[dichinero]

Well if you don’t call them rivals that’s that then...

I meant in terms of ambitions.

 

[Di Maria's angel]

No one is expecting us to go to Anfield and rip them apart, but why was it so difficult for our players to string three passes together in the second half? The constant hoofing the ball clear from our defenders when they were not under any pressure is surely due to the manager's instructions? I've watched this clearing the ball thing even against Southampton FFS, this directly results in us relenting possession, invites even more attacks immediately after, absolutely zero chance of counter attacking as the cleared ball is so far off Lukaku.

I agree that it's an excellent and safe strategy to defend deep and get a point at Anfield, but what our players did wasn't defending, it was blindly relying on luck IMO, a better finisher than Salah would have buried that rebound after De Gea's wonder save, had Emre Can used his head, he would have scored easily. My biggest gripe yesterday is that we did not even attempt to counter attack yesterday.

Also what's this nonsense about Liverpool not changing their formation or going for the win, even if they had attacked even more we were never going to score by the way we played, plus don't they always play 4-3-3 with three midfielders? They subbed in three attackers too. Who came up with this bullshit excuse? Are we only capable of counter attacking or even attacking when the opposition play careless open football?

As for all the people in this thread saying we missed Fellaini, guess what Fellaini played against Southampton where we tried to hold on to an one goal lead, we looked just as bad as yesterday then too. Mario Lemina, a newbie to PL managed to boss our midfield.

When Mourinho signed for us I knew we'd be defensive against slightly better or equal teams, but not even trying to counter attack or play football is just not right after spending so much money on players.

I think you need to understand the difference between "not trying" and "not being able to". Last season, we went to Anfield with the purpose of not losing i.e. not trying. This year, we didn't. In fact, the sky pundits were stating this difference and how we looked intent on taking the game to Liverpool. We played an OK first half but failed to compete in the second. It definitely wasnt a case of not trying. We simply were not good enough yesterday which is hardly different to 99% of our games against our fiercest rivals.

 

[Di Maria's angel]

I meant in terms of ambitions.

Liverpool v Man United is different to any fixture - how people fail to understand this is beyond my comprehension.

Form, quality of players, league position, ambitions dont matter in these games. Remember the game where Berbatov scored the hatrick at OT? Hodgson was manager, IIRC, and Liverpool were sitting in the bottom half of the table yet we barely beat them. We won the league that year.

 

[Dorian Gray]

'Football fans' who are ok with this Mourinho brand of football should rewatch this:


PS.: This is not a 100% serious post. Maybe around 70%
PPS: If you are too busy for a 5 and a half minute video, just watch from 2:30 to 3:30 for the key message.

 

[grahamo]

United's back line dealt with everything Liverpool could throw at them. Easily! Liverpool could have played all day and still wouldn't have scored. United should have been braver against them but a point at anfield is acceptable.

 

[quethenoo]

I stand corrected; They won 2-0? Possibly Jose missed a trick. Then have Mikhy in place of Young if you have to include him.
Always been a fan of Blind in a midfield 3 when needed.

Yeah he looked comfortable but Sweden just sat in and made sure they didn't lose by 7 or whatever, so arguably not much of an audition for a central midfield berth.

Generally though, if you are saying Jose could have fashioned a midfield 3 if that's what he wanted, then I agree.

 

[red_john]

I agree, sit back against City at your peril.

I don't think Jose will park the bus against city as he knows the way to hurt them is to attack. Will be interesting to see what happens. Would you settle for a point against City?

 

[haram]

'Football fans' who are ok with this Mourinho brand of football should rewatch this:


PS.: This is not a 100% serious post. Maybe around 70%
PPS: If you are too busy for a 5 and a half minute video, just watch from 2:30 to 3:30 for the key message.

What was his 'brand of football' when we were winning 4-0 then. What was his 'brand of football' when he won the league with Real then.

He just knows when to attack, and when to defend.

