Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread - See Mod Warning in OP, 09/11

223vmax

Shoveling money into a team doesn't bring success. So don't expect that. A number of things have to come together in order to be challenging for the big trophies. Anyone that knows anything about football can see we're playing as good as we have since SAF and making great improvements all round. It's exciting to see MU again and other teams coming to OT know they're in for a game.

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

Imo there should be no doubt at this stage that Moyes wasn't right for the job and needed to go when he did. But that awful season is no excuse for the next manager to struggle so badly.

It was still a strong squad that LVG inherited and he was given buckets of money to spend. His indecision on formation, poor transfer work and poor organisation of the defence are all on him. The defensive injuries give him a bit of an excuse, but not enough. If LVG doesn't make huge strides with the team before January then I would be against giving him any more money to spend in that window; then look at sacking him if he still hasn't got it going towards the end of the season. Let him prove that he can get this group playing to their ability, never mind his CV at this stage. Only then will he deserve to keep the job and spend the budget.

On a positive note, I've been happy with how the team have been keeping possession and taking the initiative in the last two games. The players seem to be making a lot of clever decisions in that regard. That's something. Hopefully these are signs of Van Gaal's vision for the team starting to take shape.

Very weird logic. The reason he can't make big strides is because we have no defense, at least a very inexperienced and injury prone one.

We are leaking goals and its costing us points and your against allowing the manager to strenghten this area?

Look at our available defenders. LVG can't control injuries. Not giving him money in January due to poor results would be idiotic in the extreme.

sky88

zerks wrote: »

Anyone see Neville's analysis of RVP last night? It highlighted his intelligent movement yet nobody picked up on it.He was running off defenders yet anytime a player had a pass on,they ignored him or simply didn't see it & ended up playing the ball square.As good as Fellaini has played recently,he doesn't have the nous or vision to play in these passes or through balls.Perhaps this will improve with Herrera back in the team.
He complained of Blind playing too many square balls,Carrick has been doing this for years now so that's not the problem.
Look at how City played balls in behind to runners while we played in front of them & our chances came from players carrying the ball themselves ala RVP & Rooney (where he should have shot)

The bit about Blind really annoyed me last night as carrick and especally cleverley in the united team has been guilty of this in the last seasons and Neville hasnt said anything about that in the past.

paulbok

223vmax wrote: »

And you think they all should 'click' and play like champions after less than 10 games?

Most of that lot were not even bought until the last few days of August so really only 7 games.

223vmax

paulbok wrote: »

Most of that lot were not even bought until the last few days of August so really only 7 games.

Thats why I said less than 10 games.

The Moldy Gowl

So Wayne Rooney signing has made sky news. Sky absolutely love to report on all news about us.
Imagine if Robbie keane made the news here about him signing a song.

The beauty is, it's chanpions league night and Liverpool are playing their biggest game in years and Wayne Rooney is on the news because he went to a ed sheeren concert. There has been more coverage of Rooney than of Liverpool or arsenal.

bangkok

sky88 wrote: »

The bit about Blind really annoyed me last night as carrick and especally cleverley in the united team has been guilty of this in the last seasons and Neville hasnt said anything about that in the past.

carrick always or 90% of the time looks to play the ball forward!! he has the most forward passes in Europe 2 years ago!!!!

Mitch Connor

Pro. F wrote: »

Imo there should be no doubt at this stage that Moyes wasn't right for the job and needed to go when he did. But that awful season is no excuse for the next manager to struggle so badly.

It was still a strong squad that LVG inherited and he was given buckets of money to spend. His indecision on formation, poor transfer work and poor organisation of the defence are all on him. The defensive injuries give him a bit of an excuse, but not enough. If LVG doesn't make huge strides with the team before January then I would be against giving him any more money to spend in that window; then look at sacking him if he still hasn't got it going towards the end of the season. Let him prove that he can get this group playing to their ability, never mind his CV at this stage. Only then will he deserve to keep the job and spend the budget.

