Well there's definitely a reaction to good results sometimes as if it is some kind of nail in the coffin of this debate. Are we an awfully coached team? No. Are Burnley an awfully coached team? No. Are Crystal Palace an awfully coached team? No. etc etc. We are not an awfully coached team, but we are not a team coached well enough that it can dominate teams consistently over the course of a season that would allow us to win titles. In my opinion, at this moment in time. Our best hope with this setup would be to 'Leicester' it at some point, but just doesnt seem like a very convincing recipe for success long term. For example, Ole is definitely good at pulling the rug out from under Guardiola. But over the course of a season, it's Guardiola's Man City that is streaking away in title races, because over a long enough time frame, his coaching methods aggregate more points. So I agree that 'awfully' is pure hyperbole, but I guess it gets more attention than 'not quite good enough;.
We are an awfully coached team
- Thread starter bond19821982
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Well there's definitely a reaction to good results sometimes as if it is some kind of nail in the coffin of this debate. Are we an awfully coached team? No. Are Burnley an awfully coached team? No. Are Crystal Palace an awfully coached team? No. etc etc. We are not an awfully coached team, but we are not a team coached well enough that it can dominate teams consistently over the course of a season that would allow us to win titles. In my opinion, at this moment in time. Our best hope with this setup would be to 'Leicester' it at some point, but just doesnt seem like a very convincing recipe for success long term. For example, Ole is definitely good at pulling the rug out from under Guardiola. But over the course of a season, it's Guardiola's Man City that is streaking away in title races, because over a long enough time frame, his coaching methods aggregate more points. So I agree that 'awfully' is pure hyperbole, but I guess it gets more attention than 'not quite good enough;.
That Poch fanboy is attention seeking gimmick. Best ignored.Wow the trolling still strong
I know the result will hide the first half performance and Ole inners will take it as a proof that Ole can outcoach Pep.
First half we were very lucky not to concede, City totally dominated us. Second half started around the same until Shaw got us the 2-0 and then the match was confortable. Before that the match could had gone either way.
First half we were very lucky not to concede, City totally dominated us. Second half started around the same until Shaw got us the 2-0 and then the match was confortable. Before that the match could had gone either way.
Yes, that is why I give ole credit for having a good defensive shape
Just good defensive shape? If that was enough to beat this city side than they wouldn't of just gone on a 21 game winning streak.
Today's performance and result was much more than just having a good defensive shape, it was more to do with our bravery on the ball our willingness to step forward and play with a high line our willingness to attack with numbers.
You make it sound like we just stuck everyone behind the ball and smashed balls forward into the channel for someone to chase in the hope of creating something.
What game were you watching. City worked us hard, shifted the ball well from right to left and asked questions of us, but in absolutely no way shape or form did they ‘dominate’ us. Henderson barely made any saves and the opportunities they did have were outside the area. The only conclusion you can make form your post is that you think possession = domination, in which case LVG must be the best manager in our history!
i do reckon LVG gets an unfair legacy as a Utd manager. Sure the games I watched with him in charge made me want to stab my eyes out with sharp pencils but people always forget the complete crock of shit the guy had for a squad. Think he did pretty well tbh with the resources available to him. Our squad now is a different tier.
He much prefers playing a game like this where we can break on the counter attack - and the players we have in attack suit that as well. It’s against teams that sit back and invite us to try and break them down that Ole has no answers.
Name the clear cut chances City had first half? Luck had nothing to do with it. 1st half they had 4 shots on target to Uniteds 3 and all routine saves for Henderson.
If you don't think that was a near perfect away performance in a big game, I suspect football isn't for you, as you'll never ever ever be satisfied.
If we play like this and move the ball quicker and high tempo it doesn't matter. We would still win against those teams.
Which good chance did they create in first half? If anything they were lucky not to conceded another goal when Shaw didn't connect properly.
They didn't dominate us no, but we could hardly string 2 passes together allowing them to keep pushing on and piling pressure.
As much as it's on "poor coaching" we badly need a player in midfield that's calm on the ball and can recycle possession under pressure.
It doesn’t really work like that I’m afraid.
I fully agree with this. I didn’t think today was the best example of that though as we kept the ball better than in many games this season. I think a proper ball playing defensive mid would work wonders in this team though.
Not really sure playing Pep's City tells you that much about the main complaints in this thread.
