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

Liam O

Pro. F wrote: »

Ferguson was great, but he didn't win a league with a squad deserving of finishing 7th.

I don't think the squad was as lacking in quality or held back by injury as you are making out. Things weren't easy, but they were not that bad and with the £64m Moyes had to spend he certainly had enough to improve the the weak areas, but instead he wasted it.



The fact that LVG made such a balls of his transfer dealings and choosing formations has been a very big reason for him having to constantly reshuffle all positions and formations.

I don't agree that those players (Jones, Smalling, Evans and Rafael I assume you are talking about) are looking like they aren't good enough at this stage. I'd like to see them working for a manager that doesn't change the formation every second game and can implement sound defensive organisation for a month or two before I make a final judgement. Although their injury issues might finish their chances in the long run regardless.



I don't think the quality and injuries have been as bad as you do. And I think it is laughable to think that we should allow this manager to spend even more money after the balls of a job he made of it in the summer, unless he starts to show something more on the pitch.

However I do apologise that you have had to read so much of this argument. I never expected many (or any) fans to agree with me, but unfortunately it was Your Airbag who decided to argue the point and that never works out well.

Throwing around a 64m figure is trying to skew the fact that he got 1 player in the Summer, and this was deadline day and an unfit player. So the squad remained stagnant and was already one of the older first 11s in the league I'd say. With the money in the league you can't afford to stagnate. Now part of this is obviously Moyes' fault but Woodward's refusal to come out and take any of the blame and try to pass it all off on Moyes who has conducted himself better than a lot of fans and upper management deserved leaves a sour taste.

Pro. F

bangkok wrote: »

easy way to put it but moyes wasn't backed in the summer when it was clear he wanted some players and they were never signed for him and you cant say he gave them a 7th place finish when he was sacked with 4 games to go. He didn't even get 1 full season

Yeah I'm sure if Moyes had been given the last four games in charge he would have won them all and climbed up to fifth if that was even mathematically possible.

Nothing is clear about what happened in the summer. All we know is that Moyes had £27m to spend in the summer and £37m to spend in January and both of his purchases were poor choices.

adox

Moyes lost the dressing room at an early stage and that was curtains for him.

Unless you were going to replace the whole squad he had to go.

The problem isnt that he wasnt given enough time, the problem was he wasnt removed sooner.

Pro. F

Liam O wrote: »

Throwing around a 64m figure is trying to skew the fact that he got 1 player in the Summer, and this was deadline day and an unfit player. So the squad remained stagnant and was already one of the older first 11s in the league I'd say. With the money in the league you can't afford to stagnate. Now part of this is obviously Moyes' fault but Woodward's refusal to come out and take any of the blame and try to pass it all off on Moyes who has conducted himself better than a lot of fans and upper management deserved leaves a sour taste.

Show some proof on the squad age and how it compares to the rest of the league. I suspect that you are wrong in your assertion.

I'm not going to get into the guessing game of who was exactly to blame for the way the transfers were conducted any more. That is a pointless black hole of bullshít.

Even with no money spent, that squad was better than seventh. Your argument that Moyes could have done better if he had more money or time is severely undermined by how atrociously the team played on the pitch.

The_Kew_Tour

last years squad should have been making top 4 no question

Pro. F

UnitedIrishman wrote: »

Time will tell but I definitely think it is a bit unfair to judge his ability to coach us defensively yet or his abilty to get our positioning right. For the vast majority of the season so far we've had a number of first choice defenders missing from training - so instead of coaching a group together, he's had to try use whatever players that are there. Then you get a player back and you have to try get 3 weeks work into him to bring him up to speed with the rest of the defence.

With the Dutch team at the World Cup, he had 5 weeks or so pre-tournament where they worked intensively as a group on their shape and their positioning without any injuries. And by all accounts it is Van Gaal himself that coaches the positional/shape aspect of his teams personally.

I'm not judging him yet. This conversation has been an utter mess because I have been dealing with Your Airbag, but I made it clear in my OP that I was not judging LVG yet.

