Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread - 2013/14 Mod Warning: Post #7871

Rayne Wooney

It will take a couple of miracles to get us past the quarter finals of the CL.

We'll likely get Bayern or someone if we get through the next round



Moyes would be having nightmares about triangles for weeks after playing them

Hidalgo

bren2001 wrote: »

We will beat Arsenal and get 4th. I'm yet to admit defeat that the season is over. I may be deluded but sure there you go.

It would take a Fergie style run in for Utd to grab 4th. Even if they were only chasing 1 team it would be remote at best but they need Everton, Spurs and Liverpool all to fade away. One might, but all three?

Oh, and Utd would have to go on title winning form.

lordgoat

No

Arsenal to win by 3. Hopefully they won't get their 8-2 match on wed.

The sooner he goes the better. This season will have really bloodied our nose. I'd rather moyes go over losing RVP Rooney etc

This last months form is close to relegation. 55-58 points at best.

bullvine

No

lordgoat wrote: »

Arsenal to win by 3. Hopefully they won't get their 8-2 match on wed.

The sooner he goes the better. This season will have really bloodied our nose. I'd rather moyes go over losing RVP Rooney etc

This last months form is close to relegation. 55-58 points at best.

58 points! we probably had that at this stage last season.

bren2001

Hidalgo wrote: »

It would take a Fergie style run in for Utd to grab 4th. Even if they were only chasing 1 team it would be remote at best but they need Everton, Spurs and Liverpool all to fade away. One might, but all three?

Oh, and Utd would have to go on title winning form.

We need to win 12 of the remaining 13 fixtures. We don't need anybody to slip up. Maybe its from playing sport since I was very young but I never give up on the field and have staged a few mighty comebacks in my time. As unlikely as it is, one year a team will be this far behind and make it, why not this year?

We don't need to play well. We need to grind out results. (I realise when we lose to Arsenal, I'll look like and idiot, I also realise I look like an idiot now).

Vic Vinegar

The way it stands now, i'd say Moyes has 13 games (+ Champions League games) to save his Man Utd career.

If there isn't a marked improvement in these last games i think the board will remove him from his position at the end of the season.

I'm all for giving chances but he's used up most of them already in my opinion.

Maybe all this crap will make the Glazer's think about selling before too much value is wiped of their cash cow! (wishful thinking!)

Mr.Micro

Agueroooo wrote: »

exactly!

58 league medals between those Man Utd players out there yesterday and he questions the mental toughness.

.

Is that not the point? Experienced players messing up? How is that the fault if Moyes? They should know how to win a game. Far to easy to blame Moyes for the teams poor attitude. He needs to be more critical of the players, a d accept no s*it, just like ferguson, then they might get the message.

Vic Vinegar

bullvine wrote: »

58 points! we probably had that at this stage last season.

I think it was 61-62!

Rayne Wooney

I think we'll beat Arsenal and then draw with Palace

KH25

No

Lads I think we're best off just accepting things as they are for now. I don't think Moyes will be sacked until at least the end of the season. I would even put money on it if I actually had any to spend :P

spiralism

No

bullvine wrote: »

58 points! we probably had that at this stage last season.

We had more.

Moyes needs to stop making **** excuses. No we're not unlucky, no we don't lack a winning mentality and what the **** would you know about that anyways, no it's not all on the squad so stop blaming them. We're ****ing crap beyond belief and its on you. Take some responsibility ffs, you're managing one of the biggest clubs in the world, hiding behind **** excuses is just another one of a long list of reasons why you should be out on your hole.

MagicMarker

Dicky Pride wrote: »

Are you thick?

Did I say that I think he should slate the team? No. All I said was what he wrote was pointless. Which it is. Everyone knows that he can't slate the team or the manager, Jesus Christ that's obvious. But instead he just writes some drivel about the team being unlucky. POINTLESS.

Have you ever in your life written anything worth reading?

Personally I think it's good being able to hear the player's views that aren't limited to 140 characters. Fair play to Mata for taking the time out to speak to his fans.

