Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2018

Giggsy11

yourdeadwright wrote: »

It was a good pass but in my opinion he is not as creative as you want for a number 10 at a top club ,
Again fantastic footballer but Jose needs to figure out where he can use him best,

He isn't 10. Sorry I don't want to act like a **** and be condescending but there are more roles than just box to box or attacking mid.

yourdeadwright

Giggsy11 wrote: »

yourdeadwright wrote: »

It was a good pass but in my opinion he is not as creative as you want for a number 10 at a top club ,
Again fantastic footballer but Jose needs to figure out where he can use him best,

He isn't 10. Sorry I don't want to act like a **** and be condescending but there are more roles than just box to box or attacking mid.

Oh I agree totally , i just find it strange Jose has not found one that suits him yet,

54and56

TheDoctor wrote: »

Sourness on about Pogba again.

Every single week.

Painful

I wonder why?

Giggsy11

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

I wonder why?

Because he is sourness, bitter fool.

Je_suis_Jean

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

I wonder why?

What are your thoughts on this?

astradave

astradave wrote: »

Pogba has never been a No10 so I don’t know why he HAS to be one now, he has always been a box to box. The second box was severely lacking against Spurs, when you are playing that position you need to know when to go forward and when to stay back, he was charging forward but then making little effort to get back to help out when Spurs had the ball..

Who keeps saying he should be a #10?

"Subbing Pogba off leaves nobody in any doubt where Mourinho thinks the blame belongs for the two recent damaging defeats. But if Mourinho ever wants to get the best out of his record signing, he must understand that Pogba doesn’t need to be punished. He needs help."

Probably the most accurate part of that article in the Times.

Giggsy11

M!Ck^ wrote: »

"Subbing Pogba off leaves nobody in any doubt where Mourinho thinks the blame belongs for the two recent damaging defeats. But if Mourinho ever wants to get the best out of his record signing, he must understand that Pogba doesn’t need to be punished. He needs help."

Probably the most accurate part of that article in the Times.

Whoever has written that deserves pat on the back.

pjohnson

Is Vidal still the force he once was or has age caught up to him?

I can only think of Vidal and Naingollan who might be able to "help" Pogba. Neither are spring chickens unfortunately.

pjohnson

I've only ever seen xG been spoke about like it means anything in the Pool thread. We haven't gone this desperate yet have we?

Mitch Connor

pjohnson wrote: »

I've only ever seen xG been spoke about like it means anything in the Pool thread. We haven't gone this desperate yet have we?

I would be surprised if it isn't something a club looks at, to be honest. Clubs hire Data Analysts. If they are not being hired for this type of analysis, I would wonder what their role is.

Yes, there are flaws, but if our XGa figure is high it indicates that the defence isn't doing a good enough job at restricting chances.

I'm not saying clubs should go all money-ball on such a stat and buy/sell exclusively based on it, but I would honestly be shocked if it isn't a legitimate part of the analysis a club does.

Honestly, I don't get the hate for it - it is a model that needs work, but as long as that is acknowledged the information it can provide can be extremely instructive.

Potential Underachiever

pjohnson wrote: »

I've only ever seen xG been spoke about like it means anything in the Pool thread. We haven't gone this desperate yet have we?

Seriously?

I read the thread regularly and have not seen it been mentioned once and definitely not seeing anyone bigging the stat up to mean anything. Maybe you're confusing it with alternative tables and ppg stats or maybe it's just a cheap shot? I'd be keen to read the posts about it if you can link a few though.

Giggsy11

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I would be surprised if it isn't something a club looks at, to be honest. Clubs hire Data Analysts. If they are not being hired for this type of analysis, I would wonder what their role is.

Yes, there are flaws, but if our XGa figure is high it indicates that the defence isn't doing a good enough job at restricting chances.

I'm not saying clubs should go all money-ball on such a stat and buy/sell exclusively based on it, but I would honestly be shocked if it isn't a legitimate part of the analysis a club does.

Honestly, I don't get the hate for it - it is a model that needs work, but as long as that is acknowledged the information it can provide can be extremely instructive.