I would want to see improvement from the manager before I would trust him to spend more money, considering that he made such a balls of spending money the first time around. He has plenty of time to show evidence on the pitch that he is up to the job, and I'll be continuing to take into account the mitigating circumstance of our defenders being so injury prone.

UnitedIrishman wrote: »

Already we're seeing our defence being more responsible for the iniation of attacks rather than just defending. We rarely kick the ball long upfield from kick outs and our backs have a lot of possession waiting for gaps to appear in midfield rather than rushing it forward.

I've been very happy with that bit, especially in the last game. And I thought that the midfield were making a lot of clever choices when building from the back too, I'm sure that didn't just happen by accident. So I am hopeful that LVG will show his quality, but it's early days yet and he does still need to show it imo.

keane2097

Pro. F wrote: »

Show some proof on the squad age and how it compares to the rest of the league. I suspect that you are wrong in your assertion.

I'm not going to get into the guessing game of who was exactly to blame for the way the transfers were conducted any more. That is a pointless black hole of bullshít.

Even with no money spent, that squad was better than seventh. Your argument that Moyes could have done better if he had more money or time is severely undermined by how atrociously the team played on the pitch.

Better than seventh could be granted, but I presume we would be all willing to abandon the "league winning" epithet at this stage?

Somewhere between 1st & 7th in 2013, terrible season in 13/14, many players shipped out, terrible injury issues and many of the signings happening with the season having already started seems to be a fair reflection of where the squad is at the moment.

I am personally not surprised by the results that have emerged from that soup.

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

Spot on

Anyone who is till of the opinion that Moyes had a title winning squad and turned them into midtable team is clearly wrong.

I didn't say that Moyes had a title winning squad, that is a straw man.

ericzeking

adox wrote: »

Moyes lost the dressing room at an early stage and that was curtains for him.

Unless you were going to replace the whole squad he had to go.

The problem isnt that he wasnt given enough time, the problem was he wasnt removed sooner.

I wouldn't say he lost the whole dressing room, he certainly lost some of the more senior heads who were more resistant to change and would have been very influential as we have heard from Rio, but he didn't loose Rooney for example and David de Gea had a very good season, Jones and Welbeck played well at times, Januzaj came in and played well.

To succeed he would have needed to clear out Rio, Vidic, RVP, Evra and latterly Giggs as a matter of urgency and that was never going to happen after they had just won the title so, well we know how it went.... It was a bit of a catch 22, I think it would have been for practically any coach. I think maybe Mourinho, Pep and maybe Ancellotti may have had a better chance of getting these players on board but I don't believe that is neccessarily right.
I was a big defender of Moyes and would have loved it to have worked out for him as he was the little guy getting his big chance but the more I look back at it the more I think he just was on one big hiding to nothing.

I would have liked to hear how Rio would have got on with LVGs 3 training sessions a day....!!!

Pro. F

keane2097 wrote: »

Better than seventh could be granted, but I presume we would be all willing to abandon the "league winning" epithet at this stage?

Somewhere between 1st & 7th in 2013, terrible season in 13/14, many players shipped out, terrible injury issues and many of the signings happening with the season having already started seems to be a fair reflection of where the squad is at the moment.

I am personally not surprised by the results that have emerged from that soup.

I'm afraid I don't understand this post at all. Are you taking up my discussion with Liam O about whether Moyes should have been kept in the job, or are you arguing that LVG's performance has been acceptable to date?

homerjay2005

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I said it last year, but it's relevant to this discussion: I'm not convinced there's a manager in the game who could have inherited that squad from Ferguson and, with virtually no changes, challenged for the title.

the key to your point here is that last bit - the team needed changing and everybody knew it. hell, Moyes knew it himself but for a mixture of reasons, it wasnt done.

im convinced that had Moyes signed 2 or 3 top players that summer, along with keeping the backroom team, he'd still have a job.

keane2097

Pro. F wrote: »

I'm afraid I don't understand this post. Are you taking up my discussion with Liam O about whether Moyes should have been kept in the job, or are you arguing that LVG's performance has been acceptable to date?

