Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread - 2013/14 mod warning post#7259

Mitch Connor

If we slipped out of the CL spaces I would be very worried about us under Moyes, but I would probably want him given to December of the next season, at least, to see what happened. In that summer and first half of the next season I would want to be seeing a serious change and improvement.

I think Moyes has been hampered by the failings this summer, and how much of that is his fault I don't know.

Certainly, I would say we will have a clearer picture come December, if not sooner. If he is still persisting with Valencia and Young (and there is no improvement in them), for example, that will be an issue for me.

As I said earlier - it isn't failing to win games that is annoying me - it is failing while doing nothing to address the issues that have been evident to everyone; lack of creativity, poor wing play and an over-run midfield.

If we are to treat this season as some sort of transitional season - then I want to see us actually doing something transitional. The only difference between us this season and last season so far is a different midfielder beside Carrick. Everything else is basically the same. Same players, same predictable play, same errors. I want to see Kagawa, Nani and Zaha given a chance to inject some life into our side. I want to see something different, something new.

BloodBath

Not going to quote the big long post above but the Ferdinand part is crap. It's some myth he is past it. He has had a poor start to the season but was in the team of the year last season after playing very well. We have far more problems than Ferdinand.

Ok let me rephrase that. He's not good enough for the big games anymore and doesn't have the fitness to be played 6 games in a row. He's looked very poor for a number of games now. The writing is on the wall and we should be looking at replacing him as first choice now.

everdead.ie

As an outsider looking in does anyone else think that this is a bit of an over reaction?

It was a tough start for United and you rarely start fast anyway, that combined with a new manager whos teams have also always started slow.

I would think if United weren't within the top four after say Christmas then it is time to start asking questions but a bit premature.

I will however admit I found it baffling not having kagawa and hernandez play a part at the weekend.

homerjay2005

everdead.ie wrote: »

As an outsider looking in does anyone else think that this is a bit of an over reaction?

what or who is over reacting? i dont see many people calling for his head, people are pissed off at our poor start, but more to the point worried that the sings so far are not good. i have seen some lads saying he is out of his depth, however these are people who didnt want him in the first place so yesterday has changed nothing for them.

and we also have already lost to our two biggest rivals, you cant expect many people to be happy with that. add in a very farcical summer and you have to admit that fans are ar least entitled to debate the current status of the team.

what ever about results, tactics and team selections have been shocking and performances really really poor. yesterdays result was coming, its the result we all feared but hoped it wouldnt happen. luckily now we have a run of games that are winnable and City/Chelsea have already dropped 5 points also, so its not the end of the world in that sense.

its the way things have been going for the last 3 months - amateurism and embarrassing that is worrying me.

SlickRic

you won't drop out of the CL places unless there was a proper injury crisis. and even then, there are enough players in the team who:

1) know how to beat shít teams as they've been doing it for years, and
2) are among the best in the league in their position (Rooney, RVP, Carrick, Vidic, DDG)

for that to not really be an issue.

if it did somehow happen, Moyes would have to deserve a sacking. he's taken over a PL winning team FFS.

Soups123

everdead.ie wrote: »

As an outsider looking in does anyone else think that this is a bit of an over reaction?

It was a tough start for United and you rarely start fast anyway, that combined with a new manager whos teams have also always started slow.

I would think if United weren't within the top four after say Christmas then it is time to start asking questions but a bit premature.

I will however admit I found it baffling not having kagawa and hernandez play a part at the weekend.

As an outsider I would agree, a new manager takes time to settle in, that added to a very difficult set of openning fixtures. The only points dropped that are genuinely poor are those to Liverpool, defeat away to City happens to the best of teams and a draw at home to Chelsea is not great but accepable. If you where losing the more obvious games I would worry more.

