Workrate

[OnlyTwoDaSilvas]

I trust the manager. I don't care about seeing Liverpool press the way they do. We also saw last season that they were absolutely knackered in some games towards the end of the season. They were finished about 25 minutes into that Europa League final, and ended up getting turned over.

If we are to contain opponents, we need to be better defensively. Especially positionally. If we do that by covering the least amount of ground in the league, then I don't care.

 

[Dir Wangem]

Updated picture from Reddit:

I will always find this topic interesting. Why would some teams run almost 10k less than other teams? That's 10 full pitch-lengths per outfield player! It's a staggering difference. Are coaches telling the players to take it easy? Is it to spare strength or to avoid injuries? Or is it just a case of "positive" and attacking-minded football requiring more running?

 

[Stack]

Work rate is an issue but doing what Liverpool do isn't the answer in my opinion. It looks good when works but when doesn't it's horrible. Not to mention it's not sustainable in a league where there is no winter break, the game is played at a much higher tempo and there are so many competitions to take part in.

However, the way we set up isn't the answer either. I like Koeman's approach, liked it when he's at Southampton and liking it at Everton. His team don't press until the other team cross the halfway line but once they do, his players are all over them giving very little space and time. In contrast what we do is, we drop further back! We don't pressurize the opponent's at all and let them all the time and space to play.

What's the point of singing Pogbas and Mkhis if we're going to sit back and pack our defense! We've a big squad, have a much, much better bench than last season when we'd the likes of McNair, Powell, Poole, Riley etc. on the bench. So let's be a bit more adventurous. We've the players now and they're definitely capable of playing in more an imposing system, just need the platform.

Exactly, thats how i like to see it done. When we drop back till our defensive third it means that our counter attack has too far to go to score and the longer it takes to get forward on a counter the more chance the opposition has to recover and defend. Just inside our own half as a trigger to press is smarter as far as Im concerned.

 

[gav81]

“Let’s get ready, put all our energy and efforts into the next game and believe we can get a result. You run and you run and you run . . . you keep going, keep going until the game is over and after the game don’t worry if you’re shattered, we’ll carry you off the pitch.”

~Roy Keane prior to Ireland's 1-0 victory vs Italy, Euro 2016

 

[Stack]

“Let’s get ready, put all our energy and efforts into the next game and believe we can get a result. You run and you run and you run . . . you keep going, keep going until the game is over and after the game don’t worry if you’re shattered, we’ll carry you off the pitch.”

~Roy Keane prior to Ireland's 1-0 victory vs Italy, Euro 2016

Your obsession is cringeworthy....

 

[The United]

We usually sit back anywhere, any time in the games, hoof the ball and probably 3-4 players only running after the ball, then lose the ball back.

Rinse and repeat. Not exactly surprising when your main tactic is to sit deep on your ass pretty much the whole match so you don't have the space even to run much.

 

[Amadaeus]

Updated picture from Reddit:

I will always find this topic interesting. Why would some teams run almost 10k less than other teams? That's 10 full pitch-lengths per outfield player! It's a staggering difference. Are coaches telling the players to take it easy? Is it to spare strength or to avoid injuries? Or is it just a case of "positive" and attacking-minded football requiring more running?

This is the most depressing statistic to see as a fan of United. It is really difficult to support a team that barely works hard and does not show the desire to win. If such a statistic persist, I can guarantee that we will not make top four this season. I would hope to see an improvement on this before December, else we better start planning for Mourinho exist.

 

[Smores]

Exactly, thats how i like to see it done. When we drop back till our defensive third it means that our counter attack has too far to go to score and the longer it takes to get forward on a counter the more chance the opposition has to recover and defend. Just inside our own half as a trigger to press is smarter as far as Im concerned.

It works fine if you have the players with speed to break early but we havent for a long time. Playing that way with Ibra, Rooney, Mata on the pitch is madness.