On a positive note, I've been happy with how the team have been keeping possession and taking the initiative in the last two games. The players seem to be making a lot of clever decisions in that regard. That's something. Hopefully these are signs of Van Gaal's vision for the team starting to take shape.

Personally I don't think there has been indecision on the formation.

He said very shortly after he took over that he didn't have the wingers/wide players of sufficient quality to play 433. He also said the players already knew, basically at least, how to play in a 433/451 - they didn't know how to play in the 352 formation that might be required during the season - so he was going to intensively teach it.

So, 352 was the starting formation - but IMO it was never the plan for it to be the primary formation.

We then signed a number of players (Mainly thinking Blind, Falcao and Di Maria) which allowed a change in formation to the 41212 diamond we were playing with - allowing us to play all but one of Herrera, Di Maria, Mata, Rooney, Falcao, RVP at the same time. So we, utterly unsurprisingly imo, changed to that formation (as I predicted we would, and said so on here).

Now we look at the last couple of game where we have played 433. Rooney suspended for the first, Falcao injured - RVP the only fit senior striker. No surpise we went to 451/433. Rooney came back for the last game but again, played CM with Blind and Fellaini (instead of Mata) and we played 433.

Both games were also big games, requiring, arguably, a more defensive approach in midfield. Especially the City game which was away, and had a right winger at right back.

Lets see how we play in a more 'normal' fixture when we have Herrera, Rooney, RVP, Falcao, Mata, Di Maria, Rafael, some centre backs... all fit, or mostly fit.

For me, the so called indecision regarding the formation is simply not listening to what LVG actually said at various points, and not taking new signings or players returning to fitness into account (or losing players to injury).

As for January - if it is a CB and top CM he is going for in January I'd let him spend away as regardless of how we are doing or our perception of him by that stage we will still need a CB and arguably a CM so I don't care who brings them in, as long as they are brought in.

The Moldy Gowl

bangkok wrote: »

like who?! never read so much nonsense.

He WANTED fabregas and by all accounts he was available but it was the club that bid 26m and then 28m. Pathetic.

Toni Kroos would also be a united player now

Not so pathetic in hindsight though. He went to Chelsea for what? 30 million?

He either didn't want to come, or barca didn't want to sell him. I would hazard a guess a lot more goes on behind the scenes and the bid is the least important thing.

(Cech out my pun)

bangkok

Gowlasauras Rex wrote: »

Not so pathetic in hindsight though. He went to Chelsea for what? 30 million?

He either didn't want to come, or barca didn't want to sell him. I would hazard a guess a lot more goes on behind the scenes and the bid is the least important thing.

(Cech out my pun)

ah here....

Mitch Connor

Gowlasauras Rex wrote: »

Not so pathetic in hindsight though. He went to Chelsea for what? 30 million?

He either didn't want to come, or barca didn't want to sell him. I would hazard a guess a lot more goes on behind the scenes and the bid is the least important thing.

(Cech out my pun)

Barca wanted 40million for him last summer (according to a number of people I trust, you don't have to) and a year later they were happy to accept less - not a tough one to accept imo. Valuations of players change, both positively and negatively a lot, it happening over 12 months isn't something to be surprised about. Summer 13 he had only been there a year and while both Barca and Fabregas were happy for a United deal to happen, neither were overly pushed to MAKE it happen. Barca wanted a figure they could say 'forced there hand' and Fabregas wanted Barca to accept a bid (no transfer request) so he could say the club didn't want him to stay.

The Moldy Gowl

bangkok wrote: »

ah here....

You are dealing with humans who are doing a job they love. They aren't robots.

By saying it's the least important thing, especially for a big club, 10 million isn't a lot.

You can throw money at a club, dosent mean they will accept. If they are looking to sell then ya. 30 million is handy. Last year barca didn't want to sell to anyone/us. I clearly don't mean you offer a Mars bar for a player. You pay the market value.

