Man Utd 0-1 Arsenal - Sunday 1st November, 2020

[Dan+]

2 hours ago, Lucas said:

I don't disagree with a word of that but my point was as bad as he is, he can't just be the scapegoat all the time because that is how it comes across.

You look at all those players today, I guess apart from Martial, you pretty much have the first choice players at full disposal, and you are literally struggling to see any with the type of character or mentality it takes to step up and win games for the team. They all hid. Arsenal haven't beaten a top 6 club for yonks away given how shocking they have been. United should go home hurting after that, will they? Not a chance.

I just don't think that same winning mentality is installed in some of these players anymore but it's exactly what you need, especially when you play for a club where expectations and standards are high.

Less glamorous players understood what it took, people like Nicky Butt, Fletcher, Irwin, McClair etc all got it because they bought into the philosophy. Not leaders, but they responded because the bar was always so high set by others.

It's unacceptable really for a club of your stature but I blame the culture of the club for letting that bar slip really. Being happy to qualify for Top 4 in this day and age is embarrassing and exactly an indictment of what this current squad is about.

I think that precisely is the problem. They aren't. They should be but they aren't. I think it's why I'm so hard on them.

[Dr. Gonzo]

5 hours ago, CaaC (John) said:

Balotelli must have been Pogba's love child then? 

They’ve got the same work ethic that’s for sure.

Either Solksjaer’s a moron or van der Beek is shite in training because I don’t see how he’s not starting over Pogba. Pogba may have been brilliant surrounded by world class players at Juve & France... but he’s falling to deliver big time at United.

At £90m you’ve got to be the type of midfielder to be able to turn any game on its head. More often than not, he’s a passenger.

[CaaC (John)+]

3 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Either Solksjaer’s a moron or van der Beek is shite in training because I don’t see how he’s not starting over Pogba.

It makes me wonder if Ole never wanted van der Beek and he might have asked Woody to target others but Woodward told him to fuck off and bought him to give the media the impression that United was buying well, that's why Ole is not playing Beek as he never wanted him in the first place, my mind boggles.  

[MUFC]

Mixture of lockdown and watching us play, what a horrible life for our fans lol.

[CaaC (John)+]

20 minutes ago, MUFC said:

Mixture of lockdown and watching us play, what a horrible life for our fans lol.

You should put a dartboard up with a picture of whoever in the middle (Pogba, Woody etc) and have a game of darts, that will pass your time away, a hit in the bullseye with either of the latter mentioned would be fun. 

[6666]

Said at the time that Elneny would've been a good squad player if we didn't send him out on loan last season as I felt he was a solid player and was being underrated too much. He's proven to be much more than that so far this season as well. One of our best players. Gabriel as well fantastic once again.

A situation where we look defensively solid but seem to lack creativity going forward. Not sure if I enjoy it as much as it being the other way round but hopefully the attack starts to come together more in the future and we can actually have both.

[Lucas]

44 minutes ago, 6666 said:

Said at the time that Elneny would've been a good squad player if we didn't send him out on loan last season as I felt he was a solid player and was being underrated too much. He's proven to be much more than that so far this season as well. One of our best players. Gabriel as well fantastic once again.

A situation where we look defensively solid but seem to lack creativity going forward. Not sure if I enjoy it as much as it being the other way round but hopefully the attack starts to come together more in the future and we can actually have both.

I think the proof will be in the pudding at the end of the season. Easy on the eye has really got you nowhere for over a decade of football now.

For years people have constantly moaned about Arsenal being a soft touch. Rightly so too. Too many embarrassing defeats.

I think it's about time you had a bit of nastiness about you and steel. Feels a little bit like the 'old Arsenal' from the early 90's now. Proper gritty and tough to beat.

Been to Liverpool and City, lost narrowly when normally you are thumped and won at Old Trafford. I'd say that is good progress for you.

Given that is your first win away at a 'Top 6' club for some time and if you get yourself a Top 4 spot as a result of this style, I'd have thought the fans would rather have substance over style for a while.

[Cicero]

The thing is, this conservative style approach isn't sustainable. Particularly for a top club wishing to challenge for honors. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

11 minutes ago, Cicero said:

The thing is, this conservative style approach isn't sustainable. Particularly for a top club wishing to challenge for honors. 

It’s worked in the past though? I don’t think that just because Pep and Klopp’s styles are more successful that doesn’t mean you can’t win things with boring football. It’s just more boring.

[Stan]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It’s worked in the past though? I don’t think that just because Pep and Klopp’s styles are more successful that doesn’t mean you can’t win things with boring football. It’s just more boring.

To what extent of sustainability though?

[Dr. Gonzo]

3 minutes ago, Stan said:

To what extent of sustainability though?