Time will tell but I think dropping out of the Top 4 just wont happen, but not sure where in the Top 4 united will be

everdead.ie

homerjay2005 wrote: »

what or who is over reacting? i dont see many people calling for his head, people are pissed off at our poor start, but more to the point worried that the sings so far are not good. i have seen some lads saying he is out of his depth, however these are people who didnt want him in the first place so yesterday has changed nothing for them.

and we also have already lost to our two biggest rivals, you cant expect many people to be happy with that. add in a very farcical summer and you have to admit that fans are ar least entitled to debate the current status of the team.

what ever about results, tactics and team selections have been shocking and performances really really poor. yesterdays result was coming, its the result we all feared but hoped it wouldnt happen. luckily now we have a run of games that are winnable and City/Chelsea have already dropped 5 points also, so its not the end of the world in that sense.

its the way things have been going for the last 3 months - amateurism and embarrassing that is worrying me.

There are obviuosly those worried he's not good enough for United but then in the media as well talk like top four should be the aim forget about the title etc that kind of **** stirring.

homerjay2005

everdead.ie wrote: »

There are obviuosly those worried he's not good enough for United but then in the media as well talk like top four should be the aim forget about the title etc that kind of **** stirring.

so there are two extremes here -

there are those who keep saying we were a team who walked the league last season.

then there are those who say that the team is not that good and we were lucky to win it by such a margain - the league will be much tougher.

the reality is we are somewhere in between. i dont think we will win the league, but if we can keep pace until January and be only 4 or 5 points off, then we have a chance - maybe we can sign somebody but its a joke that the problems that are clear for the last 4 or 5 years have not been solved this summer.

Its f*cking sad that our creativity problem from midfield is still there and that 7 games into the new season, the likes of Kagawa, Nani and Hernandez are not getting a chance.

Pro. F

Danye wrote: »

Where have I said United were using a special formation?

Moyes is insisting on playing the same formation with the same average players despite it clearly not working. He's not playing a formation that maximises the players he has at his disposal. By insisting on playing the same poor players in the same rigid formation and not have the willingness to change and adapt is strong age.

Okay, your response here is beyond stupid. I obviously was not using the phrase "special formation" as baldly and simply as you have tried to pretend. Of course you never said Moyes used a "special formation." I simply used the phrase in the context of showing that his formation was not significantly different from what is used by many modern managers of big teams, so should not be viewed as old fashioned.

If you are going to use this simple minded form of argument where you pick out one phrase, remove it of all context and cry "I never said that" then this conversation is going to be pointless. It is the dumbest way of debating something, so please stop right now.

Danye wrote: »

You seem to think that player selection and tactics are separate. The players you play dictate your tactics!! Player selection and tactics are interlinked. By playing poor players who haven't performed and who are also limited shows that they're outdated.

Oh that worked out well didnt it then!??

We played with 2 siting midfielder who where too far away from our front 2 and two average wingers. How did he think we would even get into good positions on the pitch the way we where set up.

Again you seem to think team selection has no effect on or tactics. Playing limited players who are playing poorly is a poor tactical decision and the fact he had be unwilling to change his players and in turn the formation despite in not working does indeed make it Stone Age.

Emm, yeah. I guess that would be a good place to start.

Yep. That's spot on. Hopefully when you te read that the penny might start to drop for you.

Ok, now take in to account that I'm after explaining to you you how your team selection has an effect on your tactics, answer me this... Why has Moyes insisted on playing Valencia and Young despite you saying their crap. Why is he playing them?

You seem to think that Young and Valencia are old fashioned types of players. They are not. They are just shít players (in current form anyway). There has been no era of football where managers would have said "Bring me two wingers who are shít at crossing and shít at linking up the play!"

The reason I think Moyes is picking Valencia and Young is because they offer the best defensive shape. It's a terrible choice, but it has got nothing to do with the age of his tactics. Defensive football is no more old fashioned than attacking football or balanced football. If you name old timey teams who were defensive I can name just as many who were attacking or balanced.