Pro. F

No

TheDoc wrote: »

They very clearly had an objective to flood the penalty area. As Rene confirmed, they anticipated United to go wide and cross, and there was at most times a minimum 9 people in the box.

During the week I assume they worked on positioning and reactions defensively to where the ball was being played from.

They purposefully played deep, they purposefully invited United pressure.

They made no attempts to play football, bar three breaks they had, which they scored twice from.

There was clearly a plan there from Fulham and it worked for large parts, them scoring first was dreamland. Don't belittle the tactics and strategy Fulham deployed. It further skewers things when trying to debate the situation that unfolded.

You come across as someone tactically astute and in touch through other posts you make with people, so I take for granted you know the benefits of shifting the ball across the pitch out wide and firing crosses in, along with playing intricate play outside an opponents box. Problem being we didn't vary the play enough.

But really, don't belittle Fulham as much as we expect United to win. Their keeper made some outstanding saves, their defence made some excellent blocks and interceptions. It was a horrendous site to see, but they went with a plan and came away with a point.

You can say that Fulham went into the game with a plan to defend for their lives and pray for something on the counter, they most probably did. And you can say that they would have worked on it all week in training, that is reasonably likely.

But to try and say that having your team fall back to their own six yard line when the ball is 30-40 yards out is a good defensive tactic is ridiculous. Whatever Fulham trained and planned during the weak, their execution on defence was awful. They were a shambles.

TheDoc wrote: »

Little being said about RVP's cheeky chip attempt. Squares to Chico we are 3-1 up. Finishes it properly we are 3-1 up with two minutes to go.

Agree United should be beating Fulham comfortably, but taking away the fact the squad is low on confidence,

Two defensive blunders,
Three sitters missed
Lack of composure and quality in the final third

Play that match ten times we win it 9 times comfortably, once we draw. It was a bizzare and obscure game of football.

RvP can't convert every chance he gets. His goal scoring rate has been excellent this season, but that isn't enough to overcome Moyes' poor management of the club.

Evra is still playing and still has no serious competition for his place in the team and you want to talk about how Moyes got unlucky with defensive blunders? Come on man.

Moyes sent the team out to cross the ball yet he played an inside out winger in Young, an inside out winger who isn't really a winger in Mata and a fullback who is rubbish at crossing in Evra. He then took off Rafael, a half decent crosser, for Valencia, a rubbish crosser. If there was a lack of composure in the final third then Moyes had a lot to do with why that was the case.

Dicky Pride

No

MagicMarker wrote: »

Have you ever in your life written anything worth reading

Not to you obviously. But maybe you can check back over the last few months when I was telling everyone on this thread what you all only seem to be realising now.

I must report you for being uncivil by the way, that seems to be a thing now.

IamtheWalrus

Moyes future depends on the Glazers. Are they the type to sack a manager of their NFL team?

Utopia Parkway

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

Moyes future depends on the Glazers. Are they the type to sack a manager of their NFL team?

Their last head coach got 2 seasons before getting sacked.

IamtheWalrus

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Their last head coach got 2 seasons before getting sacked.

Was he dung from the shtart?

Pro. F

No

Dicky Pride wrote: »

Not to you obviously. But maybe you can check back over the last few months when I was telling everyone on this thread what you all only seem to be realising now.

I must report you for being uncivil by the way, that seems to be a thing now.

Get over yourself. There have been plenty of people criticising Moyes on this thread all season.

Dicky Pride

No

Pro. F wrote: »

Get over yourself. There have been plenty of people criticising Moyes on this thread all season.

True enough. Apologies.

spiralism

No

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

Was he dung from the shtart?

Jesus, he was cat. Greg Schiano was his name, it took them underacheiving massively, him falling out with half the squad and an MRSA outbreak at team facilities to get him sh1tcanned at the end of the season

ArmaniJeanss

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

Moyes future depends on the Glazers. Are they the type to sack a manager of their NFL team?

As I understand it the financial negatives for failure in NFL are a good bit less than in the EPL, so theoretically you can give more time to a coach and be no worse off at the end of those X years other than missed opportunity.