 

[Tom Van Persie]

'Football fans' who are ok with this Mourinho brand of football should rewatch this:


PS.: This is not a 100% serious post. Maybe around 70%
PPS: If you are too busy for a 5 and a half minute video, just watch from 2:30 to 3:30 for the key message.

You mean the brand of football that has bagged us 21 goals in 8 games?

 

[#07]

 

[Dorian Gray]

You mean the brand of football that has bagged us 21 goals in 8 games?

Against?

 

[Redlyn]

Against?

Against the same bread and butter premier league teams that other top 4 rivals have struggled against and were the biggest reason for our underwhelming points total last season.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

Against?

7 in 2 games in the CL too. Things are going great - thanks for your concern!

 

[Dorian Gray]

What was his 'brand of football' when we were winning 4-0 then. What was his 'brand of football' when he won the league with Real then.

He just knows when to attack, and when to defend.

Dude, I am not arguing against the effectiveness of his brand of football. He IS the best at that - getting results and winning trophies.
And there is nothing wrong with liking that.
I was just expressing a personal opinion. For me, football has always been an escape from the dreary world. I would have been sorely disappointed watching my team play like that against our biggest rivals. No fun in that.

 

[el3mel]

Against?

Against the same teams City are banging goals against and people are saying they're the best ever in the league.

When we defeat these teams by 4 goals, it's because they're shite. When City do it, it's because they're excellent attacking team.

 

[haram]

Dude, I am not arguing against the effectiveness of his brand of football. He IS the best at that - getting results and winning trophies.
And there is nothing wrong with liking that.
I was just expressing a personal opinion. For me, football has always been an escape from the dreary world. I would have been sorely disappointed watching my team play like that against our biggest rivals. No fun in that.

Would have been so much more fun had we lost.

 

[Esquire]

Just got back from a biz trip (didn’t watch or listen to the news) and watched the replay.

1. Is this how we are going to play big 4 in the future? Wholly negative. Can’t stand it but getting a draw away from home against them is a good result.
2. Miki I like but cannot play in big games anymore. Just too soft.
3. Came away just... disappointed somehow that we were not just a tad more aggressive.

 

[Redlyn]

Just got back from a biz trip (didn’t watch or listen to the news) and watched the replay.

1. Is this how we are going to play big 4 in the future? Wholly negative. Can’t stand it but getting a draw away from home against them is a good result.
2. Miki I like but cannot play in big games anymore. Just too soft.
3. Came away just... disappointed somehow that we were not just a tad more aggressive.

Happy with the point but disappointed with how negative we were. However I could survive if we play 2 more games like this all season, at city and at chelsea but that's it.

Tried to give him a chance but miki is just too wasteful and soft for my liking.

 

[Android1974]

Just got back from a biz trip (didn’t watch or listen to the news) and watched the replay.

1. Is this how we are going to play big 4 in the future without Pogba, Fellaini and Carrick (and having stupidly loaned A.Pereira)? Wholly negative. Can’t stand it but getting a draw away from home against them is a good result.
2. Miki I like but cannot play in big games anymore. Just too soft.
3. Came away just... disappointed somehow that we were not just a tad more aggressive.

Just a little twitch…

 

[Foxbatt]

I think before we criticize Jose we should hear what Klopp said. It looked like a chess game to me with both managers waiting for the other to make a move. Jose was waiting for Klopp to attack more and open up so that he can bring his changes and try to attack Liverpool more. Klopp did not do that as he knew if he did that United would exploit the space available hence he also kept it defensive and denying United the space to counter attack.
Jose did not want to bring in changes also as it would open up United while Liverpool would still be tight and compact and may be able to hurt United. So it was a stalemate.

 

[James Peril]

I don't think Jose will park the bus against city as he knows the way to hurt them is to attack. Will be interesting to see what happens. Would you settle for a point against City?