And since when is not using all three subs or not changing the tactics in game old fashioned? Since the number of subs was expanded there have always been different managers using subs in different ways. Using more subs is not instantly more modern. And changing tactics in game is nothing modern either. You have some very odd ideas about how football used to be in the past.

Danye wrote: »

What did Cleverly do today? Passing the ball sidewards and backwards in a game that was over doesn't count by the way.

You might want to get your facts straight about him passing it sidewards and backwards.
Forward passes: 27/30
Sideways passes: 16/16
Backwards passes: 9/9
Link

It is true that by the time he came on City were already 4 goals up so would have been much happier to sit back, but there was still 40 minutes to go at that stage and United's play changed dramatically. What Cleverley did was keep and use possession in the midfield, link up the play going forward and make sure that the possession kept getting recycled in the attacking third.

jameshayes

this is brilliant:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Dhcl3sIxuw

Giggsy11

everdead.ie wrote: »

There are obviuosly those worried he's not good enough for United but then in the media as well talk like top four should be the aim forget about the title etc that kind of **** stirring.

I think there are very few ManUtd fans on boards.ie who think Moyes is not good enough for ManUtd. His start was not the greatest but the fixtures list didn't help at all.

On the other hand, maybe you read more posts from Liverpool fans who said Moyes is not good enough, after all how can he be good enough manager finishing above them for 3 years (maybe) spending **** all compared to them.

Zico

In any job if you take over a successful operation and run it into the ground you will get sacked.

I can give Moyes until the end of the season but the style of play needs to improve big time. Utd are hard to watch at the moment.

aperture_nuig

SlickRic wrote: »

you won't drop out of the CL places unless there was a proper injury crisis. and even then, there are enough players in the team who:

1) know how to beat shít teams as they've been doing it for years, and
2) are among the best in the league in their position (Rooney, RVP, Carrick, Vidic, DDG)

for that to not really be an issue.

if it did somehow happen, Moyes would have to deserve a sacking. he's taken over a PL winning team FFS.

Great post.

Mitch Connor

Zico wrote: »

In any job if you take over a successful operation and run it into the ground you will get sacked.

I can give Moyes until the end of the season but the style of play needs to improve big time. Utd are hard to watch at the moment.

we have been hard to watch for seasons, to be fair.

hopefully with the opening run of games out of the way Moyes will now start trying something new - and we will see some improvement in the play.

Liverpool, even though it is a League Cup game, is huge now. We need to make a statement. We either need to go full strength and put in a good, attractive, winning performance, or we need to try something new and play well - win or not.

jameshayes

if you're luis suarez you'd be gunning to get back in the saddle against a team looking shakey #worried

bullvine

3rd place is bare minimum for Moyes, if he doesn't get that. It will be curtains and rightly so!

Liam O

3 points behind Chelsea and City, 5 behind Arsenal and Spurs with a great run of games. Max points from the next 5 are required but I'm confident enough the shambles of yesterday wont be repeated any time soon. Moyes hasn't proven himself adept at team selections but how he reacts to this will be probably the most important thing to how he is seen. If Young and Valencia continue to start then I'll lose nearly all faith in him.

sReq | uTeK

Zico wrote: »

In any job if you take over a successful operation and run it into the ground you will get sacked.

I can give Moyes until the end of the season but the style of play needs to improve big time. Utd are hard to watch at the moment.

United were harder to watch under Ferguson, we haven't played good football since Ronaldo, Rooney, Tevez played up top for us.

Winston Payne

You're not entitled to good football.

Mitch Connor

Winston Payne wrote: »

You're not entitled to good football.

Ok. do you have a point to go with that obvious statement?

We aren't entitled to a winning side. We aren't entitled to a lot of things.

We can want good football. We can want winning football.

Danye

Pro. F wrote: »

Okay, your response here is beyond stupid. I obviously was not using the phrase "special formation" as baldly and simply as you have tried to pretend.

