to legendary status. When Arsenal moved to Fabregas later in Wengers time, Keane who had got older and no longer had the legs, was still employed in many Arsenal games this time to shadow and bully Fabregas who was the essential pivot. Keane's simple elegance in these games was his ability to remove a central part of the system team's development through the pitch. Isolation of these players would often leave the team devoid of answers, make them (certainly arsenal) look bulliable and mean that Ferguson's trust in his players core abilities would often pay dividends as they carved out wins despite the odd hick up. To further this point on Arsenal, when Carrick signed, the majority of fans didn't want the signing because our midfield was going to be forced to play into these teams more often, gifting them the ball and hitting them on the counter in new ways as we no longer had the central piece of the puzzle we had relied upon for 10 years. As for Guardiola, Ferguson is noted as saying his regret here is still not using Park, in fact Ferguson believes that the use of Park against Messi would have done exactly the same thing as we had seen Keane do against Fabregas years earlier. Messi might be a skillful player, one that looks like the ball is glued to his feet, yet if Park had been employed effectively, the pivot would have been broken up and allowed for United to counter more effectively have neutralised their biggest threat. Whilst many of us (myself included) may disagree that Messi was the only problem on that field, it is no doubt comforting that Sir Alex believed it to be our biggest issue.

There is nothing wrong with either system, in fact both systems have through out time been shown to be effective in different leagues and with different managers but both styles have their place. Ole grew up at Manchester United and watched Sir Alex adopting these tactics and gaining results for a long time, despite the more methodical systems around him. It isn't unreasonable to believe that his style and concept of football management was grown from this and certainly when watching the game on a Saturday I personally see more of the second type of football on show than the first and I for one don't have issues with that, even if it means that sometimes we lose games where we should win.

We have no divine right to win the league, we are a football club that has been managed by a plethora of talented managers who play system football, be they the Doc, Atkinson, van Gaal or Mourinho none stuck. They didn't fit with the club, they didn't fit with the fans and they don't fit with our brand. Ole might not win the league, hell we might spend the next 10 years fighting for 2nd place but I very much doubt it. Yes we have issues playing against a low block formation, for many this is because we have yet to find the player who can be our Carrick, Scholes, Ince or Keane... hell even a Fletcher might do it. Yet there are those who complain that we still aren't a system team, we don't have the chess like proficiency of City, Liverpool or Chelsea and they wonder if we ever will. I don't think it's needed, nor do I think it's wanted by many of us. We want to see individual players come out and make things happen, we want the thrill of Ronaldo, Giggs, Kanchelskis bombing down the wings making things happen and we don't want to give up on a manager that wants that too just because results don't always favour us. The replacement of Fred in particular will be a massive change for United today, personally I think a partnership of Rice and McTomminay would do exactly what we want and need in this way and will be slightly upset if as seems likely, we don't get him.

The knee jerk isn't knee jerk though, people are now completely divided on style lines having spent so much time being coached via the media that system play is the only viable solution and those managers who employ something else are archaic, old fashioned managers that cannot win. Strange how head to head though, each of those system teams are nullified on a regular by our team, it is instead those in the middle of the league which cause United so many problems. Someone needs to step up and thus far we have failed to either sign or create someone who has done just that in the centre of our midfield, it'll come, it always does. Until then, enjoy the wins and rue the losses but blaming our manager seems at least to me, silly.

Nice post. Don’t totally agree about the midfield though. I think under Fergie we always adapted and pressing from the front is as much a part of the game now as playing attacking full backs or not going in a 4-4-2 anymore.

Ole just seems to want Bruno and Fred to press and our forwards to stay up and that’s about it. I think he’s still tweaking his system for sure. We are yet to stumble on something that works consistently enough.

 

[::sonny::]

 

[largelyworried]

I've said this before but I'll say it again, some people, many people on this forum and across our fan base want United to play with an objective system.

Spoiler

They want player X to pass to player Y in a certain situation, to move from place A to place B when given the ball whilst player Z moves to another location waiting for the ball to be given by player Y who only has player Z in his mind. There is room in these forms of systems for some player expression, but that expression is for the most part muted for efficient play style. There are some really important things to remember with this concept though and the first most important of them being that in a system such as this, every player is simply a cog in a wheel, easily replaced for another system player who can come into the game and perform an exact role which compliments or shifts the behaviour of the other cogs on the field in a certain situation. Players know that at 1-0 down with a shift from player Y to player P their system has moved to either a more defensive or more offensive setup which informs them of the behaviours they are to employ in the oncoming phases of the game.

If this is the style of play that you're looking for then I'm unsurprised when there are those who call for the end of Ole's time at Manchester United, he doesn't coach this way and likely never will.

There is of course another system of play, in this form of system the players are given their starting roles and encouraged to remain in certain areas of the field, A left back for instance will be encouraged to either sit back and wait for the opponent to drive forwards before engaging with them and setting up a counter, or asked to drive up the field for width allowing the left winger, inverted winger, inside forward et al to cause problems in the middle of the pitch. In this system the behaviours of certain players are coached individually, each behaviour in set to allow for expression and as many have put it on the forum causes teams to look like they're waiting for individual brilliance to come up with something special.

During Sir Alex's time as a manager he employed the secondary system. Irwin and Neville were never instructed directly that they MUST give the ball to Giggs or Beckham respectively, instead they were encouraged to play to their strengths as players with the knowledge that each respective player on the pitch would do their bit to open space, drive the ball forwards, or simply score goals (Hughesm Berbatov and van Nistelrooj come to mind here). In truth. there were times during Sir Alex's career that fans and other coaches alike called this system archaic and demanded a modern adaptation of this game to a more formulated structure. These calls were mostly from those who enjoyed tiki taka football or Wenger's passing setup at Arsenal, yet it was never part of the makeup of a Manchester United side. We are, were and developed as a counter-attacking team with strong wingers and a central block that remained stoic throughout a 38 game season. There were good and bad games but the fans knew that through 38 games, quality would no doubt shine through and the team would be there or there abouts at the end of the season.

Sir Alex had issues with Guardiola, Wenger, Mourinho and plenty of others who played football in the more efficient first style, he in time developed certain counter measures for each team or would come to reflect on decisions he could have made instead. Mourinho at Chelsea saw the emergence of Darren Fletcher as the most prominent midfielder to counter balance Essien, whilst Evra and Brown were considered regularly as wingbacks to stretch his team against Terry and Carvalho or negate Ashley Cole who bombed through much of Europe at the time. With Wenger in the early years the force of Keane was used in the centre of the park to create issues between a Vieira and Petit centre line that sat back to spread the ball to Parlour and leave Wright with no options further forward. In fact, Keane became such an important part of this game every year that it would lead to much of the player base elevating Keane to legendary status. When Arsenal moved to Fabregas later in Wengers time, Keane who had got older and no longer had the legs, was still employed in many Arsenal games this time to shadow and bully Fabregas who was the essential pivot. Keane's simple elegance in these games was his ability to remove a central part of the system team's development through the pitch. Isolation of these players would often leave the team devoid of answers, make them (certainly arsenal) look bulliable and mean that Ferguson's trust in his players core abilities would often pay dividends as they carved out wins despite the odd hick up. To further this point on Arsenal, when Carrick signed, the majority of fans didn't want the signing because our midfield was going to be forced to play into these teams more often, gifting them the ball and hitting them on the counter in new ways as we no longer had the central piece of the puzzle we had relied upon for 10 years. As for Guardiola, Ferguson is noted as saying his regret here is still not using Park, in fact Ferguson believes that the use of Park against Messi would have done exactly the same thing as we had seen Keane do against Fabregas years earlier. Messi might be a skillful player, one that looks like the ball is glued to his feet, yet if Park had been employed effectively, the pivot would have been broken up and allowed for United to counter more effectively have neutralised their biggest threat. Whilst many of us (myself included) may disagree that Messi was the only problem on that field, it is no doubt comforting that Sir Alex believed it to be our biggest issue.

