Formation and team selections

Originally Posted by jem

as with all managers, the only question is whether he is making the best of what is available to him. and he isn't.

van gaal didn't pick a proper midfield, but at least he had a plan. one we all (with notable exceptions) thought was horrible to watch and not worth the journey, but still.....

and for a while it was hard to tell what mourinho was trying to do. now we know. away against teams such as the mighty liverpool and the mighty chelsea, we will do what mourinho teams have always done. spoil. and he won't pick a proper midfield.

we do not have shit players. we've got the basis of an excellent team and a few bit part players. but mourinho is not getting the best out of them. and it's not because they are all stupid, gutless, preening, arrogant, tired, nervous and irredeemably cloggish. we're getting good individual performances despite the ridiculous selections and tactics.

not sure I agree with the first half. and looking at the way mourinho's teams have played over the years, not sure it is simply being up for it. if you think he just hasn't found his drogba..... he wants to turn us into a team we would hate.

i fundamentally agree with this idiot re the quality of the squad - there's a good team in that lot.

i will continue to argue that at liverpool the plan was not simply to spoil, and that actually we controlled the game and looked to carry a threat from the off. it was only the last half hour that we sat back and it looked horrible mostly because we have no counter-attack...

i imagine yesterday would have been a similar story from the start but with more joy. 30 seconds that lasted.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

i fundamentally agree with this idiot re the quality of the squad - there's a good team in that lot.

i will continue to argue that at liverpool the plan was not simply to spoil, and that actually we controlled the game and looked to carry a threat from the off. it was only the last half hour that we sat back and it looked horrible mostly because we have no counter-attack...

i imagine yesterday would have been a similar story from the start but with more joy. 30 seconds that lasted.

ah, so now you're admitting our tactics were the same in both games? ok.

the reason we have no counter attack is because our wingers are playing in a back 6. like the reason our centre backs are exposed, despite this ridiculous negativity, is because we don't have a solid midfield in front of them and it lets players run through the middle (noted against liverpool and demonstrated yet again against chelsea).

we were lucky liverpool were under strength, aren't as good as everyone thinks they are and don't still have suarez (and we got in some great last ditch tackles and de gea made saves). against chelsea, not so lucky - chelsea aren't as bad as mourinho made them look last year, but the first goal, as well as being a terrible mistake by blind, was completely accidental other than pedro paying attention.

both games were horrible. mourinho is not a £#%&!ing united manager.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

i fundamentally agree with this idiot re the quality of the squad - there's a good team in that lot.

i will continue to argue that at liverpool the plan was not simply to spoil, and that actually we controlled the game and looked to carry a threat from the off. it was only the last half hour that we sat back and it looked horrible mostly because we have no counter-attack...

i imagine yesterday would have been a similar story from the start but with more joy. 30 seconds that lasted.

The Liverpool team made sense to negate their pressing game going over them to 3 big targets - it seemed like we had a plan. Why oh why play almost the same team against a team that plays differently?

It suggests to me that his coaching strategies are one dimensional. We needed to exploit the gaps around 3 Centre halves and an obvious way is to play 2 up front one of them very quick (Rashford). It forces one or both of the wing backs to cover and makes them play more of a 4 at the back and become defensive. One up front with the 3 behind dropping off is the last thing you want to do.

Am worried i am in same camp as Jem - can i get a cure?

Originally Posted by redhegemony

The Liverpool team made sense to negate their pressing game going over them to 3 big targets - it seemed like we had a plan. Why oh why play almost the same team against a team that plays differently?

It suggests to me that his coaching strategies are one dimensional. We needed to exploit the gaps around 3 Centre halves and an obvious way is to play 2 up front one of them very quick (Rashford). It forces one or both of the wing backs to cover and makes them play more of a 4 at the back and become defensive. One up front with the 3 behind dropping off is the last thing you want to do.

Am worried i am in same camp as Jem - can i get a cure?

it's not a camp. it's more of a mobile library.

Originally Posted by jem

ah, so now you're admitting our tactics were the same in both games? ok.

the reason we have no counter attack is because our wingers are playing in a back 6. like the reason our centre backs are exposed, despite this ridiculous negativity, is because we don't have a solid midfield in front of them and it lets players run through the middle (noted against liverpool and demonstrated yet again against chelsea).

we were lucky liverpool were under strength, aren't as good as everyone thinks they are and don't still have suarez (and we got in some great last ditch tackles and de gea made saves). against chelsea, not so lucky - chelsea aren't as bad as mourinho made them look last year, but the first goal, as well as being a terrible mistake by blind, was completely accidental other than pedro paying attention.

both games were horrible. mourinho is not a £#%&!ing united manager.

no-one can be sure either that the tactics were the same or even that the tactics were right or wrong.

if we'd scored with that early control at anfield then that game would have panned out differently of course, and we may even have been more relaxed on the counter.

and yesterday we gifted them a goal in 30 seconds that completely changed the entire complexion of the thing. even so it seems more likely that the shape would have been different, considering chelsea's formation, and we'd have been trying to use our full-backs higher up the field. looked as if we actually began with 3 behind 6 with zlatan joined by fellaini anyway...