Well, it depends, Mourinho will be defensively pragmatic and hope for the best. Man City have better players and are better at attacking than us, so without a great defensive tactic we would let in goals. Difference is, I believe Man City are a better team than United and I believe Liverpool are not. Just look at their team from yesterday, so many average players I would not even want on a free.

The pitiful thing here is that we always talk about City’s flair with highly involved full-backs and wingers - and Liverpool’s style that is always so dangerous - but what about us? Nobody is talking about our attacking game, well perhaps it being great at countering. It is always United changing ways to cope with other teams, but you never hear about them changing to deal with us (well, other than counters). That in itself is for me just plain wrong - it should be the other way around!

 

[Dorian Gray]

I think my post was misunderstood. I completely agree Mourinho is THE manager if you only want to win.
I think I am in the overwhleming minority, but for me, football was always an outlet, an outlet of unbridled joy, an escape from the unbearable sadness of this world. 90 minutes of adrenaline rush that make the other 9990 minutes of the week ( assuming 1 game per week) worth living.

I might be wrong, but Mourinho's playstyle doesn't give that. The games against your biggest rivals is what you live for!
As exemplified in that video I posted - 'there is no greater danger than playing it safe.'

Once again, it is probably just about personal preference, and what football means to you in life.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

Dude, I am not arguing against the effectiveness of his brand of football. He IS the best at that - getting results and winning trophies.
And there is nothing wrong with liking that.
I was just expressing a personal opinion. For me, football has always been an escape from the dreary world. I would have been sorely disappointed watching my team play like that against our biggest rivals. No fun in that.

Would you take a boring point at Old Trafford and winning the league? Your problem is that you've forgotten (or maybe never knew?) what it feels like and/or takes to win the league, so games like yesterday's mean everything to you. We were like it in the 80s too.

 

[Dorian Gray]

Would you take a boring point at Old Trafford and winning the league? Your problem is that you've forgotten (or maybe never knew?) what it feels like and/or takes to win the league, so games like yesterday's mean everything to you. We were like it in the 80s too.

Maybe you are right, I found football in early 90s (Liverpool in late 90s). For me, football was not about winning (humblebrag: I have enough conventional winning in real life). Football was an escape from the robotic world, a fountain of emotions, 90 minutes of my life when I actually felt alive. And I can't imagine feeling alive watching a Mourinho side play against its direct rivals.

Once again, just a personal preference, no judgement.

PS - My last post for the day. I would be able to post more only after 7 hours.

Imagine how you'd feel if you won the league?! Thankfully you're not likely to find out for a while yet ;-)

Hopefully, you are wrong

 

[Di Maria's angel]

Good read. Definitely agree with most that was stated.

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

Maybe you are right, I found football in early 90s (Liverpool in late 90s). For me, football was not about winning (humblebrag: I have enough conventional winning in real life). Football was an escape from the robotic world, a fountain of emotions, 90 minutes of my life when I actually felt alive. And I can't imagine feeling alive watching a Mourinho side play against its direct rivals.

Once again, just a personal preference, no judgement.

PS - My last post for the day. I would be able to post more only after 7 hours.

Imagine how you'd feel if you won the league?! Thankfully you're not likely to find out for a while yet ;-)

 

[Esquire]

Just a little twitch…

Understand your point but it’s not like we had stiffs at FW, LW and Attacking mid. Also had Matic and Herrera who are pretty good. It was just so negative and no matter how people couch it, it’s still ultra cautious against a Liverpool team without Sane and a crap defence.

But when we get Pogba and the other mids back hopefully we would be a bit more adventurous, especially against Shi**y.

 

[Un4givableB]

Good article, good to remind people that Fergie's football was sometimes, especially in the last couple of years was 'pragmatic' that's dull in english.