The two are linked, I'm sponging off the first to talk about the second.

Well, not whether or not Moyes should have kept the job - I don't see the point in talking about that - but where you fall on how much Moyes had going for/against him informs how good/bad a job you think LVG is doing.

I'm saying that if we grant that the Moyes squad wasn't "league winning", we probably could agree to take it as being roughly good enough for 3rd/4th at the start of last year.

From that starting point, with the issues I mentioned, I would think this season is going pretty much as you would expect.

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

I didn't say that Moyes had a title winning squad, that is a straw man.

I never mentioned you doing so and that post wasn't aimed at you.

Your Airbag

Pro. F wrote: »

I didn't say that LVG has made a balls of the season. Obviously I think there is a possibility that he could still turn it around, that's why that possibility is a part of the argument I put forward.



I could not give a flying fúck if nobody agrees with me.

But go on and tell me again how you don't agree with me. I love reading the same shít from you over and over again.

Its a bad point so maybe you should care because usually there would be a few in agreement but whatever, I have listened but there is no justification for it. Lets not flog the issue to death because its not worth the discussion its go so far because I doubt anyone at the club is even considering not buying defenders.

Maximus Alexander

homerjay2005 wrote: »

the key to your point here is that last bit - the team needed changing and everybody knew it. hell, Moyes knew it himself but for a mixture of reasons, it wasnt done.

im convinced that had Moyes signed 2 or 3 top players that summer, along with keeping the backroom team, he'd still have a job.

I don't disagree with that at all, with the right changes he might have gotten 4th and another season.

keane2097

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I don't disagree with that at all, with the right changes he might have gotten 4th and another season.

I think this makes it pretty hard to agree with the idea that this summer's transfer window was "made a balls of".

Compared to other transfer windows summer '14 will go down as pretty great.

Pro. F

keane2097 wrote: »

The two are linked, I'm sponging off the first to talk about the second.

Well, not whether or not Moyes should have kept the job - I don't see the point in talking about that - but where you fall on how much Moyes had going for/against him informs how good/bad a job you think LVG is doing.

I'm saying that if we grant that the Moyes squad wasn't "league winning", we probably could agree to take it as being roughly good enough for 3rd/4th at the start of last year.

From that starting point, with the issues I mentioned, I would think this season is going pretty much as you would expect.

Okay, got you now.

I'll look at each of the mitigating circumstances:

- Terrible 13/14 season (presumably the implication being that this might cause a hangover):
I wouldn't count that as a very big factor myself. The squad was still full of competitive types with a hunger to win and plenty of experience.

- Many players shipped out: Other than the likes of Buttner and Evra, the manager has a lot of choice in who gets shipped out. With the likes of Welbeck and Chico - who might well have been at the end of their tethers with regards to not seeing opportunities for starts - LVG only added to the situation by getting Falcao. He said himself that he was going to let players go if they didn't want to sit on the bench, he could have saved himself some of these headaches by being less honest with the players. So I'm going to put that one at least partly on him.

- Terrible injury issues:
Yep definitely a big issue, and I'm taking that into account when judging his performance.

- Many of the signings happening with the season having already started:
That is very much on the manager. I think his planning has been very poor, signing players so late, leaving gaps in the squad and not establishing a formation early enough.

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

I never mentioned you doing so and that post wasn't aimed at you.

Strange that you weren't referring to me when the post you were agreeing with was in direct response to me.

Pro. F

Your Airbag wrote: »

Its a bad point so maybe you should care because usually there would be a few in agreement but whatever, I have listened but there is no justification for it. Lets not flog the issue to death because its not worth the discussion its go so far because I doubt anyone at the club is even considering not buying defenders.

I disagree that it's a bad point and I think my justification is well reasoned. But sure tell me again how you disagree with my argument, I love reading it over and over again.