So as well as highlighting how little you actually know about football and how little you know about the game is played you also expect me to second guess what your saying?

Pro. F wrote: »

You seem to think that Young and Valencia are old fashioned types of players. They are not. They are just shít players (in current form anyway).

You really don't have a clue about football. Young and Valencia are completely old fashioned wingers. They play and can only play by trying to beat the full back and getting to the by line like wingers of years gone by. When they're up against good full backs who they can't beat by going past them down the flank their and when they're being shown inside they're lost. Haven't hot the talent or craft to come inside.

Pro. F wrote: »

The reason I think Moyes is picking Valencia and Young is because they offer the best defensive shape.

Right, so he's picking poor players because they offer the best defensive shape? So going by that do you still think his tactics aren't wrong? Playing poor players who offer nothing just so they offer the best defensive shape? That's a good tactic to be deploying?

This will be my last reply on this topic In direct reply to you. Your lack of football knowledge is so poor. You remind me of somebody who has never played or being involved in football but plays Fifa online or Championship manager and thinks he knows it all. I've picked enough holes in your last few posts to discredit what your saying.

In your own words,

Pro. F wrote: »

please stop right now.

Winston Payne

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Ok. do you have a point to go with that obvious statement?

We aren't entitled to a winning side. We aren't entitled to a lot of things.

We can want good football. We can want winning football.

We want a lot of things too. Fruitless enough pining after them. Aesthetic complaints are shallow rubbish.

Backstreet Moyes

Was with an Everton fan yesterday and he had nothing but bad things to say about Moyes. Said he is tactically clueless and he won't last long at United. Surely to god he has to be good at something to consistently keep a side like Everton constantly challenging for fourth.

aperture_nuig

Using post #666 to say I hope the red devils obliterate Liverpool on Wednesday

Pro. F

Danye wrote: »

So as well as highlighting how little you actually know about football and how little you know about the game is played you also expect me to second guess what your saying?

You really don't have a clue about football. Young and Valencia are completely old fashioned wingers. They play and can only play by trying to beat the full back and getting to the by line like wingers of years gone by. When they're up against good full backs who they can't beat by going past them down the flank their and when they're being shown inside they're lost. Haven't hot the talent or craft to come inside.

I don't want you to second guess what I am saying, I want you to stop pretending you can't follow a simple conversation.

There are still shítloads of wingers around who look to beat their fullbacks and get crosses in. There is nothing old fashioned about that. Young and Valencia don't just struggle when they are up against good fullbacks. They are utterly shíte, they struggle when they are up against average fullbacks. They struggle because they are shít, it's that simple. And Young isn't even the type of winger you are describing anyway, he looks to cut inside a huge amount, he's just crap at it.

Danye wrote: »

Right, so he's picking poor players because they offer the best defensive shape? So going by that do you still think his tactics aren't wrong? Playing poor players who offer nothing just so they offer the best defensive shape? That's a good tactic to be deploying?

You quoted one sentence of mine and ignored the one immediately following it. Here what I said: "It's a terrible choice, but it has got nothing to do with the age of his tactics." Now, does that answer your questions or do I need to get the crayons out for you?

Danye wrote: »

This will be my last reply on this topic In direct reply to you. Your lack of football knowledge is so poor. You remind me of somebody who has never played or being involved in football but plays Fifa online or Championship manager and thinks he knows it all. I've picked enough holes in your last few posts to discredit what your saying.

lol

homerjay2005

Nuts102 wrote: »

Surely to god he has to be good at something to consistently keep a side like Everton constantly challenging for fourth.

????? apart from maybe one, two years at a stretch, i cant recall them ever being close to 4th in the other 9 or 10 years he was manager there. he had them challenging for top 6, but realistically 4th was never really on the agenda for them, especially in the last 6 or 7 years.

People seem to forget that Everton are a big club with 40k+ fans, they dont have a bad team and have had a great start to the season, playing super football. time will tell what they are capable of and ultimately, how good Moyes is/was for us/them.

