Sergio Reguilón

But their styles make quite a bit of difference to the way we are transitioning and the areas of the pitch they’re taking up on and off the ball. As well as how we counter press with Greenwood, Pogba and Matic compared to with James, Fred and McTominay. A lot of these things are also dictated by opposition as well.

I think you want things to be more tactical than they actually are. That’s not to say that there isn’t instruction, there obviously is, but those instructions will always be dictated by individuals - especially when they are replaced with such different players. Which is the point about an attacking left back changing the function of the left back in Ole’s system, because it’s already happening in different positions over the pitch when players are replaced.

comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)

Well, I disagree with your first point and there’s evidence for that, being the fact that Ole has stuck to his approach despite that meaning him playing players out of position and having to ask them to play unfamiliar roles or roles they aren’t best suited to - Pogba in DM, Rashford at number ten, Pereira at RW and at ten rather than reverting to a midfield three when we had no forwards fit, etc.

Shaw is left footed, and when he’s fit, he plays in the very same part of the pitch as Brandon, attacking the inside left half space inside of Rashford.

There’s more than one tactical reason for that, including the fact that the way we overload down the left allows us the benefit of the player eventually attacking the goal line having first a greater opportunity of getting a shot rather than a cross/pass off, and secondly, any cross/pass having a shorter distance to travel before finding itself in front of goal.

We aren’t - and won’t become - an aerially dominant team from an attacking perspective, so it doesn’t make any sense to see our full backs hitting the goal line five yards from the corner flag and whipping in Baines-esque crosses.

People like to talk about balance and suggest that we’re an unbalanced side because we don’t have a top drawer RW or marauding left footed LB. They’re wrong. We look unbalanced because in possession we tactically direct play down the left side of the field. Lots and lots of sides do this; it’s a tried and tested feature of modern football. We do it a little more than most, and have been doing so since at least LVG’s days in charge, and we’ll keep doing it regardless of who we have on the right or at RB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ole is very rigid with regards to those things you mentioned, but he has never had good wide players in his time here, so can't say for sure he wouldn't tweak things if he did.

Shaw might be left-footed, but has always been better coming inside. This is why he looked very good at Lcb.

Lfc and City amongst others aren't aerially dominant either. This doesn't stop their fullbacks attacking wide on occasion and putting crosses in. In fact the rare times we have done this, we often score.

I'm not bothered about our lopsided attacking play, but we do need some threat on the right. All the top teams utilise width well, we don't. It's all too predictable.

comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 4 hours, 6 minutes ago

Hi IOAG. Hope you’re good.

Yeah, I get your point, which is fair. But I have no idea why Real would go for that when (seemingly) Spurs will give them whatever they want in terms of clauses, and I also think that looking at a potential 2/3 year solution doesn’t at all meet with Ole’s strategy. He’s building a team for the next five, six years and beyond.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All good, thanks rosso. Yourself too I trust?

I wasn't thinking so much about now that Spurs have stepped in to hijack the deal, but earlier, because that was the message coming through before Spurs' interest was known, and I presume that Madrid would've made it clear they wanted that clause, at least below a certain price threshold.

As I said, if it's because it doesn't fit your strategy that's fine; it's the refusal on principle owing to some notion of prestige that I think is misplaced.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with refusing it on principle either. Manchester United should not have their players ultimately being under the control of another club. What Juve did is neither here nor there. We operate on a different financial level, and model, to what they do.

And the principle of this ties in with the strategy of signing players (I promise there is one even if it may not seem like it ), as we don’t sign players on the basis we’re gonna sell them for a profit in a couple of years, but if we do want to then it should be on our terms rather than on Madrid’s.

There’s a lot I disagree with how this club is run but I fully agree with this stance. It’s another reason why we had issues with signing signing Haaland, as they wanted a buyout clause in the contract.

Well what a waste of time then. Would at least have been worth it if Madrid had kept the Spurs deal quiet, agreed terms with United and then had unsurmountable fax problems.

Well yes it was. But presumably United thought they could get Madrid to budge. Obviously as soon as a club like Spurs came into the mix Madrid had no need to.

Like I mentioned before, I wouldn’t be surprised if this was just Madrid piiiiissing us about. There seems to be a bit of bad blood between the clubs over the fax machine issue.

comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 4 minutes ago
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with refusing it on principle either. Manchester United should not have their players ultimately being under the control of another club. What Juve did is neither here nor there. We operate on a different financial level, and model, to what they do.

And the principle of this ties in with the strategy of signing players (I promise there is one even if it may not seem like it), as we don’t sign players on the basis we’re gonna sell them for a profit in a couple of years, but if we do want to then it should be on our terms rather than on Madrid’s.

There’s a lot I disagree with how this club is run but I fully agree with this stance. It’s another reason why we had issues with signing signing Haaland, as they wanted a buyout clause in the contract.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 4 minutes ago


Like I mentioned before, I wouldn’t be surprised if this was just Madrid piiiiissing us about. There seems to be a bit of bad blood between the clubs over the fax machine issue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I doubt it. Pretty sure Madrid would've preferred United over Spurs for a host of reasons.

If it did drag on so long maybe it's because there were two possibilities: a lower fee with a buyback, and a significantly higher fee without, and United thought (possibly misled by a wishful thinking agent) that Madrid would eventually accept the lower price without.

I dunno, there’s been plenty said, from both Spanish and English sources, that Madrid were a bit sore over how United conducted themselves over De Gea. And that’s why negotiations for Morata were so difficult. There’s a bit of ego involved on both sides. So it wouldn’t be a surprise if Madrid did wanna piiiiss us around. Though you’re probably right about what actually happened.

Could be Daz, but I don't know if Perez is the sort that lets grudges (rather than his footballing ignorance) get in the way of business.