It's a model that needs work is understatement. There are 2 guys I follow on twitter who does this xG thing and both gives different xG for the same game. It's built on the assumption on how good a chance is, it never takes into account how good a player who receives the pass is.

The basic requirement itself is not considered. Also I read Sanchez open goal had 0.3 xG, how can anyone take that seriously when we are talking about open goal and before that one on one with keeper?

54and56

M!Ck^ wrote: »

What are your thoughts on this?

Thanks for asking Mick.

In simple terms I think Pogba has the potential to be world class if deployed in a system which plays to his strengths and protects against his weaknesses which isn't such a mystery, just copy the Juventus set up.

I don't understand why Mourinho bought him if he wasn't going to play that three man midfield system with Pogba at the tip in a pretty free role.

He has all the physical attributes to be an assist and goal scoring machine but his big weakness is defence, he just doesn't seem to have any natural positioning or an ability to concentrate when it comes to that part of the game and in a Mourinho team that simply isn't tolerated.

Maybe Mourinho thought he could coach that part of the game into him or that with age/maturity that part of his game would naturally develop but he'll be 25 in a few weeks so it looks less and less likely to happen.

I think Mourinho either needs to get another Matic type player in and switch to a 3 man MF (where Pogba and Lingard fight for the AM role) or get rid of him which I know sounds mental given his talent and what he cost but to persevere with a square peg in a round hole who is costing you points/games seems even more mental!!

Now I'll duck for the blow back

Trigger

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Who keeps saying he should be a #10?

Maybe look at the quoted post Mick :pac:

pjohnson

astradave wrote: »

Maybe look at the quoted post Mick :pac:

I already said #10 is probably the wrong word. Dunno what to call a midfielder with no defensive responsibility. Even Alexis one of the three attackers helped out and tracked Yedlin twice in the first half. Pogba needs even less responsibility than the winger.

SlickRic

as an outsider, Pogba needs to be doing better. BUT, Mourinho is killing him in that system.

I don't care how much he should be able to cope in 2 with Matic against the likes of Newcastle, it's not his game. he may do an ok job most of the time, but you're highlighting his weaknesses, and hiding his strengths.

he is a luxury player, in the sense he needs to be roaming, and he, nor the coach, needs to be worried about him vacating space on occasion. you lose his best bits if he can't maraud and influence at will.

there's a reason he was brilliant at Juv and it wasn't at playing in a 2.

he has to play Matic and Carrick/Herrera, play Pogba, and drop Lingard or Martial. shoehorning Pogba into this system is not working, and he looks so ordinary.

having said all that, it's obviously no excuse for him being diabolical yesterday.

Giggsy11

pjohnson wrote: »

I already said #10 is probably the wrong word. Dunno what to call a midfielder with no defensive responsibility. Even Alexis one of the three attackers helped out and tracked Yedlin twice in the first half. Pogba needs even less responsibility than the winger.

That's not correct. Pogba had lot of responsibility at Juventus defensively but that's not his primary task, just like how it's not for Sanchez. So anytime Sanchez stayed upfront no one says anything about his defense contribution but for midfielders playing in 2, it's always important criteria.

Playing in 3 means he will play defensively but his primary task is more attack oriented.

TheDoc

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Whoever has written that deserves pat on the back.

Ken Early.

If you thought I disliked Jose, should get a load of him

Mitch Connor

Giggsy11 wrote: »

It's a model that needs work is understatement. There are 2 guys I follow on twitter who does this xG thing and both gives different xG for the same game. It's built on the assumption on how good a chance is, it never takes into account how good a player who receives the pass is.

The basic requirement itself is not considered. Also I read Sanchez open goal had 0.3 xG, how can anyone take that seriously when we are talking about open goal and before that one on one with keeper?

I don't think the ability of the player should be taken into account on XG to be honest - at least not at its first level.

From a defensive point of view, I just don't want to be giving up good chances - whether that is to Aguero or to anyone else. Sure, Aguero may be more likely to take the chance, but giving up the chance in the first place was the problem - you can't base your defense (and care on stopping a chance) on the ability of the forward in question.

It absolutely requires work - it is a model that will mature and evolve.

I don't understand people who just straight up call BS on it. Obviously it matters not at all in comparison to the actual GOALS SCORED stat, but it should still be something people look at.