Pro. F

homerjay2005 wrote: »

????? apart from maybe one, two years at a stretch, i cant recall them ever being close to 4th in the other 9 or 10 years he was manager there. he had them challenging for top 6, but realistically 4th was never really on the agenda for them, especially in the last 6 or 7 years.

People seem to forget that Everton are a big club with 40k+ fans, they dont have a bad team and have had a great start to the season, playing super football. time will tell what they are capable of and ultimately, how good Moyes is/was for us/them.

Size of the fanbase is irrelevant to the manager. It's the budget that counts.

v3ttel

Massive over-reaction. Yes, the performance was dreadful, but it's one game of 38.

We're 3 points behind Chelsea & City, having played Chelsea, City & Liverpool already. Arsenal need more investment before they will sustain a title challenge, and Spurs are still some way off challenging. The only team that had a 100% record just lost convincingly to Southampton at home.

Don't forgot that against Stoke & Cardiff, City looked very poor, they lost one of them and were lucky to draw the other. People were suddenly wondering when was the last time Pelligrini won a major trophy. Now they "look like champions" etc. It's always one extreme to the other, where the truth lies in the middle.

Jose has shown he isn't invincible by having a bit of an early season womble too. We've looked poor at City & Liverpool.

It's going to be one of those seasons. 80 points might be enough.

Danye

Pro. F wrote: »

You quoted one sentence of mine and ignored the one immediately following it. Here what I said: "It's a terrible choice, but it has got nothing to do with the age of his tactics." Now, does that answer your questions or do I need to get the crayons out for you?

Jesus. Ok, last time.

I've explained to you how his team selection has complete influence over a teams tactics. So how does picking two crap players (which is something we can both agree on at least) not have anything to do with the teams TACTICS? How?

Explain to me, how you think a managers selection has nothing to do with his tactics. Answer me that.

keane2097

Danye wrote: »

Jesus. Ok, last time.

I've explained to you how his team selection has complete influence over a teams tactics. So how does picking two crap players (which is something we can both agree on at least) not have anything to do with the teams TACTICS? How?

Explain to me, how you think a managers selection has nothing to do with his tactics. Answer me that.

You are failing entirely to show that Moyes' tactics are from the Stone Age.

I imagine the reason is because they quite clearly aren't, but you're not even coming close to making a decent argument that they are.

SlickRic

i'd have thought what is up for debate isn't whether David Moyes is a good manager. he is. of that there is absolutely no question at all. the job he did at Everton was fantastic, no matter what some Everton fans will say.

what is up for debate, and will continue to be until he proves otherwise, is his ability to handle a different level of expectation - to compete for and ultimately win Leagues, and to be at the business end of big tournaments like the Champions League.

you need a different mindset completely to the one needed at Everton.

i've heard fans say, "well, Ferguson took ages to get us competing". but on further reflection, there is one big difference. Ferguson had a track record of winning. and when i say winning, i don't mean just knockout trophies, but leagues too. Ferguson had proven it before he became Utd manager.

Moyes has not. he is simply not a proven winner yet. that is what he has to learn, and has to prove - that he can get his team to play football that wins leagues and trophies.

he has to be given time IMO, but the jury, rightly, will be out on that until he wins things.

Pro. F

Danye wrote: »

Jesus. Ok, last time.

I've explained to you how his team selection has complete influence over a teams tactics. So how does picking two crap players (which is something we can both agree on at least) not have anything to do with the teams TACTICS? How?

Explain to me, how you think a managers selection has nothing to do with his tactics. Answer me that.

Yes of course player selection effects tactics. But you said his tactics were old fashioned. They aren't. There's nothing old fashioned about picking one winger who hugs the touchline and one winger who likes to cut inside. That's what Valencia and Young are. Just because they are both shít doesn't mean they are old fashioned wingers. Having shít wingers who can't beat a man, can't cross consistently, can't link up with other players was not the style in days gone by. If you transported Valencia and Young back a few decades they would still be shít wingers (assuming the difference in modern fitness is ignored).