It also a great deflection for when players don't want to join, a great way for the club to take the moral high ground.

bangkok

Gowlasauras Rex wrote: »

You are dealing with humans who are doing a job they love. They aren't robots.

By saying it's the least important thing, especially for a big club, 10 million isn't a lot.

You can throw money at a club, dosent mean they will accept. If they are looking to sell then ya. 30 million is handy. Last year barca didn't want to sell to anyone/us. I clearly don't mean you offer a Mars bar for a player. You pay the market value.

It also a great deflection for when players don't want to join, a great way for the club to take the moral high ground.

Barca wanted 40million for him last summer (according to a number of people I trust, you don't have to) and a year later they were happy to accept less - not a tough one to accept imo. Valuations of players change, both positively and negatively a lot, it happening over 12 months isn't something to be surprised about. Summer 13 he had only been there a year and while both Barca and Fabregas were happy for a United deal to happen, neither were overly pushed to MAKE it happen. Barca wanted a figure they could say 'forced there hand' and Fabregas wanted Barca to accept a bid (no transfer request) so he could say the club didn't want him to stay.

"Mitch Connor" wrote that.... couldn't put it better myself

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

Very weird logic. The reason he can't make big strides is because we have no defense, at least a very inexperienced and injury prone one.

We are leaking goals and its costing us points and your against allowing the manager to strenghten this area?

Look at our available defenders. LVG can't control injuries. Not giving him money in January due to poor results would be idiotic in the extreme.

If the injured defenders list were to stay in the same state until January then I'd give him a pass. But it won't stay in that state, just like it hasn't been in that state up to this point.

LVG was also mistaken to not buy a right back in the summer.

DM_7

bangkok wrote: »

like who?! never read so much nonsense.

He WANTED fabregas and by all accounts he was available but it was the club that bid 26m and then 28m. Pathetic.

Toni Kroos would also be a united player now

You don't really think Kroos would have joined United over Real do you?

The Moldy Gowl

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Barca wanted 40million for him last summer (according to a number of people I trust, you don't have to) and a year later they were happy to accept less - not a tough one to accept imo. Valuations of players change, both positively and negatively a lot, it happening over 12 months isn't something to be surprised about. Summer 13 he had only been there a year and while both Barca and Fabregas were happy for a United deal to happen, neither were overly pushed to MAKE it happen. Barca wanted a figure they could say 'forced there hand' and Fabregas wanted Barca to accept a bid (no transfer request) so he could say the club didn't want him to stay.

I never buy into these stories of he said she said. Maybe I'm too cynical of them. They can be used as propaganda.

What I mean by the making the bid to actually get him is the easy part. We could have thrown 60 million at barca. He may not have wanted to leave.


I think of players as humans, they have family and friends and connections in a place where they work and have everything they want with no wants. They might be settled. Everyone is different. I think convincing someone to move from barcalona to Manchester is the hardest part if they have doubts about leaving. Then the club has to be realistic about prices and wages.

The Moldy Gowl

bangkok wrote: »

Barca wanted 40million for him last summer (according to a number of people I trust, you don't have to) and a year later they were happy to accept less - not a tough one to accept imo. Valuations of players change, both positively and negatively a lot, it happening over 12 months isn't something to be surprised about. Summer 13 he had only been there a year and while both Barca and Fabregas were happy for a United deal to happen, neither were overly pushed to MAKE it happen. Barca wanted a figure they could say 'forced there hand' and Fabregas wanted Barca to accept a bid (no transfer request) so he could say the club didn't want him to stay.

"Mitch Connor" wrote that.... couldn't put it better myself

When will people stop listening to hear say And propaganda. There is probably 2 or 3 people who would actually know what happened.

It would break confidentiality if they told the exact reasons.

bangkok

Gowlasauras Rex wrote: »

I never buy into these stories of he said she said. Maybe I'm too cynical of them. They can be used as propaganda.