We need to change our lineups or our tactics

 

[Green_Red]

It's something I have noticed so far this season. Wonder if they're being trained too hard to make up for the poor pre-season or it's just fitness issues

Most of our players were at the Euros so thats why we had a small pre season I believe. Fitness levels didnt seem to matter at Hull, we played alk the way through to the 94th minute.

We have too many slow players. Fellaini, Pogba and Mata aren't known for their workrate, neither is Ibrahimovic. Martial's defensive work is mediocre at best, poor most times. Rooney's legs are gone.

And there it is.

/thread... and forum

 

[An Irish Red]

We've got the biggest, most physically dominant side we've probably ever had and we use it to sit deep and invite pressure. It's just silly.

We should be all over teams and trying to push them back all the time and we do the exact opposite. It baffles me.

 

[MooseTheMooche]

Worrying statistic. Although I agree that running around like a headless chicken is completely pointless; the lack of our desire to sit on opponents is staggering. Watford game was just a perfect example of this. We sat back, hoping for a hoofball miracle, and let them grow into the game and ultimately punish us. City is another example, which I think is much more frustrating than the Watford game, because we were playing at our own stadium (and the goals we've lost were just woeful; standing like training posts).

I am absolutely stunned that we still play this shite of football (hoof it and hope for the best), because from what I remember, Mourinho's chelski 14/15 played mesmerizing football at times (Schuerrle's goal vs. Burnley was just a masterclass in passing, and off the ball movement).

 

[Mr. Meeseeks]

Updated picture from Reddit:

I will always find this topic interesting. Why would some teams run almost 10k less than other teams? That's 10 full pitch-lengths per outfield player! It's a staggering difference. Are coaches telling the players to take it easy? Is it to spare strength or to avoid injuries? Or is it just a case of "positive" and attacking-minded football requiring more running?

Worrying. I'm sure our tactics have a lot to do with it. But defensively, some of the goals we have conceded have been down to not closing a man down. Against Watford, Mourinho himself said their 2nd goal was down to Shaw not closing Amrabat down. He said that Shaw was told to be less than 5 meters away from him in that situation, but he was more like 25 meters away. The players need to start working harder.

 

[bpet15]

Would love to see a metric that is "km run when opponent has the ball" and "km run when in possession."

The first one doesn't mean much to me, the second one is where I think we struggle - and yes, it's concerning.

 

[Wooly Red]

That's an interesting statistic, but I'm not sure if it means anything. Everton and Chelsea are not much higher in the table and are still doing well. Burnley and Boro have run a lot more but that hasn't translated to wins either. It just reflects the tactics - Sunderland and their three DMs are pretty close to you.

I still think you all should be worried about the statistics from your midfield. I don't know what they are but I have a feeling they might show an indication of how poor it has been for the past three games in terms of attack.

 

[Lentwood]

I think we do have a problem. We seem to think that we can saunter through games in 2nd gear. When did you last see Utd play and think 'we are up for this today?' I want to see some passion, some tackles and a bit of energy! Its the PL, first dominate physically and earn the right to play

 

[redman5]

I think we do have a problem. We seem to think that we can saunter through games in 2nd gear. When did you last see Utd play and think 'we are up for this today?' I want to see some passion, some tackles and a bit of energy! Its the PL, first dominate physically and earn the right to play

I think it was Bill Shankly who once said something similar. He claimed that it doesn't matter how many good players you have in your team they had to earn the right to play their football out there on the pitch. It's no coincidence that Liverpool, City, & Spurs are noted for playing good football & also occupy the top 3 slots of sides who cover the most ground. Anyone who thinks those teams will suffer some sort of burn out are burying their heads in the sand. One tackle or interception can change the whole dynamics of a game. If a player doesn't make the effort to make that tackle or interception then the other side may go on to score, create an opening, or continue to dominate possession. However, if he does put the effort in the probability is that the reverse could happen. Multiply this by 10 outfield players doing the same thing numerous times during a match, & you give yourself a great chance, especially if you have the quality to go alongside the endeavour.

