Louis Van Gaal | 2015-16 Performance Thread

Van Gaal: The verdict

  • 1) Sack him now.

  • 2) Sack him at the end of the season.

  • 3) Let him see out his contract and part ways after that.

  • 4) Extend his contract.

  • Undecided (between 1 and 2).

  • Undecided (between 2 and 3).

  • Undecided (between 3 and 4, if things improve before his contract expires, extend).

Results are only viewable after voting.
"One night, I went to a bar, I was with a woman. We talked all night. We laughed, we flirted, I paid for several drinks of hers.
At around 5am, a guy came in, grabbed her by the arm and took her to the bathroom. He made love to her and she left with him. That doesn’t matter, because I had most of the possession on that night."
Jorge Sampaoli, Chile coach.
 
Stack said:
"One night, I went to a bar, I was with a woman. We talked all night. We laughed, we flirted, I paid for several drinks of hers.
At around 5am, a guy came in, grabbed her by the arm and took her to the bathroom. He made love to her and she left with him. That doesn’t matter, because I had most of the possession on that night."
Jorge Sampaoli, Chile coach.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
West Ham boss Slaven Bilic on van Gaal's United

Slaven Bilic has rejected suggestions Manchester United are boring. “They’re different from the Alex Ferguson era where they were quicker, more electric and bombarding the box,” said Bilic, whose West Ham side visit Old Trafford on Saturday. But he denied that made Louis van Gaal’s team dull and pointed to the effectiveness of an approach which is delivering narrow victories.

“They are winning and not conceding goals,” West Ham’s manager said. “Somebody said they are boring but I am not sure why people are saying this. They are keeping the ball, they are not a team who give you the ball and defend – you can say that this kind of football is sometimes boring. However, they have possession of the ball, they are controlling the game and they are trying to win every game.

“You can say that United are different from before, especially at home where opponents are now defending with numbers behind the ball, very compact and very deeply. With this being the case, United cannot play more direct or at a higher tempo because for this you need gaps and space behind or in between the lines of the opponent which are difficult to find. We can call it controlled football, we can call it patient football but so far it is very effective because they are in a good position in the league.”

Bilic said it was possible to give players freedom while adopting a patient style. “If you are playing this controlled football against a team that is defending by doubling or tripling up on players then it comes down to a player, especially up front or out wide, to display some kind of magic.”

Bilic agrees with Van Gaal over the importance of scoring the first goal when playing the way United do. “After that first goal there is an opportunity to exploit the space in behind teams or in between the lines as the opponent pushes up higher and takes more risks,” he said.

“I don’t find them boring – they are hard to beat. I watch them a lot and every game they have more chances and more ball possession than the opponent and in every game the opponent has only one or two chances.”
 
SteveJ said:
Bilic said it was possible to give players freedom while adopting a patient style. “If you are playing this controlled football against a team that is defending by doubling or tripling up on players then it comes down to a player, especially up front or out wide, to display some kind of magic.”
Click to expand...

As with Barca and Bayern (who have superstars in their attack), we also need 1 or 2 superstars.
I think it was a big shame that we let Di Maria go. A creative player with speed, who can take on defenders and dribble past them. That's exactly the sort of player we are looking for.

SteveJ said:
“I don’t find them boring – they are hard to beat. I watch them a lot and every game they have more chances and more ball possession than the opponent and in every game the opponent has only one or two chances.”
Click to expand...

He is right about this.
Apart from a few games, most teams don't get many chances against us.
 
SteveJ said:
Slaven Bilic has rejected suggestions Manchester United are boring. “They’re different from the Alex Ferguson era where they were quicker, more electric and bombarding the box,” said Bilic, whose West Ham side visit Old Trafford on Saturday. But he denied that made Louis van Gaal’s team dull and pointed to the effectiveness of an approach which is delivering narrow victories.

“I don’t find them boring – they are hard to beat. I watch them a lot and every game they have more chances and more ball possession than the opponent and in every game the opponent has only one or two chances.”
Click to expand...

sounds like he would find them boring as a united supporter. FFS , the opening of the last sentence.
 
sunama said:
As with Barca and Bayern (who have superstars in their attack), we also need 1 or 2 superstars.
I think it was a big shame that we let Di Maria go. A creative player with speed, who can take on defenders and dribble past them. That's exactly the sort of player we are looking for.
Click to expand...

He didn't want to be here, that would have affected team spirit and his own performances.
 
"Last season I said a lot of things about the fans and their support for us despite the results. But now the results are reasonable or may be very good and now there is sometimes they shout 'attack, attack, attack' but we are attacking 70 percent [of the time] because we have the ball.