What I mean by the making the bid to actually get him is the easy part. We could have thrown 60 million at barca. He may not have wanted to leave.


I think of players as humans, they have family and friends and connections in a place where they work and have everything they want with no wants. They might be settled. Everyone is different. I think convincing someone to move from barcalona to Manchester is the hardest part if they have doubts about leaving. Then the club has to be realistic about prices and wages.

yes there are humans, but the majority of players know they are moving to a club for probably no longer than 5 years and players careers are short anyway so for the majority this wouldn't be an issue.

Pro. F

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Personally I don't think there has been indecision on the formation.

He said very shortly after he took over that he didn't have the wingers/wide players of sufficient quality to play 433. He also said the players already knew, basically at least, how to play in a 433/451 - they didn't know how to play in the 352 formation that might be required during the season - so he was going to intensively teach it.

So, 352 was the starting formation - but IMO it was never the plan for it to be the primary formation.

We then signed a number of players (Mainly thinking Blind, Falcao and Di Maria) which allowed a change in formation to the 41212 diamond we were playing with - allowing us to play all but one of Herrera, Di Maria, Mata, Rooney, Falcao, RVP at the same time. So we, utterly unsurprisingly imo, changed to that formation (as I predicted we would, and said so on here).

Now we look at the last couple of game where we have played 433. Rooney suspended for the first, Falcao injured - RVP the only fit senior striker. No surpise we went to 451/433. Rooney came back for the last game but again, played CM with Blind and Fellaini (instead of Mata) and we played 433.

Both games were also big games, requiring, arguably, a more defensive approach in midfield. Especially the City game which was away, and had a right winger at right back.

Lets see how we play in a more 'normal' fixture when we have Herrera, Rooney, RVP, Falcao, Mata, Di Maria, Rafael, some centre backs... all fit, or mostly fit.

For me, the so called indecision regarding the formation is simply not listening to what LVG actually said at various points, and not taking new signings or players returning to fitness into account (or losing players to injury).

As for January - if it is a CB and top CM he is going for in January I'd let him spend away as regardless of how we are doing or our perception of him by that stage we will still need a CB and arguably a CM so I don't care who brings them in, as long as they are brought in.

I've paid attention to what LVG has said and the coming and going of players and injuries. It all points to incredibly poor strategy and planning and self aggrandising waffle from the manager.

If the team were playing in an organised fashion then there wouldn't be a criticism to be made, but that's not the case.

If LVG had picked a suitable formation (with maybe a variant to also experiment with) and bought and sold more sensibly to implement the formation, then he wouldn't have needed to change so much and ended up with such weaknesses in the squad and poor organisation on the field.

I'm not saying that there was one right way to do things and that LVG missed it btw. I'm saying that if you buy players that cause you to change formation so much and neglect weaknesses in the squad then that is poor management.

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

yes there are humans, but the majority of players know they are moving to a club for probably no longer than 5 years and players careers are short anyway so for the majority this wouldn't be an issue.

You are a poor judge of human nature.

The Moldy Gowl

bangkok wrote: »

yes there are humans, but the majority of players know they are moving to a club for probably no longer than 5 years and players careers are short anyway so for the majority this wouldn't be an issue.

The majority, not the top tier of players where job security is fairly low for them and their life is more important. Especially playing for the top 10 clubs competing year in year out for trophys.


Look I'm just trying to give a different angle of why a transfer might not happen rather than derp derp Woodward derp derp 5 euro derp derp. While money is important, it's not the be all and end all when you are making a million a month and have a nice life, friends, great successful job, nice place to live.

I'm sure if all his team mates were ***** he would have moved

sky88

Pro. F wrote: »

If the injured defenders list were to stay in the same state until January then I'd give him a pass. But it won't stay in that state, just like it hasn't been in that state up to this point.