There is nothing wrong with either system, in fact both systems have through out time been shown to be effective in different leagues and with different managers but both styles have their place. Ole grew up at Manchester United and watched Sir Alex adopting these tactics and gaining results for a long time, despite the more methodical systems around him. It isn't unreasonable to believe that his style and concept of football management was grown from this and certainly when watching the game on a Saturday I personally see more of the second type of football on show than the first and I for one don't have issues with that, even if it means that sometimes we lose games where we should win.

We have no divine right to win the league, we are a football club that has been managed by a plethora of talented managers who play system football, be they the Doc, Atkinson, van Gaal or Mourinho none stuck. They didn't fit with the club, they didn't fit with the fans and they don't fit with our brand. Ole might not win the league, hell we might spend the next 10 years fighting for 2nd place but I very much doubt it. Yes we have issues playing against a low block formation, for many this is because we have yet to find the player who can be our Carrick, Scholes, Ince or Keane... hell even a Fletcher might do it. Yet there are those who complain that we still aren't a system team, we don't have the chess like proficiency of City, Liverpool or Chelsea and they wonder if we ever will. I don't think it's needed, nor do I think it's wanted by many of us. We want to see individual players come out and make things happen, we want the thrill of Ronaldo, Giggs, Kanchelskis bombing down the wings making things happen and we don't want to give up on a manager that wants that too just because results don't always favour us. The replacement of Fred in particular will be a massive change for United today, personally I think a partnership of Rice and McTomminay would do exactly what we want and need in this way and will be slightly upset if as seems likely, we don't get him.

The knee jerk isn't knee jerk though, people are now completely divided on style lines having spent so much time being coached via the media that system play is the only viable solution and those managers who employ something else are archaic, old fashioned managers that cannot win. Strange how head to head though, each of those system teams are nullified on a regular by our team, it is instead those in the middle of the league which cause United so many problems. Someone needs to step up and thus far we have failed to either sign or create someone who has done just that in the centre of our midfield, it'll come, it always does. Until then, enjoy the wins and rue the losses but blaming our manager seems at least to me, silly.

Sorry, but this post is totally flawed, and not just the verbiage. There are two obvious flaws.

One, arguing about what Fergie did 15 years ago is completely irrelevant because these system coaches didn't exist back then. Pep & Klopp are a totally different level to Mourinho & Wenger. There was the barest overlap between the Pep and Fergie eras, and lets be honest, their meetings did not shine well on Fergie.

In case its missed your attention, these modern systems focussed coaches have not only won the last 5 leagues in a row now, they've done it by breaking records that would have seemed impossible back in Fergie's day - points gained, consecutive wins, goals scored, you name it, all the records are falling. They've redefined excellence. I think Fergie's highest ever points total was 91? That wouldn't win you the league in 4 of the last 5 seasons.

For me the real question is, if peak Fergie were around today, would he still be playing the same old way he was playing back in the mid-2000s and finishing in the mid-80s, even if that meant coming 2nd or 3rd most years? Or would the manager whose most enduring & impressive ability was to reinvent his teams & himself do it all over again?

Secondly, Ole is not SAF! Arguing that the greatest manager of all time might keep up with Pep and Klopp therefore any manager can is the most absurd falsehood. Unless you can show Ole is as good as SAF your argument is pointless.

 

[Regalia]

We are literally RAWK these days. We (well, at least I did) used to find endless hilarity in those self-proclaimed 'top scousers' posting wall of text after wall of text trying to defend the dross of houllier, the cult of brentan, the return of dalglish, even the absolute shit that Hodgson brought. Good lord, the best thing was they really did sound like they believed their roundabout drivel (bless their scummy dipper souls) about how those managers were not failing and would be the next messiah, if only the rest of the fanbase could see it!

And here we are, with the Ole cult circle jerking a 5000 word post basically insinuating that Sir Alex had no tactics or system so that means Ole = SAF and he just needs another few years and half billion more quid. Fergie knew how to be the best of his era, adapting to the football around him and keeping United relevant for years. Ole is just fumbling in the dark, a fish out of water among the managers in the top half of the PL, hoping Bruno, Scotty, Freddy and Rashy propels him to another amazing Top 4 finish.

 

[Roboc7]

Sorry, but this post is totally flawed, and not just the verbiage. There are two obvious flaws.

One, arguing about what Fergie did 15 years ago is completely irrelevant because these system coaches didn't exist back then. Pep & Klopp are a totally different level to Mourinho & Wenger. There was the barest overlap between the Pep and Fergie eras, and lets be honest, their meetings did not shine well on Fergie.

In case its missed your attention, these modern systems focussed coaches have not only won the last 5 leagues in a row now, they've done it by breaking records that would have seemed impossible back in Fergie's day - points gained, consecutive wins, goals scored, you name it, all the records are falling. They've redefined excellence. I think Fergie's highest ever points total was 91? That wouldn't win you the league in 4 of the last 5 seasons.

For me the real question is, if peak Fergie were around today, would he still be playing the same old way he was playing back in the mid-2000s and finishing in the mid-80s, even if that meant coming 2nd or 3rd most years? Or would the manager whose most enduring & impressive ability was to reinvent his teams & himself do it all over again?

Secondly, Ole is not SAF! Arguing that the greatest manager of all time might keep up with Pep and Klopp therefore any manager can is the most absurd falsehood. Unless you can show Ole is as good as SAF your argument is pointless.

It’s really odd, Ole is inferior to SAF in pretty much every way yet some seem to think him managing like SAF is a good idea. Ole can’t do what Pep, SAF, Klopp did/do, it’s not even a debate. I don’t know how so many people expect Ole to morph into the second coming of SAF.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

You really think a lot of yourself

Bullshit. I just don't have qualms calling out the rottenness of certain opinions.

I'm sorry but essentially everything you're saying is just delusion based on some romantic notion that United need "one of their own in charge"..

Another straw man fallacy. I've made no such argument in ANY of my posts. All I want is continuity of a football direction. Which can easily be accrued by hiring a manager who is the right fit for the job, the current squad, the foundation the incumbent has laid, to set up united to win for the long term, whilst having a far better managerial cv, definitely after more than just 7 games into the new season. That is practical.

Romanticism in comparison is wanting Conte to take over because he is the man with the best cv available outside of Pep and Klopp. Without a care for whether he suits the club, the squad nor the previous foundations laid just because he be a quick short cut to wining trophies again. Yet the last 3 times we tried that it blew up in our faces

If Ole was anyone but Ole people like you wouldn't waste their breath trying to create poetry or whatever you're trying to do to defend his mediocrity.

Another straw man
Your levels of delusion are extreme. That's why you keep harping on about things NO ONE advocates for. Whats truly mediocre is your ability to grasp the arguments of those opposed to yours. Time and again

I bend over backwards to give him no credit?

100%. Your proved it your last post.

I gave him plenty of credit when he came in after Mourinho's toxicity. But he should have left at the end of the season

That explains it. Your grudge with him is he accepted to stay in the job and steady the ship. Rather than make way for yet another great manager cv of your dreams. You basically see him as your dream killer.....

