Mou: ‘United had stopped in time. There was no evolution’

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

No, but you mentioned Mourinho's statement of intent when he arrived. He's extremely good at galvanising his public. Often he says things I think he knows full well aren't true, but he takes people with him. There was already a bounce when he came in because the previous man was so unpopular, and I think Mou has said all the right things to prolong it.

I was basing the intent on what I saw not what he said. Yes, that changed as the season progressed, but anyone who couldn't see the difference in style immediately simply didn't want to. It was clear.

Originally Posted by Buck

Swap Dan for Siders and that's half of Clarkie's posts

Actually, did LvG get booed much at Wembley? Can't say I remember it tbh.

Originally Posted by red in cumbria

Actually, did LvG get booed much at Wembley? Can't say I remember it tbh.

He did yeah. Wrongly.

Originally Posted by Clarkie

He did yeah. Wrongly.

I said "much", as opposed to a few idiots. Most of our fans were delighted we had won our first post-Fergie trophy.

Originally Posted by utd99

Ok, so what you're saying is that you didn't see a discernable difference in playing style between van Gaal's last season and Mourinho's first? Discounting the three or four teams in this league against whom it's probably sensible to have a more cautious pragmatic approach, you really couldn't see a difference? Ok, well I suppose I just imagined it then. I wonder if I'm the only one?

Well it was different, it just wasn't shit hot either. Wasn't a vast improvement in class like we were being told it was.

This year we've started pretty well. More please.

Originally Posted by utd99

I was basing the intent on what I saw not what he said. Yes, that changed as the season progressed, but anyone who couldn't see the difference in style immediately simply didn't want to. It was clear.

Of course the style was different; Mourinho and Van Gaal are polar opposites. And Mou's more direct football is more in line with what English football fans like to see. But there was also a very strong desire - understandably so - to exegrrate what we were seeing, and certainly the more enjoyable aspects were dragged out for a long time. We didn't play that well often enough and didn't score enough goals. It's tough to think of many sparkling performances last year. Heroic home draws against dross notwithstanding.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Of course the style was different; Mourinho and Van Gaal are polar opposites. And Mou's more direct football is more in line with what English football fans like to see. But there was also a very strong desire - understandably so - to exegrrate what we were seeing, and certainly the more enjoyable aspects were dragged out for a long time. We didn't play that well often enough and didn't score enough goals. It's tough to think of many sparkling performances last year. Heroic home draws against dross notwithstanding.

I think we played well more often than you're representing, but we certainly didn't take enough chances for sure.

Look, just like you I'm running out of steam with this subject. There are clearly things we'll never agree on so just allow me to make one last point and then I won't say another word on the matter.*

The problem I have with van Gaal has little to do with success or failure -- I've been following United long enough to have seen every shade from shit to diamond-- it's more that his period in charge, particularly year two, was the only time I can remember not even wanting to watch. Game after game of soul sucking football of a type that couldn't even make you angry let alone happy. It was just utterly joyless, it was deliberate and it didn't have to be that way. I need United to mean something. Mean joy, mean despair, just mean something. I hated thinking 'when's the game this weekend, and do I even care?'

Anyway, that's my bugbear and I respect the fact it isn't yours. This conversation is now over for me. You can have the last word.



* Though I can't guarantee I won't throw a gif or two out there.

£#%&!ing hell

This shite still going on?

Originally Posted by utd99

I think we played well more often than you're representing, but we certainly didn't take enough chances for sure.

Look, just like you I'm running out of steam with this subject. There are clearly things we'll never agree on so just allow me to make one last point and then I won't say another word on the matter.*

The problem I have with van Gaal has little to do with success or failure -- I've been following United long enough to have seen every shade from shit to diamond-- it's more that his period in charge, particularly year two, was the only time I can remember not even wanting to watch. Game after game of soul sucking football of a type that couldn't even make you angry let alone happy. It was just utterly joyless, it was deliberate and it didn't have to be that way. I need United to mean something. Mean joy, mean despair, just mean something. I hated thinking 'when's the game this weekend, and do I even care?'

Anyway, that's my bugbear and I respect the fact it isn't yours. This conversation is now over for me. You can have the last word.



* Though I can't guarantee I won't throw a gif or two out there.

This was really the main source of argument during that period. Not disagreements over how good it was. It wasn't deliberate and saying it was is the ignorance I referred to earlier; he's spent his career as a manager playing great football.

Mourinho spent £200m on attacking players, plus Zlatan's wages, within 12 months of taking over. So it was hardly all down to players being forced not to score goals. Uniteds post Ferguson transition is complicated. And is still a way off.

Originally Posted by Denis Irwell

£#%&!ing hell

This shite still going on?

Discussion about the evolution of United's play in a thread labelled as such? Yeah, pal.

People surely have better things to do than keep returning to a thread to report how uninterested they are in it?

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

This was really the main source of argument during that period. Not disagreements over how good it was. It wasn't deliberate and saying it was is the ignorance I referred to earlier; he's spent his career as a manager playing great football.

Mourinho spent £200m on attacking players, plus Zlatan's wages, within 12 months of taking over. So it was hardly all down to players being forced not to score goals. Uniteds post Ferguson transition is complicated. And is still a way off.

You used the last word to call me ignorant.

Nice hit.

Originally Posted by utd99

You used the last word to call me ignorant.

Nice hit.

Didn't think you be back tbf.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Didn't think you be back tbf.

I didn't say anything about your boyfriend did I?

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

This was really the main source of argument during that period. Not disagreements over how good it was. It wasn't deliberate and saying it was is the ignorance I referred to earlier; he's spent his career as a manager playing great football.

Mourinho spent £200m on attacking players, plus Zlatan's wages, within 12 months of taking over. So it was hardly all down to players being forced not to score goals. Uniteds post Ferguson transition is complicated. And is still a way off.



Discussion about the evolution of United's play in a thread labelled as such? Yeah, pal.

People surely have better things to do than keep returning to a thread to report how uninterested they are in it?

There's a difference between discussion about the "evolution" (or lack of) of Uniteds play and attention seeking obsession about justifying the tedious shite on show the two seasons under Lvg.

"People" don't put aside half a day, every day to return to it, pal