LVG was also mistaken to not buy a right back in the summer.

i think because he started late after the world cup and he couldnt fully assess the defence he didnt relise that most werent up to United standards and the defender he wanted vermalem went to barca

Mitch Connor

Pro. F wrote: »

I've paid attention to what LVG has said and the coming and going of players and injuries. It all points to incredibly poor strategy and planning and self aggrandising waffle from the manager.

If the team were playing in an organised fashion then there wouldn't be a criticism to be made, but that's not the case.

If LVG had picked a suitable formation (with maybe a variant to also experiment with) and bought and sold more sensibly to implement the formation, then he wouldn't have needed to change so much and ended up with such weaknesses in the squad and poor organisation on the field.

I'm not saying that there was one right way to do things and that LVG missed it btw. I'm saying that if you buy players that cause you to change formation so much and neglect weaknesses in the squad then that is poor management.

He bought players to change to a formation he wanted, imo. Though I do, and have said before, feel the defence was stupidly neglected in the summer and that it would cost us big. and it is doing.

I think in terms of midfield and forward options we are basically where he wants us at this point in time - though would have prefered to bring in Vidal/Strootman in the summer if injury situations had allowed it.

bangkok

Pro. F wrote: »

You are a poor judge of human nature.

no, the majority of footballers and human beings like money and will go to where ever they can get the most money. This is a fact of life

Blatter

Mitch Connor wrote: »

He bought players to change to a formation he wanted, imo. Though I do, and have said before, feel the defence was stupidly neglected in the summer and that it would cost us big. and it is doing.

I think in terms of midfield and forward options we are basically where he wants us at this point in time - though would have prefered to bring in Vidal/Strootman in the summer if injury situations had allowed it.

I wonder if he will still want to bring in Vidal/Strootman with Fellaini coming good. I get the feeling he will always play either one of Carrick/Blind in the holding role (although could be wrong on that). We are sorted at #10 with Rooney and Mata being first and second choice and Felliani/Herrera are good options for the last spot.

Would he play Strootman or Vidal instead of Carrick/Blind? Wouldn't they be a bit wasted in that holding role seeing as they do a lot of their good work in the final third?

Did LVG use Strootman as the deepest CM for Holland or did he always play him in a box to box role with de Jong protecting?

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

If the injured defenders list were to stay in the same state until January then I'd give him a pass. But it won't stay in that state, just like it hasn't been in that state up to this point.

LVG was also mistaken to not buy a right back in the summer.

Even out of that state we still need players in that area. Everyone and their dog knows it.

Your suggestion is to not let LVG buy in players for that area if we don't improve before January? Quite frankly its a laughable and daft suggestion.

Nobody could have foreseen the depth of our defensive injuries. We have had 10 different CB pairings this season with only four of the 10 playing more than a single game together. Our most consistent CB pairing thus far has been McNair and Rojo.

To suggest not giving LVG money to buy CBs is crazy and would make us a laughing stock as every opposition fan and pundit says it our no.1 priority. You may as well just hand the points over to the other team before kick off.

Can I ask what the alternative in your Master plan is? To not give LVG the cash and watch the goals continue to leak, costing us points and league positions and just sit back and watch our defense fall further apart? Or is it to sack LVG and get who exactly in in January, giving LVG half a season at the helm?

Not giving LVG money in January is the worst idea I've seen on here in a long long time. Its an extremely bizzarre and weird actually. I can't see how anyone in their right mind would think that makes sense.

Pro. F

Mitch Connor wrote: »

He bought players to change to a formation he wanted, imo. Though I do, and have said before, feel the defence was stupidly neglected in the summer and that it would cost us big. and it is doing.

I think in terms of midfield and forward options we are basically where he wants us at this point in time - though would have prefered to bring in Vidal/Strootman in the summer if injury situations had allowed it.

Leaving the defence aside, I still wouldn't be happy with the state of the midfield and forwards.