"Maybe they want more long balls, more activity in the 18-yard box, yes that is possible. But I think we don't have the players to play with long balls. Then we have to play with [Marouane] Fellaini in a striker's position and he is not a typical striker. Then we have to buy other strikers and that is not our opinion"
Click to expand...

Was that a misquotation or he just think it that way? If the latter then lord help us. Whatever exciting football we want to see, we'll never see it under LvG.
 
Last edited:
fallengt said:
Was that a misquotation or he just think it that way? If the latter then lord help us. Whatever exciting football we want to see, we'll never see it under LvG.
Click to expand...
Van Gaal believe that when his team has possession of he ball, they're "attacking" in his eyes. It's hard to agree with his logic.
 
He genuinely thinks our football is alright because we have lots of possession. He actually said that. Baffling. He might be a top coach but we'll never play exciting football under him. Please for the love of god get rid at the end of the season.
 
fallengt said:
Was that a misquotation or he just think it that way? If the latter then lord help us. Whatever exciting football we want to see, we'll never see it under LvG.
Click to expand...
That's a bizarre quote. We don't need to play more long balls. We need to have the ball in and around the opposition box more and just behind the half way line less. If our players were taking more touches in the box there would be less complaints.
 
SteveJ said:
West Ham boss Slaven Bilic on van Gaal's United

Slaven Bilic has rejected suggestions Manchester United are boring. “They’re different from the Alex Ferguson era where they were quicker, more electric and bombarding the box,” said Bilic, whose West Ham side visit Old Trafford on Saturday. But he denied that made Louis van Gaal’s team dull and pointed to the effectiveness of an approach which is delivering narrow victories.

“They are winning and not conceding goals,” West Ham’s manager said. “Somebody said they are boring but I am not sure why people are saying this. They are keeping the ball, they are not a team who give you the ball and defend – you can say that this kind of football is sometimes boring. However, they have possession of the ball, they are controlling the game and they are trying to win every game.

“You can say that United are different from before, especially at home where opponents are now defending with numbers behind the ball, very compact and very deeply. With this being the case, United cannot play more direct or at a higher tempo because for this you need gaps and space behind or in between the lines of the opponent which are difficult to find. We can call it controlled football, we can call it patient football but so far it is very effective because they are in a good position in the league.”

Bilic said it was possible to give players freedom while adopting a patient style. “If you are playing this controlled football against a team that is defending by doubling or tripling up on players then it comes down to a player, especially up front or out wide, to display some kind of magic.”

Bilic agrees with Van Gaal over the importance of scoring the first goal when playing the way United do. “After that first goal there is an opportunity to exploit the space in behind teams or in between the lines as the opponent pushes up higher and takes more risks,” he said.

“I don’t find them boring – they are hard to beat. I watch them a lot and every game they have more chances and more ball possession than the opponent and in every game the opponent has only one or two chances.”
Click to expand...

Nuff said
 
amolbhatia50k said:
That's a bizarre quote. We don't need to play more long balls. We need to have the ball in and around the opposition box more and just behind the half way line less. If our players were taking more touches in the box there would be less complaints.
Click to expand...

I think what he is saying is that we are always looking to attack but we don't always find an opening or some of our players arent adept at making those incisive passes like Barca/Bayern players seem to be. Without that we don't have a choice sometimes but pass it sideways or back.
 
Mitchell Nicholas said:
Van Gaal believe that when his team has possession of he ball, they're "attacking" in his eyes. It's hard to agree with his logic.
Click to expand...
You want to attack without the ball? You're either attacking or defending, at any stage in the game except for the drop ball. When the opponent has the ball you defend and if you have the ball, you're the attacking team. It's perfectly logic.

It doesn't adress the issue that the attacks are build up too slow and aren't as direct as people want to see them, but nor did the 'attack, attack, attack' shouts. Strictly logical they should have shouted 'attack with more directness' or 'hurry up', but of course shouts have their own logic. You can blame him for not really adressing the issue into detail, but it's nonsense to blame him for his logic that you attack when you have the ball.
 
Dr. Funkenstein said:
You want to attack without the ball? You're either attacking or defending, at any stage in the game except for the drop ball. When the opponent has the ball you defend and if you have the ball, you're the attacking team. It's perfectly logic.

It doesn't adress the issue that the attacks are build up too slow and aren't as direct as people want to see them, but nor did the 'attack, attack, attack' shouts. Strictly logical they should have shouted 'attack with more directness' or 'hurry up', but of course shouts have their own logic. You can blame him for not really adressing the issue into detail, but it's nonsense to blame him for his logic that you attack when you have the ball.
Click to expand...

Have you seen us with the ball? We do jack all with it. Time just passes us by. People are attacking him for his definition of attack in possession because one doesnt translate into the other.
 