Whereas EPL failure for a team like United leads to an immediate loss of massive revenue from the CL.

titan18

No

spiralism wrote: »

Jesus, he was cat. Greg Schiano was his name, it took them underacheiving massively, him falling out with half the squad and an MRSA outbreak at team facilities to get him sh1tcanned at the end of the season

2 seasons is generally the minimum most coaches get though bar a disaster, or a stupid owner

I am pie

I don't give an enormous amount of credit to fulham, pack the box and pray for something on the break is hardly the stuff of tactical genius. The 2 conceded goals should be of as much concern for utd fans as all the whacky crossing. Fulham barely bothered to do more than head clearances and ended up with 2 at old trafford.

spiralism

No

titan18 wrote: »

2 seasons is generally the minimum most coaches get though bar a disaster, or a stupid owner

Yes i know, i follow the sport religiously. Schiano was exceptionally bad though, believe me and that team spent well and was expected to go places, yet their season was over with 3 months left in the season (sound familiar guys?) Former players described playing for him as "like living in a communist country".

Also, when he took over them, they were in a mess and improved somewhat the following season, then bombed in a major way this year, hence him getting two years.

thegreengoblin

Very sobering piece by the Guardian's Jamie Jackson. The stats near the end on the difference in number of crosses by players over this season and last is peeking over the sofa stuff.

From the story: 'If United lose at the Emirates and Brendan Rodgers's fast-improving side win at Fulham then United will need Liverpool to drop 13 points, owing to superior goal difference, while also winning all their last 12 matches.'

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/feb/10/manchester-united-david-moyes?CMP=twt_gu

niallo27

No

thegreengoblin wrote: »

Very sobering piece by the Guardian's Jamie Jackson. The stats near the end on the difference in number of crosses by players over this season and last is peeking over the sofa stuff.

From the story: 'If United lose at the Emirates and Brendan Rodgers's fast-improving side win at Fulham then United will need Liverpool to drop 13 points, owing to superior goal difference, while also winning all their last 12 matches.'

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/feb/10/manchester-united-david-moyes?CMP=twt_gu

Spurs look solid enough as well. It's too much to ask for both to fall apart I think.

Aidric

Yesterdays result was gut wrenching in the manner it came about. In all honesty it was the day I gave up hope of top 4. On current form I just can't see a team from the top 4 having the sort of collapse needed to get us in there. I thought Liverpool would be the most likely target but their result over Arsenal changed all that.

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

Fulham's defence was awful yesterday. They were defending on their own six yard line, even deeper at times. It was worse than school boy stuff from them. You are trying to portray them as some sort of well organised, tough to break down outfit - that is a complete misrepresentation of how bad they were.

It is a joke that Moyes couldn't lead this United team to beating that Fulham team comfortably. Moyes is doing a terrible job.

Rubbish of the highest order. Fulham were set up defensively very well. To ignore how well they defend and waited for the counter is ignorance. People calling them negative and anti football looked just as foolish.

Fulham defended well and countered excellently. They could have had three goals on the counter.

As it being a joke Moyes can't lead them them to a victory, yes its a terrible result but the crossing until we get through worked, it was shocking individual errors that cost us and in the 5th minute of injury time too.

People slated Chelsea after they defeated Barca in the UCL semi final for high defensive and countering football which they claimed lack any skill and tactical know how. Those people were clowns too.

thegreengoblin

Even if the others did have some sort of collapse, United are not currently capable of putting together the required run of victories to take advantage. It would take a serious change of fortunes for three different teams for United to make the top four and it's very rare to see something like that happen.

Jimmy Iovine

That was the strangest, most one-sided match I've seen in the flesh. It was crazy.

I can't understand how Moyes did not change the tactics. Everyone there could see that it was not working. Fulham were absolutely garbage. The worst PL side I've seen play.

They had a handy time. All they had to do was head a few balls clear. Not even bother playing ball.

There was one tactic. Get the ball out wide and then cross it in. Such a waste having Rooney, Mata and van Persie in the side. Absolutely ridiculous.