Rayne Wooney

United have a plan A, and to quote Johnny Giles I think it was about Barca but also applies to us, our plan B is to go back to plan A.

Against Leverkusen I think we showed a different dimension that we can play, trying to break down the defence with players like Kagawa and Rooney instead of taking the easy option, playing it wide for Valencia/whoever to attempt a cross.

SirDelboy18

SlickRic wrote: »

i'd have thought what is up for debate isn't whether David Moyes is a good manager. he is. of that there is absolutely no question at all. the job he did at Everton was fantastic, no matter what some Everton fans will say.

what is up for debate, and will continue to be until he proves otherwise, is his ability to handle a different level of expectation - to compete for and ultimately win Leagues, and to be at the business end of big tournaments like the Champions League.

you need a different mindset completely to the one needed at Everton.

i've heard fans say, "well, Ferguson took ages to get us competing". but on further reflection, there is one big difference. Ferguson had a track record of winning. and when i say winning, i don't mean just knockout trophies, but leagues too. Ferguson had proven it before he became Utd manager.

Moyes has not. he is simply not a proven winner yet. that is what he has to learn, and has to prove - that he can get his team to play football that wins leagues and trophies.

he has to be given time IMO, but the jury, rightly, will be out on that until he wins things.

If Martinez is able to get them into a similar or better spot, which it seems like he might, then some of Moyes (already thin enough) credentials suddenly become a bit more diluted.

Getting Everton to 5th/6th/7th isn't that big of an achievement if the next guy that comes in does it too, with many different players, playing arguably a brand of football that fans appreciate more.

keane2097

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

If Martinez is able to get them into a similar or better spot, which it seems like he might, then some of Moyes (already thin enough) credentials suddenly become a bit more diluted.

Getting Everton to 5th/6th/7th isn't that big of an achievement if the next guy that comes in does it too, with many different players, playing arguably a brand of football that fans appreciate more.

Taking them from the relegation zone to 5th/6th/7th is not the same achievement as coming in and maintaining them in 5th/6th/7th.

Pro. F

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

If Martinez is able to get them into a similar or better spot, which it seems like he might, then some of Moyes (already thin enough) credentials suddenly become a bit more diluted.

Getting Everton to 5th/6th/7th isn't that big of an achievement if the next guy that comes in does it too, with many different players, playing arguably a brand of football that fans appreciate more.

One season won't be nearly enough to prove that one way or the other. The thing that Moyes did that was impressive at Everton was keeping them relatively high up the table while working with a tiny budget and doing that year after year. At the moment Martinez is using mostly Moyes' players.

Danye

Pro. F wrote: »

Yes of course player selection effects tactics. But you said his tactics were old fashioned. They aren't. There's nothing old fashioned about picking one winger who hugs the touchline and one winger who likes to cut inside. That's what Valencia and Young are. Just because they are both shít doesn't mean they are old fashioned wingers. Having shít wingers who can't beat a man, can't cross consistently, can't link up with other players was not the style in days gone by. If you transported Valencia and Young back a few decades they would still be shít wingers (assuming the difference in modern fitness is ignored).

They are. He's like trapatoni at the minute.

Rayne Wooney

Pro. F wrote: »

One season won't be nearly enough to prove that one way or the other. The thing that Moyes did that was impressive at Everton was keeping them relatively high up the table while working with a tine budget. At the moment Martinez is using mostly Moyes' players.

And basically the same philosophy Moyes used.

It's ridiculous the amount of people who can't acknowledge that Moyes did a good job at Everton, and his record of maintaining them at the level he did with little resources is primarily why he was picked for the job IMO.