To be fair, if LVG can get this possession football to work properly, it will be a joy to watch. But one must remember that in the last decade or so, only two teams have been able to pull it off with any meaningful success - Barca and Pep's current Bayern team. Then you go back to the 90s and, again, it was only really Cruyff's Barca and LVG's Ajax who emulated the ideal for which we're striving. Look at the players of those teams and compare them with ours, and the difficulty of implementing it successfully becomes evident. You just cannot achieve that level with players like Young, Lingard or Rooney. I'm not willing to claim Memphis as insufficient to the cause, yet.

If we could get the players of the necessary calibre, I do think LVG could turn us into a frightening force.

Ifs and buts, I guess, and he must bear some criticism for failing to acquire the requisite players, although getting likes of the Neymars and Mullers has been very difficult in recent windows.
 
Stack said:
"One night, I went to a bar, I was with a woman. We talked all night. We laughed, we flirted, I paid for several drinks of hers.
At around 5am, a guy came in, grabbed her by the arm and took her to the bathroom. He made love to her and she left with him. That doesn’t matter, because I had most of the possession on that night."
Jorge Sampaoli, Chile coach.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
LeftyBlaster said:
Have you seen us with the ball? We do jack all with it. Time just passes us by. People are attacking him for his definition of attack in possession because one doesnt translate into the other.
Click to expand...
I understand the issue, but you can't expect the manager to call it defence when they have the ball and try to get it towards the box. If it isn't defence it's attack, just because there are only the two.
 
Saying that keeping the ball isn't used as a form of defense in possession football is just lying in my opinion, maybe to himself without realising it, but it's just plain wrong. It's silly to try to sell it as attacking when a huge reason behind it is to keep the ball away from the opponent and the team is more focused on not losing it than on creating something.

Similarly pressing high up the pitch is at least partly attacking even though you don't have the ball. Like Klopp called it 'his playmaker'. You take the risk that the opponent plays through the press and get an easy chance to score, but you try to win the ball in transition and get an easy chance against a disorganised defense.

It's the intention behind your action that defines attacking or defending in my opinion. If your intention for keeping the ball is to play it safe and deny the opponent the chance to create something himself, then you're defending. It's silly to try and portray it as attacking when you don't intend to attack.
 
Last edited:
Balu said:
It's the intention behind your action that defines attacking or defending in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Clearly so, yes.

Furthermore, this isn't some obscure principle known only to the initiated. It's pretty much common sense in football: Attack is the best form of defence - and so forth. LVG's remark is pure spin at best. And the attempts of his proponents to spin the spin into something else is either deliberate obtuseness - or something worse.
 
The title is right there for the taking. Seriously, it's right there. If he sorts out the offense United wins the title. Needs to convert draws into 3-pointers.
 
VorZakone said:
The title is right there for the taking. Seriously, it's right there. If he sorts out the offense United wins the title. Needs to convert draws into 3-pointers.
Click to expand...
It really is. All the other challengers are thinking the same thing though.
 
Dr. Funkenstein said:
I understand the issue, but you can't expect the manager to call it defence when they have the ball and try to get it towards the box. If it isn't defence it's attack, just because there are only the two.
Click to expand...

It's not that simple. If goalie and cb keep passing the ball back and forth, would you call it attack ?

Remember this shit ?
 
Last edited:
fallengt said:
It's not that simple. If goalie and cb keep passing the ball back and forth, would you call it attack ?

Remember this shit ?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's too slow, it lacks ideas, it lacks penetration, it lacks creativity. It wouldn't make sense to say things like about something that isn't an attack, would it? Defence can't be too slow, lack ideas, lack penetration and lack creativity.

I get the point, it's not that there's no reason to complain, my point is that you can't expect the manager to call it anything other than attacking because in the end that's what it is. He didn't call it adventorous, he didn't call it vigorous attacking, he didn't call it excellent attacking, he didn't call it beautiful attacking, he didn't call it succesful attacking, he just called it attacking because with all it's shortcomings that's what it is.
 
fallengt said:
It's not that simple. If goalie and cb keep passing the ball back and forth, would you call it attack ?

Remember this shit ?
Click to expand...


Interesting example.

That was in the game where we needed a point to win the title and played keep ball till we won it.

In fact, it was pretty funny at the time. Every single one of those passes was ole'd and cheered.
 
I feel Van Gaal is the luckiest manager we ever had. Reminds me a lot if Di Mateo. His luck is like a 12th man for us. Just like how own goal was a 12th man for us a couple of season ago.
 
He let a lot of attackers go without really replacing them.

It's his fault that we can't score.
 
he reminds of me Lisa in that Simpsons episode where Lisa becomes the manager of a baseball team and tries to use science/maths to win. It's a game, just play it, don't make it too complicated...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.