We haven't had many injuries or suspensions amongst the forwards and midfielders, yet it has still required a lot of formation changes and associated problems.

As I said, all these changes wouldn't be a cause for criticism if it was working on the pitch, but it's not. The midfield have been disorganised defensively; RVP and Mata have been far too quiet when playing; the team has been far too reliant on Di Maria for creativity; Falcao is a (most likely) costly loan that we might not even be able to keep next season (there's also the issue of his age); there isn't enough competition or back-ups for the wingers when we have to use that set of formations.

Maybe LVG is happy with the midfield and forward situation. I don't think he should be.

Giggsy11

bangkok wrote: »

like who?! never read so much nonsense.

He WANTED fabregas and by all accounts he was available but it was the club that bid 26m and then 28m. Pathetic.

Toni Kroos would also be a united player now

Good that you don't read your own posts.

There were many reports that Strootman deal was very close then Moyes cancelled it, same with Garay and IIRC Garay himself said that.

Pro. F

Blatter wrote: »

Did LVG use Strootman as the deepest CM for Holland or did he always play him in a box to box role with de Jong protecting?

From what I've seen just looking at the team line-ups he mixed it up quite a bit.

Link for WC qualifying (the formations aren't always right on that site, but the line-ups are reliable)

Rayne Wooney

Strootman could be shifted between 6 and 8 as needed but he looks special playing in the latter for Roma

I don't think Blind will be a regular after the next one or two windows

The Moldy Gowl

If Blind could be TC23 replacement, that would be fantastic

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

Even out of that state we still need players in that area. Everyone and their dog knows it.

Your suggestion is to not let LVG buy in players for that area if we don't improve before January? Quite frankly its a laughable and daft suggestion.

Nobody could have foreseen the depth of our defensive injuries. We have had 10 different CB pairings this season with only four of the 10 playing more than a single game together. Our most consistent CB pairing thus far has been McNair and Rojo.

To suggest not giving LVG money to buy CBs is crazy and would make us a laughing stock as every opposition fan and pundit says it our no.1 priority. You may as well just hand the points over to the other team before kick off.

Can I ask what the alternative in your Master plan is? To not give LVG the cash and watch the goals continue to leak, costing us points and league positions and just sit back and watch our defense fall further apart? Or is it to sack LVG and get who exactly in in January, giving LVG half a season at the helm?

Not giving LVG money in January is the worst idea I've seen on here in a long long time. Its an extremely bizzarre and weird actually. I can't see how anyone in their right mind would think that makes sense.

I know there have been huge problems with defensive injuries, but, for me, that still doesn't excuse how poorly the team have defended.

Even with the injuries, some of the disorganisation in the back line has just not been acceptable. That's not down to a lack of talent, but poor coaching. I've seen plenty of PL and Seria A teams (two leagues where defending is usually at a higher standard) over the years with similar injury problems being better organised defensively.

And the poor organisation in midfield and lack of depth at full-back are two additional serious problems that have been directly caused by LVG himself.

I don't care what other people are saying the team should do. There are a lot of stupid opinions that are agreed on by the majority of fans and pundits.

As I said, I wouldn't be looking at sacking LVG until the back end of the season. I'm only talking about keeping the wallet shut in January, if he doesn't get the players he already has playing better.

Edit: I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Glazers' own plan is to spend whatever they can afford, regardless of how they think the manager is doing, in the hopes of brute-forcing their way back into the CL spots. Their business concerns are probably too pressing to worry about long term success just now.

Blatter

Pro. F wrote: »

From what I've seen just looking at the team line-ups he mixed it up quite a bit.

Link for WC qualifying (the formations aren't always right on that site, but the line-ups are reliable)

That's a great website, thanks for that.