Lets say it was perfected, or as close to perfected as it could get - and lets look at the United vs Arsenal game from a while back. We won 3-1, by that stat we dominated. We conceded every shot in football that week are were lucky/blessed with DDG that we only conceded the one. I would argue the XG stats for that game should be a cause for concern at United and point to United needing to do a lot of work on defensive shape, solidity and positioning, rather than looking at 3-1 and thinking "did 'em".

We should remember that there are two separate issues with Pogba here;

1) Pogba not being played in his best position. (Manager problem)

2) Pogba not looking bothered. (Player problem)

With just one of either of the above happening in a match, we're going to struggle to get the win but can still get it. With both of them happening in a match, we're likely going to draw or lose. That's the way it seems to be lately.

Mitch Connor

SlickRic wrote: »

as an outsider, Pogba needs to be doing better. BUT, Mourinho is killing him in that system.

I don't care how much he should be able to cope in 2 with Matic against the likes of Newcastle, it's not his game. he may do an ok job most of the time, but you're highlighting his weaknesses, and hiding his strengths.

he is a luxury player, in the sense he needs to be roaming, and he, nor the coach, needs to be worried about him vacating space on occasion. you lose his best bits if he can't maraud and influence at will.

there's a reason he was brilliant at Juv and it wasn't at playing in a 2.

he has to play Matic and Carrick/Herrera, play Pogba, and drop Lingard or Martial. shoehorning Pogba into this system is not working, and he looks so ordinary.

having said all that, it's obviously no excuse for him being diabolical yesterday.

Agree with this completely.

While I defend Pogba in general, and think his use by Jose is wrong, that doesn't excuse his actual performance either.

Trigger

pjohnson wrote: »

I already said #10 is probably the wrong word. Dunno what to call a midfielder with no defensive responsibility. Even Alexis one of the three attackers helped out and tracked Yedlin twice in the first half. Pogba needs even less responsibility than the winger.

Ah I know I was just pointing it out to Mick where that post came from.

You can’t give him NO defensive responsibility tbh, Even Lukaku has a defensive responsibility in closing down the channels. You could try give him less alright but against the bigger teams, the whole team should be able to defend and attack as a Unit.. numerous times against Spurs he had a runner in front of him chasing back that he could have caught with a bit of effort.. the lack of effort in tracking back was what annoyed me the most about him against Spurs.

I just think he had an off day (passing and attacking) yesterday where it was clear he had less defensive responsibility. He looked incredibly jaded and that could have been as a result of a strain or so.. I’d still risk a not fully fit Pogba in that role over anyone tbh.. most players at this time of the year are carrying knocks and strains.

The Problem was that Jose should have taking him off earlier when it was known he was out of form. He told Jose he was fine after 15 mins. I dunno, I’d like to think that Jose keeping him on was to try not knock his confidence with a 20 min or 45 min subbing.. who knows.

TheDoc

pjohnson wrote: »

I already said #10 is probably the wrong word. Dunno what to call a midfielder with no defensive responsibility. Even Alexis one of the three attackers helped out and tracked Yedlin twice in the first half. Pogba needs even less responsibility than the winger.

An attacking midfielder.

he likely will learn and get better at it as time goes on, but its not like hes the first midfielder ever, or even at the club, who had such incredible ability in one stage that you paired someone, or multiple people, to maximise those strengths.

We won titles with Paul Scholes in midfield, who was abhorrent defensively. His tackling meme aside, he was pretty poor positionally and defensively.

So he had Keane, Carrick, Fletcher, Park etc. There was a reason we played 4-5-1 in big games or big european away ties.

It's not a rubix cube, the answer is staring the manager in the face at this stage. And Pogba isn't as woefully defensively as gets made out. He just gets caught ahead of the ball a bit too much. He can tackle and intercept and has done so plenty.

It's just when the team gets caught in transition he is playing catchup, and in fairness its not usually him losing possesion.

His recovery runs are a big sluggish mind you, borderline lazy, but Pogba has an incredible engine and stamina. He's not a ridiculously quick player by modern standards, he just swots people away and he can utilise his qualities for 90 minutes.

