comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
On another note who the f*** designed the collar on the Liverpool shirt.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It has a distinct Colgate vibe, doesn't it?
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
On another note who the f*** designed the collar on the Liverpool shirt.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It has a distinct Colgate vibe, doesn't it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have had some seriously bad shirts over the years but nothing compared to that one.
It has a distinct Colgate vibe, doesn't it?
+++
Yes, why is there green trim on the Liverpool FC home shirt?
comment by RB&W (U21434)
posted 49 seconds ago
It has a distinct Colgate vibe, doesn't it?
+++
Yes, why is there green trim on the Liverpool FC home shirt?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Echoes of 93-94, I think.
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 4 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 26 seconds ago
Style of play.
I think some people get too hung up on this.
SAF never had a particular style of play.
He just tried to play good to watch attacking football.
OGS has manged this quite often in his short time with the club with players no where near the level SAF had for most of his time.
And this despite his go to formation being more defensive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How we played under SAF changed over time. His tactics evolved with the game.
But he was also a pragmatic manager, like Mourinho, like Ancelotti, and like many other greats of the modern game.
If anything, I’d say that Ole has a more identifiable and consistent style of play than SAF ever had.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"If anything, I’d say that Ole has a more identifiable and consistent style of play than SAF ever had."
Hahahaha. My word I have read it all now. Keep on drinking whatever you are drinking.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Educate me on SAF’s enduring style (or styles) of play please, scholay.
Then I’ll tell you about Ole’s and how and why it works.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In the early/ mid 90s he used a traditional 442 that most implored with fast players like Giggs, Sharpe and Kelchelskis. Nothing genius here as most teams done the same, only we had better players.
By the late 90s, you could clearly see he started to incorporate wing play to incorporate overlapping fullbacks as it became harder for the traditional winger due to doubling up on them. Lastly, he switched things up to a 433 with an interchangeable set of attacking players to counter Chelsea's Mourinho. Defences were bamboozled with our movement up top. To say Ferguson had no style of play is absolutely ridiculous and one of the daftest things I have read here.
But carry on going to defend Ole.
Are what you’ve described styles of play? If so, Ole’s is very clear indeed.
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level ) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
Are what you’ve described styles of play? If so, Ole’s is very clear indeed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wing play. Fast attacking counter attacks. Getting Becks and Neville to ping balls to Ruud to score for fun are not styles of play? Getting rid of Ruud, bringing in Saha who was not as lethal but his link up play was A1 is not styles of play?
Yes, Ole's is very clear indeed. Freestyle football
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idiots that make those comments feel free to refer to them. Our squad is good enough to challenge for top 4. It is my believe with even better players this manager will not mount a challenge against Klopp or Guardiola.
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idiots that make those comments feel free to refer to them. Our squad is good enough to challenge for top 4. It is my believe with even better players this manager will not mount a challenge against Klopp or Guardiola.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the squad is good enough for top and Ole achieves that, but you don't belive he'd mount a challenge for the title were the squad good enough? Strange logic.
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idiots that make those comments feel free to refer to them. Our squad is good enough to challenge for top 4. It is my believe with even better players this manager will not mount a challenge against Klopp or Guardiola.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the squad is good enough for top and Ole achieves that, but you don't belive he'd mount a challenge for the title were the squad good enough? Strange logic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Only strange for someone like you. Getting top 4 and winning this league two different ball games. It is also the job of the manager to find these players to (1) improve and (2) turn the team to a winning machine ala Klopp. This is simple stuff.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 14 hours, 47 minutes ago
Question to the people who are using words like 'diabolical' and 'catastrophic season ahead':
I haven't noticed any of you engaging in the topic of our shortened pre-season and being a couple of weeks behind other clubs in terms of fitness. Given the contrast between our last couple of games and the way we were playing (with largely the same personnel and tactics) during our extended unbeaten run before and after the lockdown, don't you think this sense of profound doom might be a little bit exaggerated?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve engaged in discussion and made the point about the disadvantage of being a game or two behind Palace myself. However, lack of match fitness doesn’t explain the fatal flaws in our defence or in Pogba’s lack of positive contribution; the latter could barely complete a ten yard pass against Brighton, nor could he recover the ball without committing a foul once ceding possession.
The squad was proven to be good enough for top four last season. Fair enough. Regardless, we have stood still in the transfer market while our competition have all made significant moves to strengthen (or in the case of City and Liverpool we’re so far ahead of us that we needed to make at least four, maybe five signings of quality in the window to have a chance of closing the gap).
The season will be “catastrophic” for Ole if we don’t get top four. He will lose his job.
The second point I meant to qualify was that good enough for top four last season has no bearing on if we are good enough this season. We will need to see improvement quickly, lose to Spurs going into fixtures against Chelsea, Arsenal and Everton and we could be talking about our season looking pretty disastrous before we’ve made it through 10 games.