It seems he definitely used Strootman as the deepest CM at times. I don't know how we'll fit another CM in at the moment. Having Carrick, Blind, Fellaini, Herrera, Mata, Rooney for three positions is plenty of depth (Four positions if we play the diamond, but di Maria will always take that left CM spot in that case). I think you need to sell one to bring another in and for me, Blind and Carrick are the weakest. Blind has just been bought and is very versatile, so there's no way he'll be going anywhere. From LVG's comments, he seems to really like Carrick, so I think it's unlikely he'll go anywhere.

I think bringing Vidal or Strootman in was planned with the thinking that Fellaini would be leaving. I think his turnaround in form (if he keeps it up) could scrap plans to bring in another CM.

The Moldy Gowl

How many goals is our Christy off the champs leauge record?

Hococop

Gowlasauras Rex wrote: »

How many goals is our Christy off the champs leauge record?

Just the one I think

Timmyctc

Gowlasauras Rex wrote: »

How many goals is our Christy off the champs leauge record?

"Christy"

Sheepy99

Who else is there to sign in midfield instead of Strootman? For all the hype, there seems to be an equal amount claiming that he won't be going anywhere anytime soon which is understandable given he only got to play for around 5 months before he had that long layoff

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

I know there have been huge problems with defensive injuries, but, for me, that still doesn't excuse how poorly the team have defended.

Even with the injuries, some of the disorganisation in the back line has just not been acceptable. That's not down to a lack of talent, but poor coaching. I've seen plenty of PL and Seria A teams (two leagues where defending is usually at a higher standard) over the years with similar injury problems being better organised defensively.

And the poor organisation in midfield and lack of depth at full-back are two additional serious problems that have been directly caused by LVG himself.

I don't care what other people are saying the team should do. There are a lot of stupid opinions that are agreed on by the majority of fans and pundits.

As I said, I wouldn't be looking at sacking LVG until the back end of the season. I'm only talking about keeping the wallet shut in January, if he doesn't get the players he already has playing better.

Edit: I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Glazers' own plan is to spend whatever they can afford, regardless of how they think the manager is doing, in the hopes of brute-forcing their way back into the CL spots. Their business concerns are probably too pressing to worry about long term success just now.

Whatever about poor organisation and not enough midfeild cover but that wasn't the part of your post I bolded. You said your against giving LVG money to buy defenders if the poor form conitunes. Thats just plain wrong and silly.

Yes there should have been a CB and RB bought but as you said earlier about the MF if the preformances were good its not an issue. LVG isn't a miracle worker, he can't forsee things not working. To say he shouldnt spend to correct things is plain wrong.

Your "youv'e made you bed now lie in it" attitude would have us continue the defensive horror show and possibly cost us foruth again. That would be setting out to purposely harm the team and club.

Thank god everyone else is logical enough to do the exact opposite because its plain and simple we need CB's.

I mentioned the oppositon fans and pundits to point how whenever UTD are talked about and analysed our defense its mentioned and how top heavy we are in atttack. You say you don't care what they think, well you should. Everyone is talking about it becuase its glaringly obvious its our major problem and has become priority no.1 for us to fix in January.

To say you don't want to give LVG the chance to fix this in January, the chance to correct his mistake of not buying CBs in the summer, to continue as we are is completely non-sensical. Thankfully nobody at the club would even entertain the idea of doing something so stupid and wreckless.

We could get some good defenders with EPL experiece without spending a forutune. We should and will. Your idea about doing otherwise is simply wrong no matter how you look at it.

Hococop

madrid have 54 goals in 17 games that is some insane statistic, with the strikers we have we will hopefully be getting the same results soon

Larry Wildman

Van Gaal's tenure has been disastrous. Some posters seem happy to cling to nebulous hope in relation to our prospects. Personally, I prefer to deal in reality - Despite being given an unprecedented warchest, Van Gaal has overseen Manchester United's worst start to a league season for 28 years. I would give him until Christmas. If there is no sign of progress by then, he should be sacked.