 

[Reiver]

Just watched the match. Yes, we were good defensively but, in every other aspect, quite disappointing. I'll certainly take a draw and would have before the match too. I wasn't expecting to go their and dominate Liverpool, like a lot of people seemed to expect.
I was very disappointed with our midfield. We got bossed by a midfield that includes the likes of Jordan Henderson. Yes, we have injuries but it was still worrying to see us put in such a poor display.
Overall I can't decide if it was players playing poorly - which is becoming a worrying trend after international breaks - or poor tactics, or a combination of both.
Say what you like about Pogba, and I'll admit he didn't really deliver in big games last season, but we look a lot worse without him in midfield as soon as we come up against anyone decent.

 

[breakout67]

Against the same teams City are banging goals against and people are saying they're the best ever in the league.

When we defeat these teams by 4 goals, it's because they're shite. When City do it, it's because they're excellent attacking team.

Its part of the narrative on this forum. Criticize every little thing regarding our own team.

The details of the game are irrelevant; because only a few people have talked about how Hererra and Mkhi could not carry the ball or find a pass to save their lives. You cannot give credit to Liverpool who closed down our players whenever we got the ball.

The tactical setup was anything but negative, but the hindsight specialists are out in full force. The 1st half was very end-to-end and were were trying to attack Liverpool, but they were doing well to close down the space. The 2nd half our level dropped massively so Mourinho made changes which balanced out the game so Klopp accepted the draw.

 

[Android1974]

Its part of the narrative on this forum. Criticize every little thing regarding our own team.

The details of the game are irrelevant; because only a few people have talked about how Hererra and Mkhi could not carry the ball or find a pass to save their lives. You cannot give credit to Liverpool who closed down our players whenever we got the ball.

The tactical setup was anything but negative, but the hindsight specialists are out in full force. The 1st half was very end-to-end and were were trying to attack Liverpool, but they were doing well to close down the space. The 2nd half our level dropped massively so Mourinho made changes which balanced out the game so Klopp accepted the draw.

Can't agree with you there, in that particular respect, since whenever Young operates as a winger now it's definitely a very defensive setup (check against Liverpool away last season, or Chelsea away for the FA Cup or at home, although in 4-4-2).

 

[breakout67]

Can't agree with you there, in that particular respect, since whenever Young operates as a winger now it's definitely a very defensive setup (check against Liverpool away last season, or Chelsea away for the FA Cup or at home, although in 4-4-2).

Whats the point in being so shallow in your assessment by just looking at team selection. How about look at the effect the player in question had on the game.

Ashley Young saw lots of the ball as we were targeting Moreno. All our corners came from his side and he had a good opportunity to score from the rebound from Lukaku's shot (but he took way too many touches and lost the chance to score). To use Ashley Young as an indication that we were playing negative makes no sense because he was actually one of our most threatening players.

We setup in the same way as in our previous games, however the lack of a good ball carrier in Fellaini/Pogba meant we couldnt get a hold of the midfield. This meant that Mkhitaryan saw very little of the ball and so had to rely on long balls to Lukaku and Young to initiate our attacks in the second half.

This game was distinctly different from the game last season at Anfield. Anyone with a bit of intelligence can see that we made an effort to push up the field and not get pushed back into our own box. The commentators even said a few times that our shape was very different to last seasons game.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

Perhaps because we're down to plan C midfield combination which doesn't tick when trying to move the ball forward? Pogba may not dominate game but he can still find way to pull some magic passes which can decide game

Fellaini for all his flaw is a good option bring down the ball from a long ball in midfield which quite a nuisance to defend as opposition team. Juanfield game, despite the dominance and possession, Fellaini role in beating the pressing can't be understated. CBS can't take risk raising the line to mark him. There is hardly any midfielder on the same level of chest control.

Hardly any team have the plan C that come in big game and still playing close to plan A level.

Watford had Tom Cleverley in midfield!!

But, seriously, as others have said, Jose would have played the same game whoever was fit.

 

[Sarni]

Against the same teams City are banging goals against and people are saying they're the best ever in the league.

When we defeat these teams by 4 goals, it's because they're shite. When City do it, it's because they're excellent attacking team.