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

no-one can be sure either that the tactics were the same or even that the tactics were right or wrong.

if we'd scored with that early control at anfield then that game would have panned out differently of course, and we may even have been more relaxed on the counter.

and yesterday we gifted them a goal in 30 seconds that completely changed the entire complexion of the thing. even so it seems more likely that the shape would have been different, considering chelsea's formation, and we'd have been trying to use our full-backs higher up the field. looked as if we actually began with 3 behind 6 with zlatan joined by fellaini anyway...

maybe you should look at how we still played 6 across the back yesterday.

obviously the games were different and we had to adapt and the formation developed (well.... we got desperate and shapeless would be more accurate), but you can still see in the early part of the game that we were using the same £#%&!ing set-up as against liverpool. and the deficient midfield was more obvious (hazard > henderson).

but whether the tactics were the same or not, they were £#%&!ing horrible. the team selections are consistently stupid and there is no defending mourinho. not even with a 6-man defence.

Originally Posted by jem

maybe you should look at how we still played 6 across the back yesterday.

obviously the games were different and we had to adapt and the formation developed (well.... we got desperate and shapeless would be more accurate), but you can still see in the early part of the game that we were using the same £#%&!ing set-up as against liverpool. and the deficient midfield was more obvious (hazard > henderson).

but whether the tactics were the same or not, they were £#%&!ing horrible. the team selections are consistently stupid and there is no defending mourinho. not even with a 6-man defence.

it wasn't the same - fellaini was next to herrera at anfield. it was the same plan to use the wingers tracking back and a narrow back 4, but the first target was to use the fullbacks to push up to meet the wingers halfway and double up, keeping chelsea at arm's length out wide. this is shown most clearly in the 1st goal (1st blind and then valencia) and it may have worked(doubt it very much) but for it, er, not working, so £#%&!ing early in the game.

whatever .... mourinho's tactics against city, liverpool and chelsea have been the tactics of a gutless loser who is anti-football. no surprise there. in fact, the only thing he hasn't done so far that was predicted is to get our lot cheating.

Originally Posted by jem

whatever .... mourinho's tactics against city, liverpool and chelsea have been the tactics of a gutless loser who is anti-football. no surprise there. in fact, the only thing he hasn't done so far that was predicted is to get our lot cheating.

no good swiping at me pal

i stand proudly behind my no jose, no pogba, no zlatan stance

Originally Posted by Baron

I think it's fair enough to say Jose's got a worryingly high amount of team selections & tactics wrong in so few league games.

The Fellaini issue is absolutely £#%&!ing baffling. It's pointless calling out his flaws as a limited player, but what - exactly - are his plus points to get him in the side? His attitude? I don't get it.

Giggsy did that article in the Telegraph about getting to know your squad, who to use & when, who you can trust & whatnot, seems that it takes a modern manager £#%&!ing months to work out what your man on the street can see in 90mins these days.

& whilst Klopp has been derided on here, he's been in the job for a year now, you can see a decidedly obvious style & attacking flair in that side. How much money was spent to achieve it? Moyes, Van Gaal & now Mourinho all seem ponderous to the point of incompetence in molding a coherent XI out of the available players.

I'm still happy to give Mourinho the time he needs, he's inherited a weird situation, but he's being ruthless with wrong the players & his approach undeniably scattergun at best at the moment.

A desperately obvious 4-3-3 exists with the players available, he has had incredible success with that formation, just £#%&!ing wake up & smell the beans

But that's surely the point, its taken him (the best part of) a year. Liverpool weren't short of embarrassments last season whilst he tried to work things out.

Agree with several of your other points, tbh.

Originally Posted by red in cumbria

But that's surely the point, its taken him (the best part of) a year. Liverpool weren't short of embarrassments last season whilst he tried to work things out.

Agree with several of your other points, tbh.

I know it seems like a stick to beat Mourinho with, but he's chopped & changed the side in the 9 league games - picking a literal footballing %@#$&! in the middle of the park & publicly praising him... it grates.

I think he is a great manager, who has proven time & again that he can get it right. Just don't think he's helping himself at all so far.

Let's see what's going down around January time. I think the Europa will actually prove to be a good stamping ground for a development XI to emerge with any luck.