ElChe32

Give it a rest Larry, I'm trying to watch Eastenders here.

223vmax

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Van Gaal's tenure has been disastrous. Some posters seem happy to cling to nebulous hope in relation to our prospects. Personally, I prefer to deal in reality - Despite being given an unprecedented warchest, Van Gaal has overseen Manchester United's worst start to a league season for 28 years. I would give him until Christmas. If there is no sign of progress by then, he should be sacked.

You really have no idea. Go and support City.

Larry Wildman

ElChe32 wrote: »

Give it a rest Larry, I'm trying to watch Eastenders here.

Really?

I'm watching a tragedy / comedy on another channel.

mewe

Gowlasauras Rex wrote: »

How many goals is our Christy off the champs leauge record?

Gowan Christy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y22Cripin-s

Timmyctc

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Van Gaal's tenure has been disastrous. Some posters seem happy to cling to nebulous hope in relation to our prospects. Personally, I prefer to deal in reality - Despite being given an unprecedented warchest, Van Gaal has overseen Manchester United's worst start to a league season for 28 years. I would give him until Christmas. If there is no sign of progress by then, he should be sacked.

Are ye sure?

Larry Wildman

Timmyctc wrote: »

Are ye sure?

Worst start to a campaign since '86, no?

Your Airbag

223vmax wrote: »

You really have no idea. Go and support City.

In Larrys defense LVG has had a really bad start. Worse than Moyes. There would be a lynch mob if Moyes was still there. Then theres the money LVG has spent to get off to a worse start.

Saying that I don't agree with Larry. The thing is LVG is rebuilding the UTD team. Moyes just continued with the team Fergie left behind. The preceieved very good league winners squad.

When LVG was stepping in Rio, Vidic, Evra, Giggs and Buttner had left. Thats a hell of a lot of experience. The pluses for LVG are the progress in a style of play we can see the team trying to play and the positive football.

It was at this point under Moyes where things only continued to get worse. With LVG I can see things getting better plus I'm keeping in mind the rebuild he is doing.

The two situations are very different but LVG is entitled to much criticism. I was doing so a lot earlier but I have seen progress in the philosophy and I want him around.

Larry Wildman

I hope that you're right, Your Airbag. I am genuinely concerned that we're in big trouble with this guy. Fingers crossed that I'm wrong.

bullvine

The problem with moyes was he got a decent run going around christmas but then new year came and things got even worse than before the good run started. We seem to be improving with every game now and hopefully start beating the teams we should be beating but if things get worse than aug/sept the pressure will be on him like it was moyes.

Lord TSC

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Van Gaal's tenure has been disastrous. Some posters seem happy to cling to nebulous hope in relation to our prospects. Personally, I prefer to deal in reality - Despite being given an unprecedented warchest, Van Gaal has overseen Manchester United's worst start to a league season for 28 years. I would give him until Christmas. If there is no sign of progress by then, he should be sacked.

Larry, I can be a bit clearer with this one. I was vague last night, but I'll be specific to you now. Because the last warning was to do with you.

There is a line that can be crossed between being negative and being continuously negative to the point of being disruptive. When every single post you make may as well be a copy/paste job, it makes it look like you are just banging on a drum over and over, looking for reactions. You've posted this post about 4 times in 48 hours now, usually unprovoked, get responses and then ignore them to start it up again.

Negative opinions are welcome if debated and if there's a desire for actual discussion. Unrelenting negativity to the point of trolling a superthread, however, is not tolerated; its soapboxing to take a single sentence, one you know is very controversial, and repeat it ad nausum in a bid to get a response.

You've made the point that LVG should be sacked, and then made it again, and again, and again. You don't need to keep making it over and over, because it rapidly looks like you're trying to bait responses now. If you've got something fresh to add, go ahead, but if you keep using the same language, posting the same post over and over and over, then there'll be further action taken.

(And goes without saying...do not respond to this post publicly).