One the issue of Rooney, he was great to watch yesterday. He has such a desire to win. The covering run he made to prevent another goal in the first half was superb and put the likes of Evra to shame.

Some observations:

- Literally 5 seconds after Rafael's horrific 'cross' Moyes called Valencia back from his warm up to come on. Valencia looked around but didn't know what was going on. He then started warming up again. Split second substitution making from Moyes.

- DDG was furious when he was going off the pitch. He kept turning to Chris Wood and making gestures. Couldn't tell what they were talking about though.

- Giggs and Moyes were in deep conversation walking off the pitch at half time. Giggs had his coat pulled over his mouth to block what the cameras could see. Clearly he wasn't saying anything about the over-reliance on crosses.

- The singing section provided some great atmosphere. However, I think they're too far away from the Stretford End. They spent the game singing different songs and it was a complete jumble. I think they should spread a few sections out around the stadium to counter this. One end couldn't hear what the other was singing and it was a bit of a mess.

Oh and I knocked over an 8-year-old celebrating RvP's goal ha. Not my fault, he was standing on the seat beside me :pac:.

SherlockWatson

Your Airbag wrote: »

yes its a terrible result but the crossing until we get through worked

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:



I'm sorry, but in what way did this work??

beno619

No

Your Airbag wrote: »

Rubbish of the highest order. Fulham were set up defensively very well. To ignore how well they defend and waited for the counter is ignorance. People calling them negative and anti football looked just as foolish.

Fulham defended well and countered excellently. They could have had three goals on the counter.

As it being a joke Moyes can't lead them them to a victory, yes its a terrible result but the crossing until we get through worked, it was shocking individual errors that cost us and in the 5th minute of injury time too.

People slated Chelsea after they defeated Barca in the UCL semi final for high defensive and countering football which they claimed lack any skill and tactical know how. Those people were clowns too.

I agree that Fulham played well and probably deserved their point but..

There is no way that we can call crossing the ball 82 times and drawing to the leagues bottem side a success.

Its a monumental F**k up. If we played that way and scored 5 the complaints wouldn't be as loud but the tactic was clearly not successful.

Jimmy Iovine

Your Airbag wrote: »

yes its a terrible result but the crossing until we get through worked

Your Airbag wrote: »

Rubbish of the highest order

Did you watch the match? The crosses were ****.

If you're going to use the wingers/full backs as much as that then they should practice their crossing. They clearly haven't.

Your Airbag

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

That was the strangest, most one-sided match I've seen in the flesh. It was crazy.

I can't understand how Moyes did not change the tactics. Everyone there could see that it was not working. Fulham were absolutely garbage. The worst PL side I've seen play.

They had a handy time. All they had to do was head a few balls clear. Not even bother playing ball.

There was one tactic. Get the ball out wide and then cross it in. Such a waste having Rooney, Mata and van Persie in the side. Absolutely ridiculous.

Indeed it was frustrating watching the players we had whip in crosses all day but saying everyone could see it wasn't working? It did work, we got through and scored twice. Defensively we were poor.

I'm not defending this style but people are ignoring the fact it worked in terms of goal scoring and individual errors cost us. Vidic, Carrick and Evra all poor in the 94th minute to allow a goal.

Maximus Alexander

thegreengoblin wrote: »

Even if the others did have some sort of collapse, United are not currently capable of putting together the required run of victories to take advantage. It would take a serious change of fortunes for three different teams for United to make the top four and it's very rare to see something like that happen.

It wouldn't. All it would take is an unprecedented and miraculous turnaround on United's part. If United won all remaining fixtures they would finish on 80 points and would definitely be in the top 4.

Obviously this isn't going to happen, but your claim is still incorrect. :P

Rayne Wooney

Your Airbag wrote: »

Indeed it was frustrating watching the players we had whip in crosses all day but saying everyone could see it wasn't working? It did work, we got through and scored twice. Defensively we were poor.

I'm not defending this style but people are ignoring the fact it worked in terms of goal scoring and individual errors cost us. Vidic, Carrick and Evra all poor in the 94th minute to allow a goal.