So yes keep multi-quoting and spewing out nice quotes, we'll never win anything with him in charge and fans like you who continue to support him despite the obvious flaws identified by nearly everyone in world football will keep setting this club further behind.

You seem to have this deep delusion that I'm so invested in Solskjaer, I'm desperate for him to win something, so I want him to stay regardless of what happens by the end of this season. I'm not.
I'm invested rather in the job he has done laying foundation for us to be successful in the long term these past 2 years. A foundation that has got us closer to all our rivals as the league table has clearly shown last few years There is no rule in existence that states he who plants must be he who harvests.. I'm quite happy for him to finish his foundations for a great team this season. Then we go and hire someone who is just as good a fit as he has been, continuing his work and finally ushering in a period of sustained challenging and winning, whilst being a world class level of manager that Solsjaer has never been. I swear, this isn't very hard to understand

I simply don't see an iota of sense of wanting to sack him 6-7 games into a season and planlessly hire anyone with a great cv. That is the height of worshiping mediocrity. The very same shit that got us where we are 7 years post Fergie in the first place. Lieka dog returning to its vomit believing it wont throw it up again.

And yes, you quote a United interview. What do you expect him to say other than he wants to play for the manager?

AS I said. Bending over backward to deny credit

Maybe he did, but do you really think any player in world football sees Pep, Klopp, Zidane, and Conte and goes "yeah let me play for the guy who got Cardiff relegated". They don't. It's just nice sentiment that is exaggerated in every interview when a player joins. Sancho did it. Ronaldo did it. Varane did

.This is pure fallacious reasoning

First, The likes of Conte, Pepe, Zidane et all do not come into the picture because no one argued they were competing with Ole for the player to play for them. Nor argued he'd beat such managers to such talents.

Second, its utterly fanciful to believer born winners and superstars like CR7 and Varane would spend time lying that a manager who they don't rate and think nothing of attracted them to United. You are basically accusing them of being mercenaries which is ludicrous in the extreme.

Also I'm not sure how I'm being a hypocrite even though you keep calling me one.

Is pointed out your willfully withhold credit from Ole. Deny it. Blatantly deny credit to Ole in following post. Deny it again.....

Repeatedly pretending people who don't buy your change the manager views are "champions of mediocrity" , '" have romantic desires of United always hiring one it's own' and "just die hard fans of Solksjaer" or worse 'just because he used to play here' . No matter what they actually put forth arguments to you time and again.....
Exhibit A is below:

If anyone is a hypocrite it's people like you who hold Ole to lower standards just because he used to play here.

 

[HerbT]

I've said this before but I'll say it again, some people, many people on this forum and across our fan base want United to play with an objective system. They want player X to pass to player Y in a certain situation, to move from place A to place B when given the ball whilst player Z moves to another location waiting for the ball to be given by player Y who only has player Z in his mind. There is room in these forms of systems for some player expression, but that expression is for the most part muted for efficient play style. There are some really important things to remember with this concept though and the first most important of them being that in a system such as this, every player is simply a cog in a wheel, easily replaced for another system player who can come into the game and perform an exact role which compliments or shifts the behaviour of the other cogs on the field in a certain situation. Players know that at 1-0 down with a shift from player Y to player P their system has moved to either a more defensive or more offensive setup which informs them of the behaviours they are to employ in the oncoming phases of the game.

If this is the style of play that you're looking for then I'm unsurprised when there are those who call for the end of Ole's time at Manchester United, he doesn't coach this way and likely never will.

There is of course another system of play, in this form of system the players are given their starting roles and encouraged to remain in certain areas of the field, A left back for instance will be encouraged to either sit back and wait for the opponent to drive forwards before engaging with them and setting up a counter, or asked to drive up the field for width allowing the left winger, inverted winger, inside forward et al to cause problems in the middle of the pitch. In this system the behaviours of certain players are coached individually, each behaviour in set to allow for expression and as many have put it on the forum causes teams to look like they're waiting for individual brilliance to come up with something special.

During Sir Alex's time as a manager he employed the secondary system. Irwin and Neville were never instructed directly that they MUST give the ball to Giggs or Beckham respectively, instead they were encouraged to play to their strengths as players with the knowledge that each respective player on the pitch would do their bit to open space, drive the ball forwards, or simply score goals (Hughesm Berbatov and van Nistelrooj come to mind here). In truth. there were times during Sir Alex's career that fans and other coaches alike called this system archaic and demanded a modern adaptation of this game to a more formulated structure. These calls were mostly from those who enjoyed tiki taka football or Wenger's passing setup at Arsenal, yet it was never part of the makeup of a Manchester United side. We are, were and developed as a counter-attacking team with strong wingers and a central block that remained stoic throughout a 38 game season. There were good and bad games but the fans knew that through 38 games, quality would no doubt shine through and the team would be there or there abouts at the end of the season.

Sir Alex had issues with Guardiola, Wenger, Mourinho and plenty of others who played football in the more efficient first style, he in time developed certain counter measures for each team or would come to reflect on decisions he could have made instead. Mourinho at Chelsea saw the emergence of Darren Fletcher as the most prominent midfielder to counter balance Essien, whilst Evra and Brown were considered regularly as wingbacks to stretch his team against Terry and Carvalho or negate Ashley Cole who bombed through much of Europe at the time. With Wenger in the early years the force of Keane was used in the centre of the park to create issues between a Vieira and Petit centre line that sat back to spread the ball to Parlour and leave Wright with no options further forward. In fact, Keane became such an important part of this game every year that it would lead to much of the player base elevating Keane to legendary status. When Arsenal moved to Fabregas later in Wengers time, Keane who had got older and no longer had the legs, was still employed in many Arsenal games this time to shadow and bully Fabregas who was the essential pivot. Keane's simple elegance in these games was his ability to remove a central part of the system team's development through the pitch. Isolation of these players would often leave the team devoid of answers, make them (certainly arsenal) look bulliable and mean that Ferguson's trust in his players core abilities would often pay dividends as they carved out wins despite the odd hick up. To further this point on Arsenal, when Carrick signed, the majority of fans didn't want the signing because our midfield was going to be forced to play into these teams more often, gifting them the ball and hitting them on the counter in new ways as we no longer had the central piece of the puzzle we had relied upon for 10 years. As for Guardiola, Ferguson is noted as saying his regret here is still not using Park, in fact Ferguson believes that the use of Park against Messi would have done exactly the same thing as we had seen Keane do against Fabregas years earlier. Messi might be a skillful player, one that looks like the ball is glued to his feet, yet if Park had been employed effectively, the pivot would have been broken up and allowed for United to counter more effectively have neutralised their biggest threat. Whilst many of us (myself included) may disagree that Messi was the only problem on that field, it is no doubt comforting that Sir Alex believed it to be our biggest issue.

There is nothing wrong with either system, in fact both systems have through out time been shown to be effective in different leagues and with different managers but both styles have their place. Ole grew up at Manchester United and watched Sir Alex adopting these tactics and gaining results for a long time, despite the more methodical systems around him. It isn't unreasonable to believe that his style and concept of football management was grown from this and certainly when watching the game on a Saturday I personally see more of the second type of football on show than the first and I for one don't have issues with that, even if it means that sometimes we lose games where we should win.