Maximus Alexander

keane2097 wrote: »

I think this makes it pretty hard to agree with the idea that this summer's transfer window was "made a balls of".

Compared to other transfer windows summer '14 will go down as pretty great.

I was pleased with the players brought in this summer. I do think it was a mistake to leave things so late, but with players and LVG being at the World Cup that may have been unavoidable.

The defense could have used more work, but how much of that is hindsight? I know there were concerns about the lack of experience, but the comedy of injuries and suspensions that has accrued couldn't have been predicted.

Pro. F

keane2097 wrote: »

I think this makes it pretty hard to agree with the idea that this summer's transfer window was "made a balls of".

Compared to other transfer windows summer '14 will go down as pretty great.

When you consider the fact that we spent circa £120m and ended up lacking cover at right-back and with a formation that hasn't clicked properly from an attacking point of view I think "making a balls of it" is a very apt description.

But sure signing RVP was great, and signing Mata was great and signing Falcao was great. When these players become available you can't afford to not sign them and never mind worrying about the long term success of the club.

keane2097

Pro. F wrote: »

Okay, got you now.
- Terrible injury issues:
Yep definitely a big issue, and I'm taking that into account when judging his performance.

- Many of the signings happening with the season having already started:
That is very much on the manager. I think his planning has been very poor, signing players so late, leaving gaps in the squad and not establishing a formation early enough.

You reckon you are taking the injuries into account, I don't think it's clear that you are at all.

You consistently paint LVG as if he has been wantonly chopping and changing the formation, as though the players available was less of a factor than a flightly personality and a lack of pre-existing ideas on how soccer is best played.

I think it's very clear that available players were, in fact, by a mile the most at play factor in determining how United were setting up.

c.f. no Rafael, Shaw not fit enough in pre-season -> no full-backs -> 3-5-2

No good wingers when the full backs became available -> 4-3-1-2

Fellaini's fitness means a winger is now available (Di Maria) -> 4-3-3

It's pretty obvious just from the various approaches that LVG has been trying to move towards the formation he's most associated with bit by bit when not hampered by injuries, never mind the fact that he has said pretty much exactly this in dribs and drabs of press conferences.

Edit to say: never to mind the difference having to play reserve/academy/midfield players in an ever-changing cast makes to the likelihood that you are going to turn in a coherent defensive performance.

If you took the best LB, RB & two CBs in the world and just dumped them into a team together with instructions on how to play but little or no practice at it they would be a bit of a mess.

The four United have been variously cobbling together is doing pretty so-so in the circumstances.

Lord TSC

Pro. F wrote: »

I could not give a flying fúck if nobody agrees with me.

But go on and tell me again how you don't agree with me. I love reading the same shít from you over and over again.

Keep it civil.

homerjay2005

keane2097 wrote: »

I think this makes it pretty hard to agree with the idea that this summer's transfer window was "made a balls of".

Compared to other transfer windows summer '14 will go down as pretty great.

thats not saying alot, considering weve been making messes of most transfer windows since 2007.

theres still alot of lessons to be learned from this summer, the main one being getting business done quicker - theres no excuse for not having players signed before season starts and i hope its a lesson we learn next summer.

and being honest, most people said we had 3 main priorities/problems last summer, of which 2 still remain despite 150million forked out.

Pro. F

keane2097 wrote: »

You reckon you are taking the injuries into account, I don't think it's clear that you are at all.

You consistently paint LVG as if he has been wantonly chopping and changing the formation, as though the players available was less of a factor than a flightly personality and a lack of pre-existing ideas on how soccer is best played.

I think it's very clear that available players were, in fact, by a mile the most at play factor in determining how United were setting up.

c.f. no Rafael, Shaw not fit enough in pre-season -> no full-backs -> 3-5-2

No good wingers when the full backs became available -> 4-3-1-2

Fellaini's fitness means a winger is now available (Di Maria) -> 4-3-3

Raf and Shaw not fit in pre-season (352):
Buy a right back, it's not like there was any chance that Raf was going to stay fit for the entire season anyway. Currently we still have only one right-back at the club.