I think the issue is partially, and this is a massive subject matter, how we view the pitch side on, and assume the covering positions are horizontal, side to side, when many systems view the pitch in a vertical fashion. Matic is being left to cover too much ground, and as such running himself knackered, where an additional midfielder would provide another body to share the load not just in defense, but in attack too.

Minor point, but Pogba's tendancy to get caught ahead of the ball also stems imo from the just chaotic tendancies we have in attack, where its everyone doing what they want, and typically the team getting congested in the middle.

Giggsy11

TheDoc wrote: »

Ken Early.

If you thought I disliked Jose, should get a load of him

I don't read his articles as he hates Jose with passion.

Since it was from Times I assumed it's from UK times, not Irish times.

Now I take it back, whoever wrote it deserves kick on the head :pac:

Giggsy11

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I don't think the ability of the player should be taken into account on XG to be honest - at least not at its first level.

From a defensive point of view, I just don't want to be giving up good chances - whether that is to Aguero or to anyone else. Sure, Aguero may be more likely to take the chance, but giving up the chance in the first place was the problem - you can't base your defense (and care on stopping a chance) on the ability of the forward in question.

It absolutely requires work - it is a model that will mature and evolve.

I don't understand people who just straight up call BS on it. Obviously it matters not at all in comparison to the actual GOALS SCORED stat, but it should still be something people look at.

Lets say it was perfected, or as close to perfected as it could get - and lets look at the United vs Arsenal game from a while back. We won 3-1, by that stat we dominated. We conceded every shot in football that week are were lucky/blessed with DDG that we only conceded the one. I would argue the XG stats for that game should be a cause for concern at United and point to United needing to do a lot of work on defensive shape, solidity and positioning, rather than looking at 3-1 and thinking "did 'em".

Player quality should be taken into consideration. If player has a ball near the edge of the box, if the player is Pogba, KdB he will be closed down immediately, if the player is Fellaini he will be given time to shoot without worrying much.

Same with strikers, hard chance for Welbeck is an easy chance for RVN. Football won't work with these assumptions and algorithms.

Also like I said, different sites gives different results.

bangkok

Next game we play in the league against chelsea we could be in third place before ko unless moyes can stop liverpool

yourdeadwright

I think United answer is to play Alexis as a false 9 like he did at his one really stand out season at Arsenal, try get Pogba closer to him.

It would make them way more fluid as a team and they would keep the ball much better going forward,
Playing Alexis on the left further disrupts the team as Martial is crap on the right,

Mitch Connor

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Player quality should be taken into consideration. If player has a ball near the edge of the box, if the player is Pogba, KdB he will be closed down immediately, if the player is Fellaini he will be given time to shoot without worrying much.

Same with strikers, hard chance for Welbeck is an easy chance for RVN. Football won't work with these assumptions and algorithms.

Also like I said, different sites gives different results.

I agree with that - generally low XG chances could be much higher depending on the player involved. You could be specifically set to force the ball to certain players in certain positions cause you are confident they cannot hurt you.

However, you should not be allowing a free shot on goal anyway - whether it is KDB or Shelvey, you should be closing them down.

Also, I do suppose that my comment is more applicable to high XG chances. You should be trying to restrict the number of them regardless of the player quality.

If a high XG chance falls to Welbeck, there is still a chance he finishes it - or at least the defence should be working on the assumption he will. They should be working to stop a great chance falling to a striker, any striker. the better ones will punish you more often but the poorer ones can still punish you.

yabadabado

TheDoc wrote: »

Ken Early.

If you thought I disliked Jose, should get a load of him

Yeah but he is a full **********

yabadabado

yabadabado wrote: »

Yeah but he is a full **********

Jaysus Yaba, ya got me there with '**********'.

I'm here trying to fill in the blanks, but it's not happening. I've even dug out 'wankstain' for the first time since primary school. It doesn't fit.

Clue??

Giggsy11

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I agree with that - generally low XG chances could be much higher depending on the player involved. You could be specifically set to force the ball to certain players in certain positions cause you are confident they cannot hurt you.

However, you should not be allowing a free shot on goal anyway - whether it is KDB or Shelvey, you should be closing them down.