We have no divine right to win the league, we are a football club that has been managed by a plethora of talented managers who play system football, be they the Doc, Atkinson, van Gaal or Mourinho none stuck. They didn't fit with the club, they didn't fit with the fans and they don't fit with our brand. Ole might not win the league, hell we might spend the next 10 years fighting for 2nd place but I very much doubt it. Yes we have issues playing against a low block formation, for many this is because we have yet to find the player who can be our Carrick, Scholes, Ince or Keane... hell even a Fletcher might do it. Yet there are those who complain that we still aren't a system team, we don't have the chess like proficiency of City, Liverpool or Chelsea and they wonder if we ever will. I don't think it's needed, nor do I think it's wanted by many of us. We want to see individual players come out and make things happen, we want the thrill of Ronaldo, Giggs, Kanchelskis bombing down the wings making things happen and we don't want to give up on a manager that wants that too just because results don't always favour us. The replacement of Fred in particular will be a massive change for United today, personally I think a partnership of Rice and McTomminay would do exactly what we want and need in this way and will be slightly upset if as seems likely, we don't get him.

The knee jerk isn't knee jerk though, people are now completely divided on style lines having spent so much time being coached via the media that system play is the only viable solution and those managers who employ something else are archaic, old fashioned managers that cannot win. Strange how head to head though, each of those system teams are nullified on a regular by our team, it is instead those in the middle of the league which cause United so many problems. Someone needs to step up and thus far we have failed to either sign or create someone who has done just that in the centre of our midfield, it'll come, it always does. Until then, enjoy the wins and rue the losses but blaming our manager seems at least to me, silly.

Well I didn’t read every word of the lengthy sermon but I did latch onto the gist of it and I agree wholeheartedly.
Different folks different strokes / different managers different abilities, and Ole is doing marvellously by not establishing a system of play.
It’s the good old quadruple bluff. How can another side set up to play against you when you don’t know how you’re going to play yourself eh?
And I may sound flippant but, as City fan who’s had to watch Ole repeatedly pull Pep’s pants down, I’m actually very serious.
Despite the little boy lost act in the press conferences, and despite no established style of play or certainty of result against any side, Ole confounds everyone by improving his results year on year.
Hard to accept for some but that’s what actually happens and it’s why he still has the job. He’s good at it.

 

[Flytan]

Bullshit. I just don't have qualms calling out the rottenness of certain opinions.

Another straw man fallacy. I've made no such argument in ANY of my posts. All I want is continuity of a football direction. Which can easily be accrued by hiring a manager who is the right fit for the job, the current squad, the foundation the incumbent has laid, to set up united to win for the long term, whilst having a far better managerial cv, definitely after more than just 7 games into the new season. That is practical.

Romanticism in comparison is wanting Conte to take over because he is the man with the best cv available outside of Pep and Klopp. Without a care for whether he suits the club, the squad nor the previous foundations laid just because he be a quick short cut to wining trophies again. Yet the last 3 times we tried that it blew up in our faces

Another straw man
Your levels of delusion are extreme. That's why you keep harping on about things NO ONE advocates for. Whats truly mediocre is your ability to grasp the arguments of those opposed to yours. Time and again


100%. Your proved it your last post.

That explains it. Your grudge with him is he accepted to stay in the job and steady the ship. Rather than make way for yet another great manager cv of your dreams. You basically see him as your dream killer.....


You seem to have this deep delusion that I'm so invested in Solskjaer, I'm desperate for him to win something, so I want him to stay regardless of what happens by the end of this season. I'm not.
I'm invested rather in the job he has done laying foundation for us to be successful in the long term these past 2 years. A foundation that has got us closer to all our rivals as the league table has clearly shown last few years There is no rule in existence that states he who plants must be he who harvests.. I'm quite happy for him to finish his foundations for a great team this season. Then we go and hire someone who is just as good a fit as he has been, continuing his work and finally ushering in a period of sustained challenging and winning, whilst being a world class level of manager that Solsjaer has never been. I swear, this isn't very hard to understand

I simply don't see an iota of sense of wanting to sack him 6-7 games into a season and planlessly hire anyone with a great cv. That is the height of worshiping mediocrity. The very same shit that got us where we are 7 years post Fergie in the first place. Lieka dog returning to its vomit believing it wont throw it up again.


AS I said. Bending over backward to deny credit

.This is pure fallacious reasoning

First, The likes of Conte, Pepe, Zidane et all do not come into the picture because no one argued they were competing with Ole for the player to play for them. Nor argued he'd beat such managers to such talents.

Second, its utterly fanciful to believer born winners and superstars like CR7 and Varane would spend time lying that a manager who they don't rate and think nothing of attracted them to United. You are basically accusing them of being mercenaries which is ludicrous in the extreme.



Is pointed out your willfully withhold credit from Ole. Deny it. Blatantly deny credit to Ole in following post. Deny it again.....

Repeatedly pretending people who don't buy your change the manager views are "champions of mediocrity" , '" have romantic desires of United always hiring one it's own' and "just die hard fans of Solksjaer" or worse 'just because he used to play here' . No matter what they actually put forth arguments to you time and again.....
Exhibit A is below:

"Strawman" is just a buzzword you seem to use anytime any argument is presented to you that you have no desire to discuss. So yes, keep using it any time you can't actually argue a point, true 2021 debating.

Grudge against him? What? It's been clear from his whole career that he's a bad manager. Being given 400M hasn't let him win anything of note. He's a bad/mediocre manager at best. That's not an opinion, that's just how his career has been. Was there a chance he came here and turned his career around? Maybe? But he hasn't and despite investing more into the squad than any other club our brand of football is getting worse each season he is in charge. I gave him credit for steadying the ship. The ship was steadied after his interim time and most real clubs would appoint an actual long term manager at the time. It's not "hypocritical". I'm simply saying he gets credit for steading the ship. That's it. He hasn't done anything to earn credit since. I'm sorry but I'm not celebrating finishing 2nd in a 1 horse race last season for the league.

"
You seem to have this deep delusion that I'm so invested in Solskjaer, I'm desperate for him to win something, so I want him to stay regardless of what happens by the end of this season. I'm not.
I'm invested rather in the job he has done laying foundation for us to be successful in the long term these past 2 years. A foundation that has got us closer to all our rivals as the league table has clearly shown last few years There is no rule in existence that states he who plants must be he who harvests.. I'm quite happy for him to finish his foundations for a great team this season. Then we go and hire someone who is just as good a fit as he has been, continuing his work and finally ushering in a period of sustained challenging and winning, whilst being a world class level of manager that Solsjaer has never been. I swear, this isn't very hard to understand"

If you haven't noticed, this is essentially what everyone has said. He was here to lay the foundation and he's done that. It was time to go before the season when we could have hired a manager with the skills and ability to manage such a good squad. You seem to think having a good career as a manager is a negative with how you're describing replacing him. Yes, winning everywhere you go is worse than getting Cardiff relegated. The mental gymnastics you live off of are Olympic worthy.

And yes, people like you do judge him differently. We're literally worse with more money invested than LVG and Mourinho but you seem to think he's still deserving a job. He's not, and any other club would have fired him already. Like it's a simple question: If Ole left today, who would want to hire him. The answer is no top club. And I doubt even you can try to romanticize that one. If no one wants him, why is he good enough for United? Why are you judging him differently than a player or our last 3 managers? Because he is being judged differently.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

The question I asked was if you think the quality of our style of play is up to the standards of Klopp and Pep. If i understand correctly you're saying Ole has never had the players to implement a style of play up to the standard of Pep or Klopp and now that he does, we need the players to gel before we can see it? What gives you the impression that we will see a style of play that's up to the quality of Pep and Klopp when the players we got adapt?