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 14 hours, 47 minutes ago
Question to the people who are using words like 'diabolical' and 'catastrophic season ahead':
I haven't noticed any of you engaging in the topic of our shortened pre-season and being a couple of weeks behind other clubs in terms of fitness. Given the contrast between our last couple of games and the way we were playing (with largely the same personnel and tactics) during our extended unbeaten run before and after the lockdown, don't you think this sense of profound doom might be a little bit exaggerated?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve engaged in discussion and made the point about the disadvantage of being a game or two behind Palace myself. However, lack of match fitness doesn’t explain the fatal flaws in our defence or in Pogba’s lack of positive contribution; the latter could barely complete a ten yard pass against Brighton, nor could he recover the ball without committing a foul once ceding possession.
The squad was proven to be good enough for top four last season. Fair enough. Regardless, we have stood still in the transfer market while our competition have all made significant moves to strengthen (or in the case of City and Liverpool we’re so far ahead of us that we needed to make at least four, maybe five signings of quality in the window to have a chance of closing the gap).
The season will be “catastrophic” for Ole if we don’t get top four. He will lose his job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pogba is recovering from COVID-19. You might have heard of it? It’s this virus kicking around that has killed a million people in a few short months and can affect the respiratory system and brain for months after the patient’s recovery from the most serious symptoms.
Ole has said that Pogba still isn’t fit, that he’s being closely monitored by the club’s medics, and that he’s being given 60 minutes per game to try to help get him back up to speed.
And it isn’t Ole’s fault that the squad hasn’t been strengthened.
If the squad isn’t at the level of City’s or Liverpool‘s and isn’t helped up close to that level by the money men, should he be sacked if he still manages to make top four?
I mean, I’d argue that we now have the fourth best squad in the league, and are miles off the top two. So I’d expect Ole to challenge for third, but a fair result would be us finishing fourth. How much can realistically be asked of him?
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 8 hours, 24 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idiots that make those comments feel free to refer to them. Our squad is good enough to challenge for top 4. It is my believe with even better players this manager will not mount a challenge against Klopp or Guardiola.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the squad is good enough for top and Ole achieves that, but you don't belive he'd mount a challenge for the title were the squad good enough? Strange logic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Only strange for someone like you. Getting top 4 and winning this league two different ball games. It is also the job of the manager to find these players to (1) improve and (2) turn the team to a winning machine ala Klopp. This is simple stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It isn’t the job of the manager to find those players, sorry. That’s not how the club works.
That’s been explained to us by all of Woodward, LVG and Mourinhox
It isn’t the job of the manager to find those players, sorry. That’s not how the club works.
That’s been explained to us by all of Woodward, LVG and Mourinhox
-----------------------------------------------------
...and as someone mentioned on another thread I think, Liverpool's recruitment operation has made a huge but not widely appreciated contribution to Klopp's success. Yes, Klopp is a great coach and better than Solskjaer. But it turns out that massively successful buys such as Salah and Robertson weren't his choices, but recommended by the transfer team.
This is where we've failed more than anywhere else: think about not just the quality of recruitment, but the ROI that Liverpool have achieved over the last few years thanks to having the right structure around the manager. (This stretches back to before Klopp when you think about the spectacularly successful Suarez and Coutinho purchases.) Spurs have similarly punched above their financial weight with consistently smart recruitment.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
It isn’t the job of the manager to find those players, sorry. That’s not how the club works.
That’s been explained to us by all of Woodward, LVG and Mourinhox
-----------------------------------------------------
...and as someone mentioned on another thread I think, Liverpool's recruitment operation has made a huge but not widely appreciated contribution to Klopp's success. Yes, Klopp is a great coach and better than Solskjaer. But it turns out that massively successful buys such as Salah and Robertson weren't his choices, but recommended by the transfer team.
This is where we've failed more than anywhere else: think about not just the quality of recruitment, but the ROI that Liverpool have achieved over the last few years thanks to having the right structure around the manager. (This stretches back to before Klopp when you think about the spectacularly successful Suarez and Coutinho purchases.) Spurs have similarly punched above their financial weight with consistently smart recruitment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is where we’ve most frequently and consistently failed. Even when the right targets have been agreed on and acquired, we’ve often signed them at the wrong time (Maguire and Bruno) or paid way over the odds (Maguire, AWB, Fred, if he can be counted).
The most serious and damaging failure has been in the scattergun approach to the appointment of managers, which has seen the players’ on-pitch progress overturned and squad go through the grinder four times in eight years. They just don’t understand how to build a footballing strategy.
Agreed Rosso.
Incidentally, while the blame for this resides with Woodward and the Glazers, I'm sceptical at the notion they are utter, preening morons. I suspect in addition to personal failings and unwillingness to lose control, there may be a sense that there's more than one way to run a club and a belief, held in good faith, in the Fergie model with footballing decisions all dictated by the needs of the manager. After all, there are examples of clubs doing badly with a DoF in place. It's not a panacea. Maybe that legacy has created a blind spot. The Fergie model worked when Fergie was there and he was complemented by Gill.