Also, I do suppose that my comment is more applicable to high XG chances. You should be trying to restrict the number of them regardless of the player quality.

If a high XG chance falls to Welbeck, there is still a chance he finishes it - or at least the defence should be working on the assumption he will. They should be working to stop a great chance falling to a striker, any striker. the better ones will punish you more often but the poorer ones can still punish you.

xG will also be high when players keep on taking shots from everywhere, it just adds up and finally gives big number.

Mitch Connor

Giggsy11 wrote: »

xG will also be high when players keep on taking shots from everywhere, it just adds up and finally gives big number.

Overall XG yes, but you can (and should) also consider the XG of the individual chances/shots.

Again, I'm not saying the system is perfect, but it can be instructive.

If a striker isn't scoring I would look at XG as a point towards where the issue could be. If the XG is low, then they are not getting many/many good chances. If the XG is high, then they are missing good chances.

The result is the same, lack of goals, but the solution to the issue can be very different - ranging from needing a better player, needing to give someone else a chance at the position to completely changing the attacking focus and training of the side.

I'm not saying you should 100% go by XG or that it is perfect, I'm just saying that as a data point it can prove useful and instructive as to the general performance of a side. I would also assume clubs, who I feel must be looking at this, would also have their own view of how chances are valued and thus how they interpret the possibilities of a match themselves. They also wouldn't need it to be 100% accuracte, as they would understand the model and nature of the results they are looking at.

Mitch Connor

Deleted User wrote: »

Jaysus Yaba, ya got me there with '**********'.

I'm here trying to fill in the blanks, but it's not happening. I've even dug out 'wankstain' for the first time since primary school. It doesn't fit.

Clue??

I think the latter part could by nugget.

Mitch Connor

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I think the latter part could by nugget.

Cheers Mitch, that leaves a few possibilities there which I can work with.

Adamocovic

Deleted User wrote: »

Jaysus Yaba, ya got me there with '**********'.

I'm here trying to fill in the blanks, but it's not happening. I've even dug out 'wankstain' for the first time since primary school. It doesn't fit.

Clue??

It's 'Gobbobbles'.

Giggsy11

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Overall XG yes, but you can (and should) also consider the XG of the individual chances/shots.

Again, I'm not saying the system is perfect, but it can be instructive.

If a striker isn't scoring I would look at XG as a point towards where the issue could be. If the XG is low, then they are not getting many/many good chances. If the XG is high, then they are missing good chances.

The result is the same, lack of goals, but the solution to the issue can be very different - ranging from needing a better player, needing to give someone else a chance at the position to completely changing the attacking focus and training of the side.

I'm not saying you should 100% go by XG or that it is perfect, I'm just saying that as a data point it can prove useful and instructive as to the general performance of a side. I would also assume clubs, who I feel must be looking at this, would also have their own view of how chances are valued and thus how they interpret the possibilities of a match themselves. They also wouldn't need it to be 100% accuracte, as they would understand the model and nature of the results they are looking at.

In that case you are ignoring very important point, whether the said player is taking chances or hesitating to shoot, or the player is even making the runs he should be making.

I'm not completely writing off this model, just that it has lot of holes and so many use this as some sort of bible to prove their point. This model is based on assumptions which is ignored by many.

Adamocovic

Adamocovic wrote: »

It's 'Gobbobbles'.

Ah sorry lads, I know it's not exactly a gif or 'lol' kind of morning after that tripe yesterday.

It's just, after almost a billion spent on players in recent years - Our attack looks like a complicated session of 'keep ball' for the most part, and our midfield is that threadbare that opposition goalkeeper's will soon fancy their chances running the ball through it.

I have to laugh or I might cry.

Mitch Connor

Giggsy11 wrote: »

In that case you are ignoring very important point, whether the said player is taking chances or hesitating to shoot, or the player is even making the runs he should be making.

I'm not completely writing off this model, just that it has lot of holes and so many use this as some sort of bible to prove their point. This model is based on assumptions which is ignored by many.

As I said, it is instructive, not definitive.

If people want or expect it to be definitive then they will never accept it, cause it never will be.

It is just another stat that can be used, in conjunction with other stats and other analysis and just straight up watching the game, to determine a course of action.