I'll answer with 3 things:
1. Ole has not had close to the playing equipment to implement a competitive style as effortlessly consistent as Pep, Klopp and even Tuchel can till this season. It is why we are never consistently good. Its Why We play at that high level in fits and starts. Not over a sustained period of 10 plus games. In fact the post lockdown mini season as the ONLY time we got consistency good for a significant run of games.

2. Ole' is not regimented system manager. Automatisms are not his manager style. Like his mentor SAF or a Zidane, his system is to build a template frame work, from which players can express themselves and think their way through the various in game tactical situations opponents throw at them. With special tactics picked to negate opponents strengths and multiply our own. However that manager style is heavy reliant on its partnerships. They must be settled. Its why Fergie could have a whole XI of his squad training together for a match 4 weeks away, that he intended to rest his starters in.

Now think to our current spine in the first team: Its in flux. Even worse, our alternate 11 got kicked out of the cabarao cup, robbing us of a chance to gel them too. If Ole had a world class CV, I'd see why people, are so impatient that it isn't gelling quicker. People should remember our slow start last season, due to no pre season and worse equipment. It will take a while to get is going. Right now even with being slow to get going we are 2 off the top. Having played low block preferring clubs that have given us the worst trouble past 2 seasons. Now our next fixtures seem hard on paper but against sides that all shun a low block. The kind of football that suits us to a T! I'm thus convinced the increasing chicken little mentality of a number of our fans is uncalled for.

3. I'm convinced once our new players gel our system will be consistently better and of a high end competitive level because those new players have eliminated two crucial terminal weakness that were hurting our squad an making it impossible to be consistent.(While also elevating our level as a team by their sheer quality.)
Namely a dead right wing in the attack phase, rendering it impossible for us to be effective vs low block teams and a none compatible starting center defence that birthed the mc-fred tragedy in midfield. (Which made us double vulnerable at home as opposed to away)

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

"Strawman" is just a buzzword you seem to use anytime any argument is presented to you that you have no desire to discuss. So yes, keep using it any time you can't actually argue a point, true 2021 debating.

Straw man isn't a buzz word. Its calling out a person like yourself furiously debunking an invented caricature of that you came up with all on you own that has absolutely nothing to do with what anyone has argued for. A real embodiment of fallacious reasoning. Its deeply ironic that you imagine you are the one who actually knows how to debate....

Grudge against him? What? It's been clear from his whole career that he's a bad manager. Being given 400M hasn't let him win anything of note. He's a bad/mediocre manager at best. That's not an opinion, that's just how his career has been. Was there a chance he came here and turned his career around? Maybe? But he hasn't and despite investing more into the squad than any other club our brand of football is getting worse each season he is in charge. I gave him credit for steadying the ship. The ship was steadied after his interim time and most real clubs would appoint an actual long term manager at the time. It's not "hypocritical". I'm simply saying he gets credit for steading the ship. That's it. He hasn't done anything to earn credit since. I'm sorry but I'm not celebrating finishing 2nd in a 1 horse race last season for the league.

He stole your dreams. We get it..........

If you haven't noticed, this is essentially what everyone has said

Now you are out right lying....You and your clique have been telling us since this thread begun he has not progressed the club since he stayed beyond his interim stint and has just been sinking us further and further behind our rivals, because he is clueless on pitch, off pitch and tactically. That if our board has any sense they should dispense with his "mediocrity' and "immediately" go pick up a "modern manager' with the a greatest cv available like a Conte. "Before its too late".

Don't pretend to walk all that back now.....

. He was here to lay the foundation and he's done that. It was time to go before the season when we could have hired a manager with the skills and ability to manage such a good squad

News flash, the foundation job hasn't actually been finished. You are also all too willing to rip it up to hire anyone with a great cv without any regard for those self same foundations and utterly lack the self awareness to realize how ridiculous it is, yet you claim to be the ones who actually want the club's best interest at heart as opposed to folks like me.

You seem to think having a good career as a manager is a negative with how you're describing replacing him.

Are you seriously THAT bad at reading comprehension? I dare you and ANYONE ELSE to quote a single post of mine where I argue something that ridiculous.

Its like your brain is utterly incapable of differentiating between wanting a manager with a great cv, who is the right manager fit for the United job and not wanting/having a problem anyone with a good cv taking over post the incumbent. Because you lot inter change the two an awful lot yet they have NOTHING in common.

Yes, winning everywhere you go is worse than getting Cardiff relegated. The mental gymnastics you live off of are Olympic worthy.

More classic drivel. invent some idiotic argument then gleeful attribute it to a person who has never used it

And yes, people like you do judge him differently. We're literally worse with more money invested than LVG and Mourinho but you seem to think he's still deserving a job.

I will state it again. If you seriously think :
i. we are currently worse off than when he took over as interim.
ii. Worse off than when LVG was around.
iii. Worse off than when Mourinho left us.
A thing that is objectively false. You are utterly and completely deluded. No ifs, buts or maybes. Which has nothing to do with us judging Ole differently and everything to do with you being deluded.

Like it's a simple question: If Ole left today, who would want to hire him. The answer is no top club. And I doubt even you can try to romanticize that one.

Who beyond you gives a flying feck who will hire him next?

Since when are managers hired based on who will hire them next, as opposed to what they can offer a club to progress its long term plans?

Its clowns like yourself repeatedly trying to romanticize your distaste for the guy's ability with idiotic statements like that.....

If no one wants him, why is he good enough for United?

Obviously because Manchester United thankfully doesn't base its future plans on what others clubs think is best for their own clubs plans.

Why are you judging him differently than a player or our last 3 managers? Because he is being judged differently.

Repeating a lie 100 times will never make it true.

 

[Nickthepip]

You post that with no context

Carry on

What context do you need? This post is pretty accurate. Good coaches build successful teams.

 

[ayushreddevil9]

Straw man isn't a buzz word. Its calling out a person like yourself furiously debunking an invented caricature of that you came up with all on you own that has absolutely nothing to do with what anyone has argued for. A real embodiment of fallacious reasoning. Its deeply ironic that you imagine you are the one who actually knows how to debate....


He stole your dreams. We get it..........


Now you are out right lying....You and your clique have been telling us since this thread begun he has not progressed the club since he stayed beyond his interim stint and has just been sinking us further and further behind our rivals, because he is clueless on pitch, off pitch and tactically. That if our board has any sense they should dispense with his "mediocrity' and "immediately" go pick up a "modern manager' with the a greatest cv available like a Conte. "Before its too late".

Don't pretend to walk all that back now.....


News flash, the foundation job hasn't actually been finished. You are also all too willing to rip it up to hire anyone with a great cv without any regard for those self same foundations and utterly lack the self awareness to realize how ridiculous it is, yet you claim to be the ones who actually want the club's best interest at heart as opposed to folks like me.


Are you seriously THAT bad at reading comprehension? I dare you and ANYONE ELSE to quote a single post of mine where I argue something that ridiculous.

Its like your brain is utterly incapable of differentiating between wanting a manager with a great cv, who is the right manager fit for the United job and not wanting/having a problem anyone with a good cv taking over post the incumbent. Because you lot inter change the two an awful lot yet they have NOTHING in common.



More classic drivel. invent some idiotic argument then gleeful attribute it to a person who has never used it


I will state it again. If you seriously think :
i. we are currently worse off than when he took over as interim.
ii. Worse off than when LVG was around.
iii. Worse off than when Mourinho left us.
A thing that is objectively false. You are utterly and completely deluded. No ifs, buts or maybes. Which has nothing to do with us judging Ole differently and everything to do with you being deluded.