 

[Treble]

I'd like to see Chelsea's stats from the start of last season. They may go a long way in explaining why United suffered 3 defeats within a week.

Is it possible that Mou hasn't updated his training methods and his teams struggle fitness wise? This may explain why 10 men PSG outplayed Chelsea at their ground.

Edit: Chelsea were 13th, 20th were Villa.

 

[Treble]

That's from last season. City's and Chelsea's stats explain why both teams struggled to perform according to the expectations.

Edit: Liverpool were midtable when Klopp took over.

 

[JPRouve]

I'd like to see Chelsea's stats from the start of last season. They may go a long way in explaining why United suffered 3 defeats within a week.

Is it possible that Mou hasn't updated his training methods and his teams struggle fitness wise? This may explain why 10 men PSG outplayed Chelsea at their ground.

Edit: Chelsea were 13th, 20th were Villa.

It's not a fitness problem, it's far worse. We are tactically unprepared, we are supposed to be a sliding defense but the block doesn't slide, we are supposed to use zonal marking but our players don't pickup the players that enter their zone.

It's as if Mourinho gave the instructions but forgot to dispense the tactical sessions on the training field. For example Conte does a 11 vs 0.

 

[redflair]

Why do people think this a surprise?

Mourinho's innate conservative nature has always meant he likes to save the most attacking energy for..

1. When the team is behind and..

2. When they're breaking from a defensive spring ie his 3T formula (turnover, transition and tempo) which he used to such devastating effect at Porto, Chelsea (Mark 1) and Inter.

I don't expect anything different here at OT. His philosophy is ingrained (but ultimately, I hope, successful).

 

[JPRouve]

Why do people think this a surprise?

Mourinho's innate conservative nature has always meant he likes to save the most attacking energy for..

1. When the team is behind and..

2. When they're breaking from a defensive spring ie his 3T formula (turnover, transition and tempo) which he used to such devastating effect at Porto, Chelsea (Mark 1) and Inter.

I don't expect anything different here at OT. His philosophy is ingrained (but ultimately, I hope, successful).

Unfortunately that argument is pretty bad, good defensive teams work more.

Edit: When they are "conservative", that's why a lot of teams want the ball.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

That's from last season. City's and Chelsea's stats explain why both teams struggled to perform according to the expectations.

Edit: Liverpool were midtable when Klopp took over.

Only if Chelsea's stats were different in the previous season, when they won the league.

If Mourinho's teams have always run less than most others it might be the main reason he managed to keep a lean squad and a fixed starting XI, while generally being fairly lucky with injuries.

 

[montpelier]

Right, to look for a connection between the playing of the top top footy & running about a lot, I done some fascinating stats analysis for us all to enjoy. This is firstly, points & goal difference in workrate order & then added together. Then the 2nd lot just adds some numbers credit for the tremendous-ness of endeavour. It ends up looking like the actual League table but maybe supports our perceptions about who have been the teams with most authority to their play - LFC, City, Arsenal (now) and Everton !!! vs us & Chelsea say. You could also just as easily say it's a load of crap distorted to a fair degree by the hard games vs easy games effect that is very tricky to quantify. It doesn't look good for us though if you think we are a Top 4 side.

(not sure everything is totally right, )

Liverpool -------------- 10 11-8 ====== Pts + GD = 13
Man City-------------- 15 15-4 ======Pts + GD = 26
Spurs------------------ 11 8-2 =======Pts + GD = 17
Burnley----------------- 4 3-8 =======Pts + GD = MINUS 1
West Brom------------- 7 6-5 =======Pts + GD =8
Arsenal-----------------10 12-7 ======Pts + GD 15
Middlesbro---------------5 5-7 =======Pts + GD = 3
Bournemouth-----------4 3-9 =======Pts + GD = MINUS 2
Southampton-----------5 4-6 =======Pts + GD = MINUS 4
Leicester-----------------7 7-7 =======Pts + GD = 7
Swansea-----------------4 4-7 =======Pts + GD = 1
Everton-----------------13 10-3 ======Pts + GD = 20
West Ham----------------3 7-13 ======Pts + GD = MINUS 3
Chelsea------------------10 10-6 ======pts + Gd = 14
Watford-------------------7 10-9 ======pts + GD = 8
Stoke----------------------1 3-14 ======pts + GD = MINUS 10
Hull------------------------7 6-7 =======pts + GD = 6
C Palace-------------------7 7-5 =======pts + GD = 9
Sunderland---------------1 3-9 =======pts + GD = MINUS 5
UNITED-------------------9 8-6 =======pts + Gd = 11