Only one winger you trust (4312):
Buy another winger. It's not like this problem has gone away, we still don't have enough quality on the wings. Even though I rate Januzaj, him having so little competition is not okay.

Fellaini's fitness (433):
Nothing changed with Fellaini becoming fit, he directly replaced Hererra.

keane2097 wrote: »

It's pretty obvious just from the various approaches that LVG has been trying to move towards the formation he's most associated with bit by bit when not hampered by injuries, never mind the fact that he has said pretty much exactly this in dribs and drabs of press conferences.

If LVG ends up playing 433, ie one centre forward and one number 10, then he will have two of Rooney, RVP, Falcao and Mata sitting on the bench. That is a waste of money and will make it harder than it needs to be for young CFs and 10s to develop at the club. There will also still be a lack of quality in depth for the wings. That is poor with the amount of money spent.

Kirby

Pro. F wrote: »

If LVG ends up playing 433, ie one centre forward and one number 10, then he will have two of Rooney, RVP, Falcao and Mata sitting on the bench.

4-3-3 doesn't implement a number 10. It operates with three central midfielders, two wingers and a central striker.

Pro. F

Kirby wrote: »

4-3-3 doesn't implement a number 10. It operates with three central midfielders, two wingers and a central striker.

What we would call a 4231, ie one CF and one number 10, LVG refers to as a 433. It sounds odd, but it's definitely the case that when he says 433 he is talking about one CF, one 10, two wide and two CMs. IIRC I've seen the term used like that in a few Dutch coaching videos on youtube as well.

Kirby

Didn't know that. Interesting. Maybe it's a Dutch thing.

Iused2likebusts

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

last years squad should have been making top 4 no question

Do You think last year's team was better than arsenals don't see it personally.

Kirby

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

last years squad should have been making top 4 no question

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

Do You think last year's team was better than arsenals don't see it personally.

Last year was an anomaly. Not many expected Liverpool to have such a good season. Similar to Southampton this season. They are sitting in one of the top 4 spots. It happens.

The 4th spot is more attainable this year as Liverpool and Spurs are struggling. Finish ahead of them and wait for the saints wobble and 4th spot is there to be taken. Arsenal might struggle too.

It's an open season.

DM_7

Blind, Herrera, Di Maria, Rooney, Falcao and Van Persie would be Van Gaals first choice six.

Throw in first choice Rojo and Shaw, then we see he had a good transfer policy in his first summer, good mix of younger and established high quality players. He will want to add to it going forward.

He isn't short a right back, he was okay with Valencia as his second choice. He might not be when the season is over but thats a separate issue.

So I would be happy to see him spend money on defence if he wanted to do it in winter.

Pro. F

DM_7 wrote: »

Blind, Herrera, Di Maria, Roonwy, Falcao and Van Persie would be Van Gaals first choice six.

Throw in first choice Rojo and Shaw, then we see he had a good transfer policy in his first summer, good mix of younger and established high quality players. He will want to add to it going forward.

When Falcao, RVP or Rooney get injured Mata has to come into a position that never looked like it would suit him. So that's a problem I would see with that first choice front 6. One injury in any of three positions means you might need to change the formation around completely to accommodate Mata.

DM_7 wrote: »

He isn't short a right back, he was okay with Valencia as his second choice. He might not be when the season is over but thats a separate issue.

So I would be happy to see him spend money on defence if he wanted to do it in winter.

Valencia was always a poor right-back. If Van Gaal can manage to train him to the position then he'll have been vindicated. He'll have plenty of time to try and he's known for doing that type of thing in the past. As it stands, he hasn't managed it yet and so Valencia's presence can't be used as extra mitigating evidence for the poor defensive organisation.

DM_7

Pro. F wrote: »

When Falcao, RVP or Rooney get injured Mata has to come into a position that never looked like it would suit him. So that's a problem I would see with that first choice front 6. One injury in any of three positions means you might need to change the formation around completely to accommodate Mata.