Fuck if I know, but it seems less physically demanding than Pep & Klopp’s styles demanding high pressing and constant movement... so in that sense it might be more sustainable.

It might require better defenders than we have in England currently to be more sustainable. But that’s more an issue of quality than sustainability 

[The Artful Dodger]

When you've not got the best team you have to be more conservative to win and build your momentum, so far he's show he's savvy in knowing his side's strengths and weaknesses. It was only really against Liverpool that they were outplayed and to have the best defensive record, having played last year's top 3 away, is pretty impressive considering the hammerings that have been handed out to many. We need better defensive sides, this isn't an American sport where scoring is meaningless and everyone is too moronic to wait, this is the best sport in the world and defensive coaching is as much as art as attacking (Hate it when people say 'offence', another Americanism).

Thought they were very good yesterday anyway, not at all defensive, controlled the game and should have been well up by half time.

[Cicero]

25 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It’s worked in the past though? I don’t think that just because Pep and Klopp’s styles are more successful that doesn’t mean you can’t win things with boring football. It’s just more boring.

It's proven to be a quick fix winning formula. Not a sustainable one. 

 

[The Artful Dodger]

Some of the greatest managers of all time have been extremely conservative, football goes through different trends but things always return. Right now I'd say a top class conservative manager would have a great chance of success given how abysmal many of the supposed best sides are at defending.

[Dr. Gonzo]

12 minutes ago, Cicero said:

It's proven to be a quick fix winning formula. Not a sustainable one. 

 

In England there have only been 2 sides since 1992 that I think can claim they really had long term sustained success. And one of those managers is famous for changing up the style he played based on the players he had

[Cicero]

37 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

In England there have only been 2 sides since 1992 that I think can claim they really had long term sustained success. And one of those managers is famous for changing up the style he played based on the players he had

For me, Mourinho is the prime example.  He's built the blue print for his teams to win and win now. Not focusing on the future long term stability of the club and emphasising on a result driven, conservative counter attacking game. Something I believe isn't consistent long term. 

There's no bigger man for our success but many forget Ranieri was the one who really built our spine. Our spine was the only thing that really kept our team competitive post Mourinho. We only really saw Mourinho's affect on the team after our spine had gone. We'd spend millions to win the league, then the following season we'd collapse. Seeing some of the worst football imaginable with millions spent. It was a similar thing with Conte who had the same philosophy of football. We were great one year, the next total capitulation and some of the worst football imaginable. 

In my own opinion, progressive football builds more consistency long term than conservative football. The latter has proved to be more difficult to sustain. Manchester City and us are the perfect examples. City have been in the Top 4 since 2011 whereas we have been going up and down the ladder. 

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

6 minutes ago, Cicero said:

For me, Mourinho is the prime example.  He's built the blue print for his teams to win and win now. Not focusing on the future long term stability of the club and emphasising on a result driven, conservative counter attacking game. Something I believe isn't consistent long term. 

There's no bigger man for our success but many forget Ranieri was the one who really built our spine. Our spine was the only thing that really kept our team competitive post Mourinho. We only really saw Mourinho's affect on the team after our spine had gone. We'd spend millions to win the league, then the following season we'd collapse. Seeing some of the worst football imaginable with millions spent. It was a similar thing with Conte who had the same philosophy of football. We were great one year, the next total capitulation and some of the worst football imaginable. 

In my own opinion, progressive football builds more consistency long term than conservative football. The latter has proved to be more difficult to sustain. Manchester City and us are the perfect examples. City have been in the Top 4 since 2011 whereas we have been going up and down the ladder. 

 

I don’t think Chelsea are the best example tbh, because your players down tools when they get sick of a manager and it’s cheaper for Roman to replace one man than an expensive squad.

[Cicero]

10 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I don’t think Chelsea are the best example tbh, because your players down tools when they get sick of a manager and it’s cheaper for Roman to replace one man than an expensive squad.

Roman and the board also realised that conservative football isn't producing any form of sustainability. Hence why he appointed Sarri and hence why he appointed Lampard over Allegri. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Just now, Cicero said:

Roman and the board also realised that conservative football isn't producing any form of sustainability. Hence why he appointed Sarri and hence why he appointed Lampard over Allegri. 

He appointed Sarri and then promptly got rid of him 

[Cicero]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

He appointed Sarri and then promptly got rid of him 

Sarri wanted to leave for Juventus and it was by mutual consent. We could of gone after Allegri who was a guaranteed quick fix, but opted for Lampard who's philosophy of the game was similar to Sarri's. 

United's players also down tools with Mourinho and went from 2nd to 6th. This is what happens when you have attacking players and demand them to restrict their attacking ability for shitehousery.