Exactly

We put 4 past Everton, West Ham and Swansea and it's them who are shite and we did nothing impressive. City do that and they are amazing.

 

[The Mitcher]

Exactly

We put 4 past Everton, West Ham and Swansea and it's them who are shite and we did nothing impressive. City do that and they are amazing.

The hypocrisy really pisses me off. Until this match we were neck and neck on goal difference.

 

[Galactico]

I am quite disappointed that we did not have a sustained period in the match where we truly tried to test their defence. We played it ultra safe and that is unforgivable for our club.

This goes beyond 0, 1 or 3 points. It’s anout the identity of our club. We didn’t win over millions of supporters worldwide by playing this style in a match against our biggest rivals. They’re not even league contenders at the moment. Why do we show them so much respect? Would we do the same of Watford who have more points.

This game was an advert for the premier league and for Manchester United, watched by millions around the world. I doubt we would have won many fans over who subscribe to the United ethos of attacking football and flair and guts. I did not see a winning mentality from my team and that worries me. I witnessed a “let’s not get beat” mentality, and I fear that this does not win you titles. We also leave this game, not knowing anything about our true level against Liverpool.

Man City, on the other hand, took the opportunity yesterday to shine and outscored their opponent. They would have won a lot of fans with their brand of football and I’m sure a lot of you are watching on with envy (I am and ashamed to admit it). How many fans / players will be watching that game and envious or want to play for United?

It’s not about the points, it’s about the ethos of the club. I feel we had enough in us to take them on and win. We will now never know what would had happened if we had at least tried.

 

[Hullyback]

What was his 'brand of football' when we were winning 4-0 then. What was his 'brand of football' when he won the league with Real then.

He just knows when to attack, and when to defend.

He must be a big fan of Kenny Rogers.

 

[Red Primus]

I think my post was misunderstood. I completely agree Mourinho is THE manager if you only want to win.
I think I am in the overwhleming minority, but for me, football was always an outlet, an outlet of unbridled joy, an escape from the unbearable sadness of this world. 90 minutes of adrenaline rush that make the other 9990 minutes of the week ( assuming 1 game per week) worth living.

I might be wrong, but Mourinho's playstyle doesn't give that. The games against your biggest rivals is what you live for!
As exemplified in that video I posted - 'there is no greater danger than playing it safe.'

Once again, it is probably just about personal preference, and what football means to you in life.

You're pigeonholing Mourinho into a category he isn't supposed to be in. He's not a safety first-by the numbers manager. He goes for the smart play that yields results over the long term. His brand is Adaptive Football. Fun or not, that video you showed doesn't prove anything, in fact, it's quite the opposite - the players there are playing a ONE TIME Only match - a winner takes all match which means they can go all out to achieve their objective with no consequence. Mourinho has done the same when it comes to Finals when there's nothing to lose. You can throw in the kitchen sink when there's no long term circumstances to consider.

United has played entertaining football a whole lot more this season but people tend to focus on the ones where we are more strategic thus may be considered lacking in entertainment despite the mitigating circumstances. Context is king.

 

[vivaronaldo]

Out of interest, was the Stoke game, after an International break?
If so, we have 2 draws, both of which occurred immediately after an international break.

jose has yet to win a game for united after the international break...

 

[Davistiano]

It is always a tough match at Anfield, and 1 point is of course better than losing.

Yes, we showed no motivation to win at all. Passes from the midfield were mostly aimless - looked like a clear rather than a pass. One may say Mou's tactics caused us the 3 points, however I don't think his tactics was the major problem thou. As a fan, of course we would want to see beautiful football week in week out, beating Liverpool with another 4:0 will be great result of course; but in reality, it is impossible to do that every time.

We were supposed to hit them on break - and while we did not created many break chances - if Lukaku scored that one, it will be a totally different story and I think by that time Mou's tactics would be a success, and that possibly will open up Liv and allow us to score more.

Now, lets move on and we should focus on the upcoming big games, especially when we play against City...

Glory Glory Man United!!