Who beyond you gives a flying feck who will hire him next?

Since when are managers hired based on who will hire them next, as opposed to what they can offer a club to progress its long term plans?

Its clowns like yourself repeatedly trying to romanticize your distaste for the guy's ability with idiotic statements like that.....


Obviously because Manchester United thankfully doesn't base its future plans on what others clubs think is best for their own clubs plans.

Repeating a lie 100 times will never make it true.

Curious to know in what way you think the foundation job isn't complete?

Do you really think it takes 2 and a half years to lay foundation? Lay a foundation after a 400m investment? Do you expect to us win trophies after 5 years or so? We have one of the best squads there are in the league barring a good CM. We still could get something better than McFred but the man wouldn't give VdB a run in. And if you think a midfielder is what Ole needs to complete the 'foundation' then I am sorry thats not asking for foundation, that's asking for the complete picture.

 

[PoTMS]

Just out of interest, when does it stop being considered knee jerk?

 

[Ledom]

Ok, so lets try this again. Remember for those who claim I'm using unnecessary verbiage I have 3 posts a day.... I'm a newbie... thus trying come up with an argument and then defend it as much as I can whilst not attempting to write an actual small thesis is actually somewhat difficult. Further to this, if half of those of you who remarked had actually read anything I wrote you'd have noticed that I didn't say that Ole is was or ever will be Sir Alex and further still, even had I done that, none of you actually attempted to argue about why I was wrong just declared it as though that was enough to win the day.

So

Is it?

The idea that Sir Alex didn't have a system to his play and relied on individual coaching to get the best out of the team is nonsense. At most you can say he altered his system to the players he had on hand but he always inserted a very distinct style and made players follow strict systems.

There aren't many periods under Sir Alex where we didn't have an obvious system of play. I've seen more and more of these assessments and it saddens me that his time is being rewritten by some.

I didn't say that Sir Alex didn't have a system to his play, in fact in my two later posts I was very clear that Sir Alex played a mostly counter attacking setup that revolved around a strong central pairingm fast wingers who can exploit the wide areas and either a single or double pivot of strikers who would break the defensive line by running off the shoulder of the last man. Further to this, Sir Alex of course issued instructions, I pointed to several of them both those he employed and those he regretted not employing yet Sir Alex wasn't an objective system manager who broke the pitch into zones where players would have specific instructions. Arguing that he did is revisionism at it's highest level. Sir Alex developed a fluid system of football that relied heavily on the individual skill sets of his most talismanic players by driving the rest of his teams to create opportunities through instruction. Ronaldo operated in a free role in much the same way as Giggs had 8 years prior, Cantona was allowed freedom to roam as was McClair whilst others in the team were given track back instructions or put directly onto a player who was seen as the essential pivot line of an entire team... again I gave an example here of Fabregas and Keane.

What I did do here however, is say that to my mind I see that Ole is attempting somewhat of the same stylised system. I didn't say he is doing it well, nor did I say that he is close to the man that ran football in this country for almost 3 decades. I said that his footballing education points directly to a reasonable assumption that this is in generalised terms, his ambition and it is an ambition that I myself respect as a fan.

It's saddening as it's only become a 'thing' since Ole arrived, and is used to defend him.

As with Smores here you clearly didn't read what I wrote properly because had you, you'd have noticed that none of what I actually wrote (not what you thought I wrote, or what you wanted me to write) disagrees with the post by Fortitude. I simply said something within it that you didn't like, that Ole is attempting to do the same. Should he do so? I don't know, yet it's clear at least to many of us that he is attempting to use the same stylised choices when setting up his team and there is no reason to suggest otherwise. Is it going perfectly? That's up for debate, but to say that there isn't at least a hint of the same counter attacking football with certain players being asked to track further back and others being given freer roles to create fast breaks is what did b82REZ say... that's it, horseshit.

The length of the post doesn't make it a good post. Especially when the poster is making shit up to suit a quite obvious agenda.

What exactly did I make up? You've used verbose and aggressive language towards me but you've not actually said much in your posts here. Just decided that I'm talking out of my horses backside and making up facts to suit me. Give me a reference point so that we can debate or back off and stop with that ad hominids simply because you disagree. You're a grown ass man, act like one. I'll say this again because you as with others clearly didn't read what I wrote, we DID play under Sir Alex with instructions. All teams play under instructions. Yet there are different methods of imposing instructions, Sir Alex and Ole impose instructions in a different way to Klopp and Guardiola who operate on an entirely different set of technical rules. Neither is more correct, they're different takes on the game and whilst you might have decided that X beats Y, that's not really how this works.

You point out some interesting superficial similarities. I'm sure many will question precisely how similar - say - Klopp and Paisley really are...but for the sake of argument, let's buy these similarities.

In Barcelona's case, it definitely made a lot of sense to hire Pep - who was/is a natural successor to Cruyff, with access to a group of players whose core (Puyol, Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets, Messi) were graduates from an academy teaching a brand of football that can be traced all the way back to Michels, etc. There's an undeniable continuity there - and a system in place, not least.

However, the same surely isn't remotely true for any of the other managers you mention.

The "Liverpool way" or the "United way" are pretty vague concepts, ultimately. Not an actual "philosophy" you can build a football academy on.

And Chelsea don't have a "way" - you can't claim that Mourinho established either a brand of football or a "culture" at Chelsea in a manner that's comparable - in the slightest - to the Barcelona "way" (and not even to the much vaguer United/Liverpool "ways").

So - if Tuchel is indeed similar to Mourinho in some ways, that comes across as coincidence more than anything. And I certainly don't think the people who hired him (Tuchel) thought it was a good idea to do so because they envisioned him as some kind of successor to Mourinho (the good Mourinho, one would have to assume - not the meltdown version).

Similarly, it seems absurd enough to regard Klopp as a "successor" to any of the managers who enjoyed success in charge of Liverpool decades ago.

I guess the point I'm attempting to make here is that whilst these similarities are vague or sometimes stretched they prove two honest points and were in reference to an initial observation that the modern game has "evolved" and so moving beyond the pass and move, free expression of football was required. So since that wasn't clear here, I'll attempt to make it clearer. Barcelona, Liverpool and even Chelsea have watched football being played at their clubs in a certain way for a long time. Barcelona in their best moments have retained upward of 90% of the possession for instance, this isn't a new thing, as you say we can go all the way back to Michels if needed but I felt going to Cruyff was enough to emphasise the point. When a manager comes to Barcelona there is an expectation of this style and when it is not given, where there is no indication of this style being employed and no attempt by the manager to fulfil the same historic functions that the club has won with, the manager is given less time and if unsuccessful is pushed out of the door much faster than those who fail whilst using the accepted methods.

Liverpool under Rafa was a massive example of this, Rafa played a way that the old boys found acceptable, the new lads saw hope and it galvanised the supporters to go the extra mile in defending a man that it had become clear to everyone else, couldn't break beyond the glass ceiling that he had created for himself. Whilst you believe the concept at Liverpool to be ultimately vague, it's unreasonable to dismiss the idea that fans are more likely to award managers with extra time based on their comprehension of a return to how they "should" play even where results aren't right there yet.