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

Yes of course player selection effects tactics. But you said his tactics were old fashioned. They aren't. There's nothing old fashioned about picking one winger who hugs the touchline and one winger who likes to cut inside. That's what Valencia and Young are. Just because they are both shít doesn't mean they are old fashioned wingers. Having shít wingers who can't beat a man, can't cross consistently, can't link up with other players was not the style in days gone by. If you transported Valencia and Young back a few decades they would still be shít wingers (assuming the difference in modern fitness is ignored).

But Young did not cut inside effectively or not may occasions I can remember? Your right of course about sh1t wingers being a problem but tactically I think Moyes was to blame for the loss. The wingers he picked restricted our style of play and although on paper both teams had a 4-4-2, with the forwards dropping off it was one winger who made the difference imo.


City had Navas, who hugged the touchline and Nasri roamed inside left a lot, a similar set up and it worked for them. I'm not sure how much Young cut inside effectively, he gave the ball away loads and only recieved something like 17 passes and all of them in wide areas.

Nasri received the ball 42 times, from wide, deep and advanced positions, he also received balls very centerally. He was roaming inside left and making himself open and the extra man in midfeild all day where as Young stayed wide to try and cut in. Navas and Zabellta where there to take care of him and Evra.

Nasri's deployment was a big differnce yesterday imo. He made 43 out of 47 passes and a lot of them were linking up the midfeild and he was dragging Smalling out of defense. This had a knock on effect of a lot of freedom for Kolarov and Valencias inability to track him gave City an early grip on the game.

We could have done simiiar on our left flank if we played Kagawa instead of Young. That plus Kompany following Rooney would have led to the gaps I talked about earlier. Moyes had us set up to rigid and wide.

Mitch Connor

SlickRic wrote: »

i'd have thought what is up for debate isn't whether David Moyes is a good manager. he is. of that there is absolutely no question at all. the job he did at Everton was fantastic, no matter what some Everton fans will say.

what is up for debate, and will continue to be until he proves otherwise, is his ability to handle a different level of expectation - to compete for and ultimately win Leagues, and to be at the business end of big tournaments like the Champions League.

you need a different mindset completely to the one needed at Everton.

i've heard fans say, "well, Ferguson took ages to get us competing". but on further reflection, there is one big difference. Ferguson had a track record of winning. and when i say winning, i don't mean just knockout trophies, but leagues too. Ferguson had proven it before he became Utd manager.

Moyes has not. he is simply not a proven winner yet. that is what he has to learn, and has to prove - that he can get his team to play football that wins leagues and trophies.

he has to be given time IMO, but the jury, rightly, will be out on that until he wins things.

ferguson also didn't take over a club that were current champions. The united he took over needed re shaping from top to bottom.

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

But Young did not cut inside effectively or not may occasions I can remember? Your right of course about sh1t wingers being a problem but tactically I think Moyes was to blame for the loss. The wingers he picked restricted our style of play and although on paper both teams had a 4-4-2, with the forwards dropping off it was one winger who made the difference imo.


City had Navas, who hugged the touchline and Nasri roamed inside left a lot, a similar set up and it worked for them. I'm not sure how much Young cut inside effectively, he gave the ball away loads and only recieved something like 17 passes and all of them in wide areas.

Nasri received the ball 42 times, from wide, deep and advanced positions, he also received balls very centerally. He was roaming inside left and making himself open and the extra man in midfeild all day where as Young stayed wide to try and cut in. Navas and Zabellta where there to take care of him and Evra.

Nasri's deployment was a big differnce yesterday imo. He made 43 out of 47 passes and a lot of them were linking up the midfeild and he wa dragging Smalling out of defense. This had a knock on effect of a lot of freedom for Kolarov and Valencias inability to track him gave City an early grip on the game.

We could have done simiiar on our left flank if we played Kagawa instead of Young. That plus Kompany following Rooney would have led to the gaps I talked about earlier. Moyes had us set up to rigid and wide.