Assuming, like I do, that his preferred formation in against 14 or 15 teams of 20 will be the front six I mentioned (It would be normal to mix it up a bit in a game against a Chelsea or City)


Rooney out, Put Mata at 10.

Falcao or RVP out? Put Rooney up front and Mata at 10.

Di Maria out? That is the one that will be a problem over any other player and that will need to be fixed over time.

Pro. F wrote: »

Valencia was always a poor right-back. If Van Gaal can manage to train him to the position then he'll have been vindicated. He'll have plenty of time to try and he's known for doing that type of thing in the past. As it stands, he hasn't managed it yet and so Valencia's presence can't be used as extra mitigating evidence for the poor defensive organisation.

I didn't suggest that last part about Valencia. But his presence does explain why it made sense to prioritise other signings in the first summer of Van Gaals reign.

Iused2likebusts

Kirby wrote: »

Last year was an anomaly. Not many expected Liverpool to have such a good season. Similar to Southampton this season. They are sitting in one of the top 4 spots. It happens.

The 4th spot is more attainable this year as Liverpool and Spurs are struggling. Finish ahead of them and wait for the saints wobble and 4th spot is there to be taken. Arsenal might struggle too.

It's an open season.

I'd expect Utd to get top 4 this year but any manager bar fergie would've struggled to get that squad last year into the top 4. The spine of the team bar ddg all went into decline together and the younger players didn't look as good without Carrick rio vidic evra and rvp at their peak.

kryogen

@ ProF in as others have posted since!

I am unsure of what you mean by Mata coming into a position that won't suit him? From a tactical point of view?

The number 10 role is perfect for him, but I don't like him there as much when we play two up front as he has more responsibility defensively then suits him (imo) but as the number 10 in a system with proper wingers to stretch the field a bit and give him more space to work in while having two more typical CM's behind him, one deep lying/defensive and one box to box, I would be very happy with him in the team.

The problem is having 3 top level strikers of course and not a lot of games to play really this season, but injury and suspension have already played their part with the forwards as well as the backs. I think if 433/451/4231 whatever you want to call it, is the way Van Gaal wants the team long term, then one of the three strikers will be moved on. Maybe Falcao won't be made permanent, maybe RvP will move in the summer, I don't know but there is no point in having the three of them in the squad next season if two up top is not the way he will go, and in that scenario I can see Mata moving, I am sure he will be replaced by someone more suited to the formation/system though.

It won't be fixed in one summer and I am happy with the progress made, looking forward to the next phase.

kryogen

By the way, its nice to prove now and then that people can hold views that are different to others and yet if they make their points in a rational, reasonable, manner there is no problem!

Liam O

Mata should be the one on the right instead of Januzaj. I like the system of one pacey trickster winger and a skilful cut inside smart player on the other side. There has almost been this idea that Mata can't play wide since he joined despite starting his career there and playing great stuff for Chelsea out wide. The problem has been that there's too much defensive responsibility on the wingers at United, probably because the midfield and full backs have been too poor to cover for them but Fellaini and Blind along with Rafael and Shaw should be able to cover well for the wingers to stay forward.

kryogen

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

I'd expect Utd to get top 4 this year but any manager bar fergie would've struggled to get that squad last year into the top 4. The spine of the team bar ddg all went into decline together and the younger players didn't look as good without Carrick rio vidic evra and rvp at their peak.

I just can't agree with that line of thinking at all. The squad was not good enough to win the league, though, I might disagree with that, but it was certainly good enough to make the top four.

City and Chelsea both had off seasons, Liverpool were realistic title contenders for God sake and should have won it but threw it away with a couple of slip ups. We were awful and getting worse, the style was awful, the creativity was non existent, the tactics were poor. The players did not perform to their level, a lot of them were disilusioned and demoralised, but to say any manager would have struggled is just incorrect. If at some point we actually had put together a good run of form in the second half of the season we probably would have been top four!