As for Chelsea, again, Tuchel isn't Mourinho or Ranieri but he employs the same park the bus tactics and many of the former managers players would either be picked first or be within picking distance of the first team today. Further to that, Chelsea fans are willing to accept the park the bus style of tactic simply BECAUSE they have seen it employed successfully before and the expansive football has cost them time and again (Lampard attempted a more expressive style of football as did Vialli both were dismissed after short periods). Whilst you might not accept that it becomes stylistically attached to the clubs, there is glaring evidence that all of these teams are willing to accept or reject managers who fulfil historic or inherent parts of what makes the club their club... to them.

Even so it was another reflection that all of these clubs and teams, Cruyff, Guardiola, Ranieri, Wenger, Tuchel.... you name it... they have all been beaten to titles by less formulated tactical managers who allow for free expression of players at certain moments of a game or season. Sometimes their dominance can feel frustrating and many times (inc Wenger one he got Arsenal playing) would end up having fans call out that we must change. I simply disagree and believe that with the right players and the right time expression play can and will once more elevate us to the top of the sport. Others want that quick fix and in each of these examples I pointed to a manager who operates in the same stylistic manner and failed to import those behaviours into our club.

That's all well and good, however in the end you're basically laying the blame of our poor performances at the feet of our midfield. We made three big money signings during the summer, therefore if midfield is as much of a gkaring weakness as you (and others) make out, it should have been identified by the manager and prioritised.

I remain skeptical as to how much it would actually have improved us though. We were crying out for a defender, and after buying one of the best around we still leak goals. We were crying out for a right winger. We buy one who is highly rated and we still struggle to create.

For me the issues go beyond midfield and there's a clear weakness in the tactical and coaching side. That's nothing to do with being "coached via the media" but is there for all to see when watching our matches.

In essence this is why I hate the tl;dr mentality. Free flowing football that offers players the ability to make more choices starts in the defence, we have upgraded Lindelof to Varane and see now a higher line between Varane and Maguire that allows for better balance in that area. After moving past the defence it is the job of our midfield to control and create further opportunities whilst retaining the ball and finding available opportunities further forwards. Scholes was a master of the ball, praised at every single level as a man that could cut a team up in a single moment. If Scholes didn't have those free players in wide areas, the Giggs, Sharpes, Kinkysm these balls would often have fallen short or indeed looked silly. Keane was a machine in the midfield as was Robbo before him, he could take a ball from the back and drive it forwards for a pot shot or a deft pass but these moves only work because the team had the ability and creativity to make sure that when players did this, others did the grunt work. If McClair was opening up for a shot, Sharpe would oft be seen moving into the space behind the last man the drag defenders to him to open that extra inch for the shot. When Giggs was charging up the wing against teams there was Yorkie or Sheringham making the last man brick it because if that ball got in, there was going to be a goal.

If you want a clearer picture of what I think we're playing right now, I'd say Ruuds 04/05 United and we didn't win that year. We came third with Chelsea getting 95 points and us finishing with 77. That year we had Howard, Neville, Ferdinand, Brown, Heinze, Ronaldo, Keane, Scholes, Giggs, Rooney and Ruud. It isn't a bad team at all, in fact much of that team would create the backbone later of our last great one under Sir. Alex, yet I can in all honesty look at much of that team and find similar players in our current setup. They way they want to play, the way they ARE playing and the derisive way in which some 'fans' talk about them. It was clear to some of us in 04 that we were building towards something again, to others they said we'd never win against Jose and that football had left the United way behind. Remind me again, who was wrong?

Finally, in my opinion you ARE being coached by the media. Football like most other things is circular, we go through fashionable changes and expect those who control our entertainment to fall in line. Ferguson most often refused to fall into line and decided to play football the way he felt like it should be played. Often it would work and many times it wouldn't. He picked up trophies against organised defences and total footballing masters (you can all dismiss Arsenal as total footballing masters but you'd be wrong and helplessly so). Ferguson often played his worst football when against low blocks, until he found the right pieces of the puzzle and opened those teams up in ways that we didn't expect... Fletcher vs Chelsea still being the stand out moment for that for me. When Fletcher put the ball in I think many of us, dare I say most of us, felt a light turn back on and in my opinion it's where 09 became a reality, not just a promise (for those that need the goal it was his 05 one https://www.manutd.com/en/videos/detail/goal-of-the-day-darren-fletcher-v-chelsea-10-october-2020).

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Curious to know in what way you think the foundation job isn't complete?

Center midfield.
Sancho is still bedding in
It not known whether we are moving forward with Pogba or letting him go
We haven't decided whether we will let CR7 ana Cavani groom Greenwood into our next long term 9. Or we are going to go and sign Halaand

Do you really think it takes 2 and a half years to lay foundation? Lay a foundation after a 400m investment?

After 4.5 prior years of turning corners like we were at a round about, having wasted a lot of money resulting in an imbalanced, unhappy and Frankenstein squad? Yes.

Do you expect to us win trophies after 5 years or so?

I expect us to be ready to challenge and win trophies consistently after the foundations are set. Which will be by the end of this season. Lattest next summer. What remains to be seen is if it will be Ole reaping the benefits or an upgrade.of him.

We have one of the best squads there are in the league barring a good CM. We still could get something better than McFred but the man wouldn't give VdB a run in. And if you think a midfielder is what Ole needs to complete the 'foundation' then I am sorry thats not asking for foundation, that's asking for the complete picture.

Fair enough then if that's your view. We simply have a very different understanding of what a foundation and a complete picture looks like.

For me the foundation is a team with no weakness in personnel. The complete picture is consistently challenging for and wining things with what has been built.

I desire Ole to complete the foundation. Then Id like us to pick the right fit , with the high end cv to boot. to take the ship to outer space to conquer the galaxy

 

[jamesjimmybyrondean]

Center midfield.
Sancho is still bedding in
It not known whether we are moving forward with Pogba or letting him go
We haven't decided whether we will let CR7 ana Cavani groom Greenwood into our next long term 9. Or we are going to go and sign Halaand

After 4.5 prior years of turning corners like we were at a round about, having wasted a lot of money resulting in an imbalanced, unhappy and Frankenstein squad? Yes.



I expect us to be ready to challenge and win trophies consistently after the foundations are set. Which will be by the end of this season. Lattest next summer. What remains to be seen is if it will be Ole reaping the benefits or an upgrade.of him.

Fair enough then if that's your view. We simply have a very different understanding of what a foundation and a complete picture looks like.

For me the foundation is a team with no weakness in personnel. The complete picture is consistently challenging for and wining things with what has been built.

I desire Ole to complete the foundation. Then Id like us to pick the right fit , with the high end cv to boot. to take the ship to outer space to conquer the galaxy

So we have Bruno Rashford Greenwood Cavani Pogba Maguire Shaw Awb DDG. Then this summer we added Varane Sancho and Ronaldo but we shouldn't expect a title challenge because of just one DM and those 3 worldclass players we signed are expected to take the whole season to bed in. feck me. Lets be real here if somebody isn't expecting a title challenge with this team they've dropped their standards

 

[Sky1981]

Taking away the goalpost on a pickup truck and runs away. This thread.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

So we have Bruno Rashford Greenwood Cavani Pogba Maguire Shaw Awb DDG. Then this summer we added Varane Sancho and Ronaldo but we shouldn't expect a title challenge because of just one DM and those 3 worldclass players we signed are expected to take the whole season to bed in. feck me. [/T]

What? Who said that?