Whether Young cut inside effectively or not is not really relevant to the point I was making. Picking one winger who hugs the touchline and one winger who cuts inside is nothing like old fashioned. And picking two shít wingers is not old fashioned either.

I know what you mean about Kagawa working from the left might have exposed gaps in City's defence more. That could have possibly worked, but it is still no reflection on whether Moyes' tactics are old fashioned.

Pro. F

Danye wrote: »

They are. He's like trapatoni at the minute.

Yeah of course he is. I completely agree with you.

Danye

Pro. F wrote: »

Yeah of course he is. I completely agree with you.

That's good. You should appreciate the education I've given you. I usually charge for such services.

Pro. F

Danye wrote: »

That's good. You should appreciate the education I've given you. I usually charge for such services.

If you want to take the last word all you have to do is say so.

bullvine

As I said earlier, the Arsenal match at Old Trafford in November is now huge, he needs to win that, to beat one of his rivals at home. If that doesn't happen. I would fear for the team. If they can't win that match, against a team we've had a brilliant record against in the last 6 years then you'd need to worry for the season.

Danye

Pro. F wrote: »

If you want to take the last word all you have to do is say so.

Thanks.

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

Whether Young cut inside effectively or not is not really relevant to the point I was making. Picking one winger who hugs the touchline and one winger who cuts inside is nothing like old fashioned. And picking two shít wingers is not old fashioned either.

I know what you mean about Kagawa working from the left might have exposed gaps in City's defence more. That could have possibly worked, but it is still no reflection on whether Moyes' tactics are old fashioned.

Bit of a contradiction no? You said of course team selection effects tactics.

The players are instructed to do certain things pre-match. To me UTD looked rigid and unable to handle City and unable in the first to pose much of a threat or defend the counter.

I wouldn't call it Old fashioned but it looked like he didn't know what to change or he didn't give instructions from the side lines when we were getting over run.

He made a change that improved things from a contain and get more possession standpoint when the game was already over but the way things were set up City were tactically superior and Moyes came out of it looking like he was behind tactically. Just my opinion.

Plenty of time to right things though

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

Bit of a contradiction no? You said of course team selection effects tactics.

The players are instructed to do certain things pre-match. To me UTD looked rigid and unable to handle City and unable in the first to pose much of a threat or defend the counter.

I wouldn't call it Old fashioned but it looked like he didn't know what to change or he didn't give instructions from the side lines when we were getting over run.

He made a change that improved things from a contain and get more possession standpoint when the game was already over but the way things were set up City were tactically superior and Moyes came out of it looking like he was behind tactically. Just my opinion.

Plenty of time to right things though

Do you know what Danye said first that I disagreed with? He said that Moyes tactics were in the stone age. It was nonsense talk and that was what I was disagreeing with.

Moyes tactics not being as good as Pellegrini's (when you consider player selection as part of tactics) I can totally agree with. But that is nothing to do with the very stupid statement that Moyes' tactics are stone age.

With regards to giving instructions from the sidelines I wouldn't say there was much any manager could have done to improve things once he had sent out such a shíte midfield and he found them being monstered by a good midfield.

Danye

Pro. F wrote: »

Do you know what Danye said first that I disagreed with? He said that Moyes tactics were in the stone age. It was nonsense talk and that was what I was disagreeing with.

Moyes tactics not being as good as Pellegrini's (when you consider player selection as part of tactics) I can totally agree with. But that is nothing to do with the very stupid statement that Moyes' tactics are stone age.

With regards to giving instructions from the sidelines I wouldn't say there was much any manager could have done to improve things once he had sent out such a shíte midfield and he found them being monstered by a good midfield.

If he sends out a ****e midfield yet again tactically he's getting it wrong.

Pro. F

Danye wrote: »

If he sends out a ****e midfield yet again tactically he's getting it wrong.

Bad or wrong tactics are not the same as old fashioned tactics.