DM_7

Am I the only person who thinks Di Maria's best position is not on the wing and generally should be playing as the third midfield player?

I thought the last two games showed he would be far more useful in and around midfield running at players, going wide rather than starting there, make it easier for him to get into positions all across the pitch in offensive positions.

With the players available this season I would want to see the formation used against Everton, QPR and West Ham over what was used v Chelsea and City

Liam O

DM_7 wrote: »

Am I the only person who thinks Di Maria's best position is not on the wing and generally should be playing as the third midfield player?

I thought the last two games showed he would be far more useful in and around midfield running at players, going wide rather than starting there, make it easier for him to get into positions all across the pitch in offensive positions.

With the players available this season I would want to see the formation used against Everton, QPR and West Ham over what was used v Chelsea and City

He gets lost on the wings a lot more alright. Realistically you want him on the ball as much as possible and that's better through the middle. That said, Rooney is also someone who makes things happen through the middle and Di Maria is infinitely better on the wings than him so that's the trade off. With the way it currently is with Januzaj, Young and Valencia the other wing options I'd like to see the diamond return for a while.

kryogen

If we could get them on the field at the same time, this is probably the best we can put out

---

DDG

---

Raf---Jones---Rojo---Shaw

---

Blind

---

---Hererra

---

Di Maria--

---

Rooney

---

---

Falcao

---

RvP---

Can make an argument for who the centre back pairing should be of course, but basically that is it I think.

Some day, some day they will all play together for a run of games and we will see how much damage could be done.

Pro. F

DM_7 wrote: »

Assuming, like I do, that his preferred formation in against 14 or 15 teams of 20 will be the front six I mentioned (It would be normal to mix it up a bit in a game against a Chelsea or City)

Rooney out, Put Mata at 10.

Falcao or RVP out? Put Rooney up front and Mata at 10.

Di Maria out? That is the one that will be a problem over any other player and that will need to be fixed over time.

Mata isn't suited to playing the 10 in a diamond midfield with the strikers we have. There is too much running required of the front three in that formation, and when our strikers aren't the quickest it makes it even harder to accommodate a light-weight like Mata in that system. I was concerned about these issues before the season started and it has been a problem.

DM_7 wrote: »

I didn't suggest that last part about Valencia. But his presence does explain why it made sense to prioritise other signings in the first summer of Van Gaals reign.

It doesn't make sense to me. Valencia was a worse full-back than Welbeck or Chico were strikers, Kagawa was a 10 or Valencia and Young were wingers.

Pro. F

kryogen wrote: »

@ ProF in as others have posted since!

I am unsure of what you mean by Mata coming into a position that won't suit him? From a tactical point of view?

The number 10 role is perfect for him, but I don't like him there as much when we play two up front as he has more responsibility defensively then suits him (imo) but as the number 10 in a system with proper wingers to stretch the field a bit and give him more space to work in while having two more typical CM's behind him, one deep lying/defensive and one box to box, I would be very happy with him in the team.

The problem is having 3 top level strikers of course and not a lot of games to play really this season, but injury and suspension have already played their part with the forwards as well as the backs. I think if 433/451/4231 whatever you want to call it, is the way Van Gaal wants the team long term, then one of the three strikers will be moved on. Maybe Falcao won't be made permanent, maybe RvP will move in the summer, I don't know but there is no point in having the three of them in the squad next season if two up top is not the way he will go, and in that scenario I can see Mata moving, I am sure he will be replaced by someone more suited to the formation/system though.

It won't be fixed in one summer and I am happy with the progress made, looking forward to the next phase.

Yes, from a tactical point of view. I agree that Mata is great at 10 with one CF and a wide midfield behind him. But we don't have proper wingers, not in terms of strength in depth. And, as you say, with Falcao, Rooney and RVP on the books we would be wasting resources if we played a formation with one centre forward.