 

[Flytan]

So we have Bruno Rashford Greenwood Cavani Pogba Maguire Shaw Awb DDG. Then this summer we added Varane Sancho and Ronaldo but we shouldn't expect a title challenge because of just one DM and those 3 worldclass players we signed are expected to take the whole season to bed in. feck me. Lets be real here if somebody isn't expecting a title challenge with this team they've dropped their standards

I mean it's not just our fans that are doing this. Gary Neville made a fool of himself yet again by saying if we signed Kane, Varane, and Sancho we'd go for the title. Then we do that and instead of Kane get Ronaldo and he changes his mind. Basically the fans (and Gary Neville) are intentionally moving the goalposts every single season to find new excuses of why Leicester can challenge for trophies, Chelsea can replace their manager midseason and win the UCL, and City are title favorites without a striker but we can't expect Ole to do anything useful until the squad perfectly suits his "style" which he himself has said isn't something he values.

 

[jamesjimmybyrondean]

Center midfield.
Sancho is still bedding in
It not known whether we are moving forward with Pogba or letting him go
We haven't decided whether we will let CR7 ana Cavani groom Greenwood into our next long term 9. Or we are going to go and sign Halaand

After 4.5 prior years of turning corners like we were at a round about, having wasted a lot of money resulting in an imbalanced, unhappy and Frankenstein squad? Yes.



I expect us to be ready to challenge and win trophies consistently after the foundations are set. Which will be by the end of this season. Lattest next summer. What remains to be seen is if it will be Ole reaping the benefits or an upgrade.of him.

Fair enough then if that's your view. We simply have a very different understanding of what a foundation and a complete picture looks like.

For me the foundation is a team with no weakness in personnel. The complete picture is consistently challenging for and wining things with what has been built.

I desire Ole to complete the foundation. Then Id like us to pick the right fit , with the high end cv to boot. to take the ship to outer space to conquer the galaxy

I might have misinterpreted but I assumed this means the foundation will be set by the end of the season or next summer then that's when we will be ready to challenge

 

[Smores]

So we have Bruno Rashford Greenwood Cavani Pogba Maguire Shaw Awb DDG. Then this summer we added Varane Sancho and Ronaldo but we shouldn't expect a title challenge because of just one DM and those 3 worldclass players we signed are expected to take the whole season to bed in. feck me. Lets be real here if somebody isn't expecting a title challenge with this team they've dropped their standards

It always amazes me when people move the goalposts. We're only at October and countless of those who were claiming Ole would have us as title challengers this season are now saying we never had enough.

 

[Nikelesh Reddy]

Lately without even 10 games played yet (In the PL), there is so much negativity and pessimism on the forum?

Like it's almost as if you'd think we're in a relegation battle, even after finishing 2nd last year, and yes I've heard all the excuses as to why we finished 2nd and why it was nothing to do with Ole or the players and in fact more to do with the teams around us. I mean we deserve some credit can't make up excuses for every single positive thing that United do. Anyway, there seems to be a lot of talk and dislike towards the manager. Now more than ever it seems as I'm perplexed as to why? Why now of all times, why right this moment?

We're not in free fall by any means and yet the feeling around the fans on here anyway is that we're in some sort of disaster mode. Even news that Phelan, Carrick, McKenna are getting new contracts somehow comes back to Ole and fake, patronising praise for the club.

The season has just begun and I'll say it again, people are getting really upset to the point where from the outside looking in, looking at people's reactions to news, it seems as though we're flirting with the bottom 3.

It's the international break too, which doesn't help things either.

It’s because expectations were sky high after we signed Ronaldo(and quite rightly so)….Plus we have dropped 5 points at home against 2 ordinary teams….Plus the quality of our performances isn’t anywhere near Liverpool,city or Chelsea’s level….That’s why we are seeing such pessimism at the start of this season…

 

[bond19821982]

We can challenge only after the foundations are set ? So Ronaldo, Pogba, Bruno, Sancho, Rashford, Cavani, Mason,Varane, Maguire isn't enough for a title challenge ?

Man, the level of embarrassing posts from posters who wants Ole to continue is just baffling.

 

[The Firestarter]

We can challenge only after the foundations are set ? So Ronaldo, Pogba, Bruno, Sancho, Rashford, Cavani, Mason,Varane, Maguire isn't enough for a title challenge ?

Man, the level of embarrassing posts from posters who wants Ole to continue is just baffling.

Traits of a personality cult.

 

[Kush]

We can challenge only after the foundations are set ? So Ronaldo, Pogba, Bruno, Sancho, Rashford, Cavani, Mason,Varane, Maguire isn't enough for a title challenge ?

Man, the level of embarrassing posts from posters who wants Ole to continue is just baffling.

It'll take a whole season of these new signings to gel you see, that's when foundations will be fully set! Oh, actually, let me cover all the bases, and add, another summer window will be required as new DM/ST/RB may be needed. This time, next year, I'll again write how the new signings need a season to bed in, and that's when the foundations will be fully set.

No wonder, we are the only club who seem to be stuck in a perpetual re-build. Because, we have never ending set of problems, and new transitional signings, because previous ones become too old or regress.

 

[largelyworried]

Ok, so lets try this again. Remember for those who claim I'm using unnecessary verbiage I have 3 posts a day.... I'm a newbie... thus trying come up with an argument and then defend it as much as I can whilst not attempting to write an actual small thesis is actually somewhat difficult. Further to this, if half of those of you who remarked had actually read anything I wrote you'd have noticed that I didn't say that Ole is was or ever will be Sir Alex and further still, even had I done that, none of you actually attempted to argue about why I was wrong just declared it as though that was enough to win the day.

I'm not saying you're suggesting SAF is Ole. I'm saying that he’s not is the point you're missing. Arguing that Ole plays a similar system to SAF therefore may also succeed is like saying Hassenhutel plays a similar system to Klopp and therefore is as good a manager. It's flawed logic.

There are basically two questions at play here. 1) Can a more improvised, player led style of football trump the system based managers we see these days at all and 2) Can Ole in particular do it? Invoking SAF answers neither of these questions.

 

[Hammondo]

We can challenge only after the foundations are set ? So Ronaldo, Pogba, Bruno, Sancho, Rashford, Cavani, Mason,Varane, Maguire isn't enough for a title challenge ?

Man, the level of embarrassing posts from posters who wants Ole to continue is just baffling.

Nope they are not.

 

[bond19821982]

Nope they are not.

Yeah , exactly what I said earlier.

 

[Bobcat]

Is it?

The idea that Sir Alex didn't have a system to his play and relied on individual coaching to get the best out of the team is nonsense. At most you can say he altered his system to the players he had on hand but he always inserted a very distinct style and made players follow strict systems.

There aren't many periods under Sir Alex where we didn't have an obvious system of play. I've seen more and more of these assessments and it saddens me that his time is being rewritten by some.

Not really tbh. This SAF nonsense has been debunked on here several times.

SAF was 100% more "freestyle" in his approach than these modern system managers that was mentioned and honestly it was the thing that made us so great. We played to the strengths of our squad and our players were free to express themselves and we often lined up in different formations depending on the team we fielded

The difference between now and then was the intensity and quality of what we did with and without the ball

 

[Hammondo]

SAF was 100% more "freestyle" in his approach than these modern system managers that was mentioned and honestly it was the thing that made us so great. We played to the strengths of our squad and our players were free to express themselves and we often lined up in different formations depending on the team we fielded

The difference between now and then was the intensity and quality of what we did with and without the ball

That way doesn't work anymore, coaching has improved a lot since then, it's simply not good enough.

 

[ShinjiNinja26]

Don’t worry lads we’re only 8 games in…