We didn't really pass the ball very well, constantly lost it in midfield and didn't create very much at all in the first half. Second half we relied on countering in numbers - something we've never had problems with - and looked okay with a very deep 4/5/1 formation.
A win is obviously great and Shaw's goal in particular was a joy, but it's not like we were playing brilliant one-touch passing to get around their press, or keeping the ball where we wanted it. We just resorted - successfully - back to the model of last season in big games: concede the ball, defend deep and break with pace.
I'm far more concerned with the midweek draw and what that says about coaching, rather than today.
We didn't really pass the ball very well, constantly lost it in midfield and didn't create very much at all in the first half. Second half we relied on countering in numbers - something we've never had problems with - and looked okay with a very deep 4/5/1 formation.
A win is obviously great and Shaw's goal in particular was a joy, but it's not like we were playing brilliant one-touch passing to get around their press, or keeping the ball where we wanted it. We just resorted - successfully - back to the model of last season in big games: concede the ball, defend deep and break with pace.
I'm far more concerned with the midweek draw and what that says about coaching, rather than today.
In the second half yes, but first half you'd struggle to find a completed pass by mct or Fred after the first 10 mins. Hyperbolic to make a point of course
You're confusing possession for control/domination.
yeah but it is years and years of these results, records, runs of form now. more likely you don't understand something than ole is just somehow to luckiest manager to ever live
Believe it or not, one team is usually on top in any given half of football.
In tightly contested affairs both teams will have spells of dominance and create chances.
Broaden your horizons... or drop your agenda... whichever is applicable.
Glad you celebrate but not sure why you have to go on about superior coaches as if Ole is inferior. He’s not. He may not be the sort of coach you want but he has us at least as high as anyone can expect at the moment.
I disagree with the idea that putting Klopp in charge would see us win any of the games we have lost, look at Liv’s recent results. I’m not comparing them by the way, only saying that so called superior coaches don’t always win. It’s just incorrect to say Ole is inferior, but may be true to say that you don’t like his coaching, fine; personally I love it.
oh dear. You are taking a beating here.
Henderson had a quiet game, especially in the first half - I’m not sure he even had a significant save to make?
you Score away from home first against City, then they will always be on the front foot - that’s how football flows.
even then, they created nothing in the first half. They started to push in the second half, as would be logical for any team who are behind... we could have scored 3 or 4 times easily.
Does it annoy you that OGS has beaten Pep more times than any other manager? Was that what the commentators said today?
Avoided this thread because that headline is just doesn’t make sense. How come is an “awfully coached team” is the 2nd in that table? How it ended up finishing 3rd last season beating a huge bunch of the top top clubs on the way? How? It is just not true whatever sophisticated reasoning you have for the statement.
Our first goal wasn’t a counter attack and the pen didn’t come from a counter attack.
Ahem.. how is this related to what I'm saying ? I didn't mention today's game in my reply. Someone was saying why it's bad to be good at counter attacking. It's not bad but counter attacking isn't a style of play, it's a bonus. No team goes full season winning but just scoring counters every game.
Overall I don't think we look like a well coached team at all. We look well and good in some games if you're evaluating on a general basis, then not really we're not. Today we looked solid defense and were well drilled in terms of defensive organization but offensively wise we're still a long way ahead of us from becoming a team with a clear attacking system on the pitch.
The Gundogan chance on another day ends up on the back of the net, sure they didn't test Henderson much but they were clearly best. We couldn't make 3 consecutive passes.
Because you said we can’t win the league only scoring counter attack goals. We clearly as shown even tonight don’t score purely from counter attacking
The Gundogan chance was a clear one. Besides that they didn't create much but they have all the possession and territory, we could even get to midfield.
I'm honestly not sure what you're replying on. Again I didn't mention today's game. I'm posting a general statement after reading this reply :
I'm saying it's not a terrible thing but counter attacking isn't a style of play.
Henderson had a quiet game, but it wasn't because of lack of City chances. Gundogan had a good opportunity that he failed to convert, Cancelo hit the bar, Sterling missed a sitter. I mean let's not pretend City created nothing. I'm sure the XG is pretty even for today's match.
Why would Ole winning, therefore us winning, annoy me? I'm happy as hell, I honestly thought we were going to lose today.