All the possible resolutions of this scenario involve ridiculous amounts of money wasted by singing and not properly using top quality attacking players. And changing formation from 352 to 442 diamond to 433 is extremely disruptive, as we can see with the disorganisation on the pitch this season. All of that could have been avoided if LVG had been better at planning things from the start. It really is not much to ask that a manager should foresee these problems and avoid them.

Bleating Lamb

Crystal ball out,Utd in Champions league having stolen 4th place from Liverpool on goal difference with a Falcao hat trick on last day of league season.
Top of a tough CL grp which includes Barcelona,CSKA Moscow and Ludogrets the legends!
Tonight at H/T v Barca it's one all.
Utd line up- De Gea,Azpilicueta,Jones,Evans,Shaw,Reus,Herrera,Vidal,Di Maria,Rooney,Falcao.
Subs- Valdes,Rafael ,Hummells,Rojo,Blind,Mata,Schneiderlin,Wilson.
Januzai,Carrick,Smalling,Mc Nair,Blackett all injured.
RVP sold for 20m sterling in Summer to Quatar Sheiks new team!
Nani swopped for Azpiliqueta.
Ah that's what dreams are made of.

adox

Bleating Lamb wrote: »

Crystal ball out,Utd in Champions league having stolen 4th place from Liverpool on goal difference with a Falcao hat trick on last day of league season.
Top of a tough CL grp which includes Barcelona,CSKA Moscow and Ludogrets the legends!
Tonight at H/T v Barca it's one all.
Utd line up- De Gea,Azpilicueta,Jones,Evans,Shaw,Reus,Herrera,Vidal,Di Maria,Rooney,Falcao.
Subs- Valdes,Rafael ,Hummells,Rojo,Blind,Mata,Schneiderlin,Wilson.
Januzai,Carrick,Smalling,Mc Nair,Blackett all injured.
RVP sold for 20m sterling in Summer to Quatar Sheiks new team!
Nani swopped for Azpiliqueta.
Ah that's what dreams are made of.

Hummells on the bench makes fantasy post void.

DM_7

Pro. F wrote: »

Mata isn't suited to playing the 10 in a diamond midfield with the strikers we have. There is too much running required of the front three in that formation, and when our strikers aren't the quickest it makes it even harder to accommodate a light-weight like Mata in that system. I was concerned about these issues before the season started and it has been a problem.

I am not concerned about it like you are, Mata has acknowledged the need for more work in defence which is good, i don't see a real reason that he can't become used to that workload.

How many games did he play there this season with three midfielders behind him, three times? I think he did well in those games overall. (The three I am thinking are a 4-0 v OPR, a 2-1 v Everton and a 1-1 against Chelsea - a game his equivalent Oscar was poor).

Maybe it won't work out in time but I am happy to see him given chances to do it this season and be there next when the system may be developed or expanded upon further.

Pro. F wrote: »

It doesn't make sense to me. Valencia was a worse full-back than Welbeck or Chico were strikers, Kagawa was a 10 or Valencia and Young were wingers.

Maybe so, priority in his first summer was probably to get players for his first team, which he did, the others were/are back up players. Makes sense to me.

Giggsy11

Sporting 3-1 Schalke, Nani with a goal and assist. Assist was just a simple pass to Jefferson though.

Liam O

Just the goal and assist from Nani tonight. In the Champions League.

DM_7

Liam O wrote: »

Just the goal and assist from Nani tonight. In the Champions League.

Where are they playing him?

Deiseboy01

kryogen wrote: »

If we could get them on the field at the same time, this is probably the best we can put out

---

DDG

---

Raf---Jones---Rojo---Shaw

---

Blind

---

---Hererra

---

Di Maria--

---

Rooney

---

---

Falcao

---

RvP---

Can make an argument for who the centre back pairing should be of course, but basically that is it I think.

Some day, some day they will all play together for a run of games and we will see how much damage could be done.

I dont think you can play three centre forwards in a side and expect it to function well.

Your back five is fine.

Midfield has to have Carrick in there, id go with Carrick Blind then Jan Herrera Di Maria with Rooney up top.