And with some 10-10-9-9-8-8-7-7-6-6.... etc, weighting for the workrate

Liverpool 23
Man City 36
Spurs 26
Burnley 8
West Brom 16
Arsenal 22
Middlesbro 10
Bmouth 5
Southampton 2
Leicester 12
Swansea 6
Everton 25
West Ham 2
Chelsea 18
Watford 11
Stoke MINUS 7
Hull 8
C Palace 11
Sunderland MINUS 4
UNITED 12

 

[redflair]

Unfortunately that argument is pretty bad, good defensive teams work more.

It may be good, bad or otherwise, but most people knew what we were getting by hiring him. There is no point people complaining about 'sitting behind the ball', 'not being proactive' because that, generally, is what a Mourinho side does.

Like I said, I hope he's successful - but he needs some brutal changes in personnel if any of that is to come to fruition.

 

[JPRouve]

Only if Chelsea's stats were different in the previous season, when they won the league.

If Mourinho's teams have always run less than most others it might be the main reason he managed to keep a lean squad and a fixed starting XI, while generally being fairly lucky with injuries.

They were 5th in 2014/2015.

 

[JPRouve]

It may be good, bad or otherwise, but most people knew what we were getting by hiring him. There is no point people complaining about 'sitting behind the ball', 'not being proactive' because that, generally, is what a Mourinho side does.

Like I said, I hope he's successful - but he needs some brutal changes in personnel if any of that is to come to fruition.

It's not even true, good Mourinho's team don't run less.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

They were 5th in 2014/2015.

Well there you go. This isn't tactics. Just players being lazy cnuts. I wonder who the main culprits are? (although I'm sure we could all name at least one of them!)

 

[Pogue Mahone]

EDIT. Could only find the top 10 players for distance covered.

1. George Boyd (Burnley) = 49.6km
2. Jordan Henderson (Liverpool) - 48.0km
3. Roberto Firmino (Liverpool) - 46.9km
4. Adam Lallana (Liverpool) - 46.6km
5. Jack Cork (Swansea) - 46.2km
6. Kevin De Bruyne (Manchester City) - 46.0km
7. Daniel Drinkwater (Leicester) - 45.7km
8. Marouane Fellaini (Manchester United) - 45.7km
9. Andrew Surman (Bouremouth) - 45.6km
10. Craig Dawson (West Brom) - 45.6km

The much-maligned Marouane Fellaini is the only United player to feature.

I wonder how many would make the bottom 10?

 

[JPRouve]

Well there you go. This isn't tactics. Just players being lazy cnuts. I wonder who the main culprits are? (although I'm sure we could all name at least one of them!)

Shame on me, I messed up, they had two players in the top 5, they weren't actually top 5. And I can't find the stats for that particular season but in 2013/2014 they were 13th, I think.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Shame on me, I messed up, they had two players in the top 5, they weren't actually top 5. And I can't find the stats for that particular season but in 2013/2014 they were 13th, I think.

Ok. Interesting. That changes everything. Damn you!

 

[Pogue Mahone]

You know, if this really is the norm for Mourinho teams it explains a lot of stuff. I already mentioned that it might be linked to the way he typically has lean squad, a settled first XI and relatively few injuries. It's probably also a factor in his reputation for not playing kids. Which is something that really stands out when you see him picking strong teams for Carling Cup games and the like. He very rarely gives first-teamers a break because he doesn't need to.