Even a stat such as 'Shots' or 'Shots on Target' doesn't, imo, tell a full story. A shot could be on target but be a pea roller from 70 yards out that the keeper was never going to concede. It being 'On Target' however, make it more worthy than an off target shot that beats the keeper all ends up but cannons back off the inside of the post. I understand the one off the post would never have resulted in a goal, but to my mind it was closer to actually being a goal than the 70 yard shot that rolled into the keepers hands.

Assists is another one - you can have an amazing defence splitting pass that puts the goal on a plate for the scorer.great assist. You can have McClair playing the ball two yards to Beckham and Beckam beating the keeper from halfway. both are assists. Meh? Even a lack of assists can be contentious, imo. Pogba was called out for a lack of assists last season - he created loads of great chances that our forwards fluffed. not his fault. Matic should have had an assist for Martial at the weekend, not his fault Martial missed.

Stats can be BS, no matter the stat. But viewing the stats with a critical eye and understanding the context can be extremely instructive and XG is part of that discussion.

Trigger

Nothing like a loss to bring out some healthy discussion points on a Monday morning

Barely any hyperbole on display too..

astradave

astradave wrote: »

Nothing like a loss to bring out some healthy discussion points on a Monday morning

Barely any hyperbole on display too..

Some good reading so far this morning IMO. I don't agree with it all, but still good reads. Respectful, thought-out discussion for the most part.

Adamcp898

astradave wrote: »

Nothing like a loss to bring out some healthy discussion points on a Monday morning

Barely any hyperbole on display too..

Yesterday on the other hand appeared like the whole thread was on the sauce :pac:

Liam McPoyle

Good to see some healthy discussion without the sniping that has been creeping in here of late.

We have had some poor results lately, that will happen to most teams. We've had some diabolical individual and team performances, that will happen too.

Despite all that we are still second in the table and through to the next rounds of the CL and the FA Cup.

Despite all that we are 7 points better off than we were at the same stage last season.

The poor performances are a concern but we do have players more than capable of challenging for major honours.

The coming months are going to be the biggest test that Jose has ever faced as a manager.

Cantona's Collars

All our back 4 are right footed as are our midfield bar Matic.
For all of LVG's notions he tried to address that. We are too unbalanced,players having to check back onto their right as they have no confidence in using their left foot.

Trigger

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

All our back 4 are right footed as are our midfield bar Matic.
For all of LVG's notions he tried to address that. We are too unbalanced,players having to check back onto their right as they have no confidence in using their left foot.

It’s not as if we don’t have left footed players though..

Shaw, Rojo, Blind, Matic, Mata and Lukaku that would be in the matchday squads.

Shaw and Rojo in for Young and Smalling and have Jones the more comfortable right side of defence could be the way to go.

Rojo has been brutal though since he came back from injury and he has an awful habit of just lashing the ball up the pitch

J. Marston

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

All our back 4 are right footed as are our midfield bar Matic.
For all of LVG's notions he tried to address that. We are too unbalanced,players having to check back onto their right as they have no confidence in using their left foot.

We have three players alone doing that on the left wing while the right wing is barren.

What I'd give for a half-decent right winger.

FutureGuy

I enjoy watching City and Liverpool far more than I do United.

There. I said it.

TheDoc

Giggsy11 wrote: »

I don't read his articles as he hates Jose with passion.

Since it was from Times I assumed it's from UK times, not Irish times.

Now I take it back, whoever wrote it deserves kick on the head :pac:

I'm waiting for a second captains pod where he breaks down and just proclaims he hates him and just wishes he would retire

I'm always like "do it Ken, just do it, you'll feel better"

TheDoc

astradave wrote: »

It’s not as if we don’t have left footed players though..

Shaw, Rojo, Blind, Matic, Mata and Lukaku that would be in the matchday squads.

Shaw and Rojo in for Young and Smalling and have Jones the more comfortable right side of defence could be the way to go.

Rojo has been brutal though since he came back from injury and he has an awful habit of just lashing the ball up the pitch

Incredible how under utilised he has been this season.

Indestructable

ABU's (and plenty of Utd fans) at the minute...