All I'm saying is that we shouldn't go over the top, we've seen this before the highs and lows. For now let's enjoy the victory, Im pretty proud of the team display specially the effort, today we saw a team that gave everything on the pitch. Thats all I can ask for.
Or on another day he doesn't even get that chance. The poor passing was mainly from Fred, McTominay but even those two gave good protection to the defence and it meant Henderson wasn't as busy as expected.
I've been impressed with our defending today, we didn't really concede a lot of quality chances apart from typical ones City create (crosses from Walker/de Bruyne). We were really good in that department although (a bit of) luck was on our side.
Attacking wise I didn't like our display. Our main tactics was to throw bodies forward, but it looked like one runner on the ball plus 3/4 attackers in flat line. Every attack looked kind of random, although I guess some people will argue it was a tactic to confuse the opponent. I can't remember us creating good chances through counter attack. Off the ball movement is still our biggest issue (especially when we have the possession). It's comical how we want to beat press and players receiving the ball have no passing option because all front 4 are way too far. I guess it's because they are "coached" to wait for direct pass, but I'm not sure.
From positive signs, once we beat the initial City pressing we moved the ball rather well. We didn't try to be too direct, and it was like we almost got through their defensive line a couple of times with some nice passing.
Also, I thought Martial and Rashford were much more involved in defensive part of the game which is nice to see.
Scoring a goal early does wonders to our confidence. Hopefully this will be a spark to ignite the team for the rest of the season.
Attacking wise I didn't like our display. Our main tactics was to throw bodies forward, but it looked like one runner on the ball plus 3/4 attackers in flat line. Every attack looked kind of random, although I guess some people will argue it was a tactic to confuse the opponent. I can't remember us creating good chances through counter attack. Off the ball movement is still our biggest issue (especially when we have the possession). It's comical how we want to beat press and players receiving the ball have no passing option because all front 4 are way too far. I guess it's because they are "coached" to wait for direct pass, but I'm not sure.
From positive signs, once we beat the initial City pressing we moved the ball rather well. We didn't try to be too direct, and it was like we almost got through their defensive line a couple of times with some nice passing.
Also, I thought Martial and Rashford were much more involved in defensive part of the game which is nice to see.
Scoring a goal early does wonders to our confidence. Hopefully this will be a spark to ignite the team for the rest of the season.
I think that counter attacking is perhaps the best aspect to Ole's management I can't see anything else outside of that. If the impetus is on the opposition to attack it favours the way we are set up. I think however given most games we are typically on the front foot there might be a need to re-arrange the coaches and bring someone who has a more positive influence in helping the players digress movement, positioning and spaces so that there's more balance to the team in possession of the ball.
Danny Murphy just praising the organisation of the defence in today’s game and said it is result of work on the training ground.
If I might say, this post seems to suggest it is easy to orchestrate whatever attacking move you can conceive of and rather disregards the effect a quality opponent has on execution, team shape and individual positioning.
I suggest there was often a huge difference between what was intended or coached and what actually happened in the real world.
If I had to guess what the team instructions were I’d say they were simple and mainly concerned closing down in midfield and bombing on when we got the ball off them. Sometimes it happened sometimes it didn’t. Good teams make it hard for you to do what you really want to do, even average teams can make it hard.
One thing that doesn’t help fluid attacking play is having players like McT and Fred in CM, giving the ball away and getting caught in possession (by excellent players pressurising as a team). They fought like lions though, which is worth a lot.
On a day like today, I don’t fuss too much if it wasn’t all pretty. I take the win and, as you say, hope it’s the start of better form going forward.
It does. We have been very poor in our last few games. We didn't dilly dally on the ball. We got our tactics right today. Martial played well is the other reason.
I agree, it was a case of City controlling territory and possession but struggling to create big chances. Our defense was superb today, specially Shaw.
When we win we've got the best coaching team in the country but if we draw or lose they are awful.
Yeah defensively we were very strong yesterday but still need to show that we are capable of breaking down teams that are set up in low blocks and put more of those sides to the sword like City have done well. I feel like both our players and coaches suit games where we are given space by the opposition but would really like to see us bring in someone who specialises in finding ways past well drilled teams.
He signed a number of underwhelming players, opting for his nationality and rumors about him disliking south american is legit.
He was given the war chest, and he signed some of the worst players to ever played for United. When its all doom and gloom, he felt like a genius and promoting youths. That's shambles, worst manager after Moyes.