 

[Treble]

Only if Chelsea's stats were different in the previous season, when they won the league.

If Mourinho's teams have always run less than most others it might be the main reason he managed to keep a lean squad and a fixed starting XI, while generally being fairly lucky with injuries.

Completely agree.

Unfortunately I can't find PL stats for the season when they won the title. Only found stats about the CL, season 2014/15. Chelsea covered way more distance in the CL compared to the PL last season when they struggled: 112 km vs 108km per game. Basically, they would be in the top 3 up there with Liverpool with 112 km per game. But the CL stats may be generally higher than the PL stats, don't know about that.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Completely agree.

Unfortunately I can't find PL stats for the season when they won the title. Only found stats about the CL, season 2014/15. Chelsea covered way more distance in the CL compared to the PL last season when they struggled: 112 km vs 108km per game. Basically, they would be in the top 3 up there with Liverpool with 112 km per game. But the CL stats may be generally higher than the PL stats, don't know about that.

That CL stuff is interesting. I wonder if all teams up their distances in Europe?

 

[Bwuk]

You know, if this really is the norm for Mourinho teams it explains a lot of stuff. I already mentioned that it might be linked to the way he typically has lean squad, a settled first XI and relatively few injuries. It's probably also a factor in his reputation for not playing kids. Which is something that really stands out when you see him picking strong teams for Carling Cup games and the like. He very rarely gives first-teamers a break because he doesn't need to.

Nope. On average per game Matic was #2 in the league, and Fabregas #5 the time Chelsea last won the premier league.

http://talksport.com/football/premi...ers-average-distance-covered-game-201415?p=10

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Nope. On average per game Matic was #2 in the league, and Fabregas #5 the time Chelsea last won the premier league.

http://talksport.com/football/premi...ers-average-distance-covered-game-201415?p=10

What about the team overall, though?

 

[Bwuk]

What about the team overall, though?

I have no idea and I can't find the numbers, but the likes of Willian, Oscar, Hazard, Azpilicueta, Ramires etc were not lazy players.

The Barca team under Pep used to cover a lot of ground but rarely rotated.

 

[JPRouve]

What about the team overall, though?

I have no idea and I can't find the numbers, but the likes of Willian, Oscar, Hazard, Azpilicueta, Ramires etc were not lazy players.

The Barca team under Pep used to cover a lot of ground but rarely rotated.

I remember seeing Azpi and Willian fairly high in that stat, that year.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Hmmmm... We're all still speculating.

All we know for certain is that:

1. United are currently 20th
   
2. Chelsea were 17th in 2015/16 (did crap)
3. Chelsea were 13th in 2013/14 (3rd in PL, SF of CL)
4. Fellaini is the only United player in the top 10 this season

So it does look to be at least partly down to tactics, which have previously been reasonably successful.

Of course, the drop from 13th to 20th is a big drop. You wonder how much of that might be down to a small number of players letting the side down?

I'm thinking mainly of the likes of Rooney and Ibra. Although the fact that we've only one United player in the top 10 (Fellaini) is a damning indictment on all of our team, especially (and I hate to say this) Pogba. It's abundantly clear that Fellaini is supposed to be the most deep-lying of all our CMs. Yet he's covering more ground than our box to box superstar. That ain't good at all. Hopefully things will change as his fitness starts to improve.

 

[Dobbs]

Maybe Mourinho's way of doing things is dinosaur stuff now. What worked so well for him back in the days, and especially from 2004-2010, isn't working as well anymore it seems.

He's said we need to press more. So what we're seeing on the pitch isn't exactly what Mourinho wants.

 

[redflair]

It's not even true, good Mourinho's team don't run less.

I have never said Mourinho's teams run less. I said his innate conservatism is ingrained. I'm afraid that's unarguable.

We both want the same thing: a powerful, high-octane outfit that creates lots of chances and scores goals.

We won't have that with at least three of the players we currently have in the first team.