In fairness man, that's akin to opening a banana by smashing it against a table, it will work eventually but you're probably better off doing it a different way.

82 crosses, all I can do is laugh

Jimmy Iovine

Your Airbag wrote: »

Indeed it was frustrating watching the players we had whip in crosses all day but saying everyone could see it wasn't working? It did work, we got through and scored twice. Defensively we were poor.

I'm not defending this style but people are ignoring the fact it worked in terms of goal scoring and individual errors cost us. Vidic, Carrick and Evra all poor in the 94th minute to allow a goal.

2 goals from 81 crosses is a shockingly bad turnover. I don't know how you could defend that.

Your Airbag

SherlockWatson wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:



I'm sorry, but in what way did this work??

We scored two goals as a results of balls being crossed into the box.

beno619 wrote: »

I agree that Fulham played well and probably deserved their point but..

There is no way that we can call crossing the ball 82 times and drawing to the leagues bottem side a success.

Its a monumental F**k up. If we played that way and scored 5 the complaints wouldn't be as loud but the tactic was clearly not successful.

I agree, I'm not saying this is how UTD should play every week. When you are up against a team parking the bus your options are limited but yes we could have tried something else. In terms of scoring the tactic was successful. A better quality of cross and we could have had more.

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Did you watch the match? The crosses were ****.

If you're going to use the wingers/full backs as much as that then they should practice their crossing. They clearly haven't.

The crosses were very poor but we had so much it got through, Fulham sat back and allowed us that many, they defended very well but we got through and could have had more.

Kerrydude1981

No

Just wondering out of all the crosses,how many were successful in the end?

I think the first half count was 7 successful crosses.

Your Airbag

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

2 goals from 81 crosses is a shockingly bad turnover. I don't know how you could defend that.

I am saying it worked, which it did, not that I like it.

Those two goals were enough were it not for woeful individual defensive errors.

It was not pretty when breaking down a team parking the bus it worked in terms of getting goals.

Chelsea could not do it against West Ham playing their way.

If Vidic headed the ball clear we had 3 points, piss poor to watch but had Vida done that it worked and we had the win.

user2011

No

U21's on now vs West Ham for anyone interested.

Maximus Alexander

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

2 0 goals from 81 crosses is a shockingly bad turnover. I don't know how you could defend that.

FYP.

The goals didn't come from crosses.

Maximus Alexander

Kerrydude1981 wrote: »

Just wondering out of all the crosses,how many were successful in the end?

I think the first half count was 7 successful crosses.

18 out of 82 successful.

Your Airbag

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

FYP.

The goals didn't come from crosses.

All we did was cross. The goals were directly linked to balls being crossed in and the aftermath of those crosses, 2nd balls etc.

We didn't try any other tactic except crossing.

Headshot

No

lol when you throw enough ****e at something it was bound to stick eventually

DARK-KNIGHT

No

Bannerman7 wrote: »

Agree.
Who should club try to get in to replace Moyes / Round etc

Guus Hiddink.... or preferably klopp

beno619

No

Your Airbag wrote: »

We scored two goals as a results of balls being crossed into the box.



I agree, I'm not saying this is how UTD should play every week. When you are up against a team parking the bus your options are limited but yes we could have tried something else. In terms of scoring the tactic was successful. A better quality of cross and we could have had more.




The crosses were very poor but we had so much it got through, Fulham sat back and allowed us that many, they defended very well but we got through and could have had more.

Sorry we drew to Fulham, it didnt work if we won 2-1 complaints would be just as bad imo. We needed to score 5 without reply to justify that kind of football.

Maximus Alexander

Your Airbag wrote: »

All we did was cross. The goals were directly linked to balls being crossed in and the aftermath of those crosses, 2nd balls etc.

We didn't try any other tactic except crossing.

That's not as much fun.

Jimmy Iovine

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

FYP.

The goals didn't come from crosses.

True dat. I haven't seen a replay of them so I can't remember the build up. It's all a blur to me. Even the tip off seems like a cross.

Kerrydude1981

No

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

18 out of 82 successful.

Someone has posted a video on Youtube of all the crosses