I suspect that apparently winning formula was their starting point, and then lack of specialist knowledge, reluctance to cede control, and confused thinking makes it hard to eliminate that blind spot.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 7 minutes ago
Agreed Rosso.
Incidentally, while the blame for this resides with Woodward and the Glazers, I'm sceptical at the notion they are utter, preening morons. I suspect in addition to personal failings and unwillingness to lose control, there may be a sense that there's more than one way to run a club and a belief, held in good faith, in the Fergie model with footballing decisions all dictated by the needs of the manager. After all, there are examples of clubs doing badly with a DoF in place. It's not a panacea. Maybe that legacy has created a blind spot. The Fergie model worked when Fergie was there and he was complemented by Gill.
I suspect that apparently winning formula was their starting point, and then lack of specialist knowledge, reluctance to cede control, and confused thinking makes it hard to eliminate that blind spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, that all makes sense.
And you can stir in, from the Glazers’ perspective - the business perspective - an unwillingness to change something that isn’t broken, particularly when they may have had thoughts about cashing in in the backs (or even fronts) of their minds.
You don’t commit to undertaking a significant and potentially risky restructuring when you don’t see an obvious and immediate business case for doing so if you’re also considering realising your investment in the near term.
If the squad isn’t at the level of City’s or Liverpool‘s and isn’t helped up close to that level by the money men, should he be sacked if he still manages to make top four?
-
If only that’s how football worked. If we don’t get top four then there’ll need to be exceptional circumstances that allow Ole to keep his job. Unless the Glazers have totally given up on United.
Brady - Evans connection looking good for the Buccs so fare. Gronk beginning to look like his old self... I can see why their attention would be elsewhere.
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 7 minutes ago
If the squad isn’t at the level of City’s or Liverpool‘s and isn’t helped up close to that level by the money men, should he be sacked if he still manages to make top four?
-
If only that’s how football worked. If we don’t get top four then there’ll need to be exceptional circumstances that allow Ole to keep his job. Unless the Glazers have totally given up on United.
Brady - Evans connection looking good for the Buccs so fare. Gronk beginning to look like his old self... I can see why their attention would be elsewhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think we’ll get top four.
But some people seem to think a top three or four finish isn’t good enough and that he should be out of the door regardless.
Sign in if you want to comment
My Take So Far
Page 5 of 6
6
posted on 28/9/20
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
On another note who the f*** designed the collar on the Liverpool shirt.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It has a distinct Colgate vibe, doesn't it?
posted on 28/9/20
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 3 minutes ago
On another note who the f*** designed the collar on the Liverpool shirt.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It has a distinct Colgate vibe, doesn't it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have had some seriously bad shirts over the years but nothing compared to that one.
posted on 28/9/20
It has a distinct Colgate vibe, doesn't it?
+++
Yes, why is there green trim on the Liverpool FC home shirt?
posted on 28/9/20
comment by RB&W (U21434)
posted 49 seconds ago
It has a distinct Colgate vibe, doesn't it?
+++
Yes, why is there green trim on the Liverpool FC home shirt?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Echoes of 93-94, I think.
posted on 28/9/20
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 4 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 26 seconds ago
Style of play.
I think some people get too hung up on this.
SAF never had a particular style of play.
He just tried to play good to watch attacking football.
OGS has manged this quite often in his short time with the club with players no where near the level SAF had for most of his time.
And this despite his go to formation being more defensive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How we played under SAF changed over time. His tactics evolved with the game.
But he was also a pragmatic manager, like Mourinho, like Ancelotti, and like many other greats of the modern game.
If anything, I’d say that Ole has a more identifiable and consistent style of play than SAF ever had.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"If anything, I’d say that Ole has a more identifiable and consistent style of play than SAF ever had."
Hahahaha. My word I have read it all now. Keep on drinking whatever you are drinking.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Educate me on SAF’s enduring style (or styles) of play please, scholay.
Then I’ll tell you about Ole’s and how and why it works.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In the early/ mid 90s he used a traditional 442 that most implored with fast players like Giggs, Sharpe and Kelchelskis. Nothing genius here as most teams done the same, only we had better players.
By the late 90s, you could clearly see he started to incorporate wing play to incorporate overlapping fullbacks as it became harder for the traditional winger due to doubling up on them. Lastly, he switched things up to a 433 with an interchangeable set of attacking players to counter Chelsea's Mourinho. Defences were bamboozled with our movement up top. To say Ferguson had no style of play is absolutely ridiculous and one of the daftest things I have read here.
But carry on going to defend Ole.
posted on 28/9/20
Are what you’ve described styles of play? If so, Ole’s is very clear indeed.
posted on 28/9/20
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
posted on 28/9/20
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
posted on 28/9/20
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
posted on 28/9/20
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level ) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
posted on 28/9/20
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
Are what you’ve described styles of play? If so, Ole’s is very clear indeed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wing play. Fast attacking counter attacks. Getting Becks and Neville to ping balls to Ruud to score for fun are not styles of play? Getting rid of Ruud, bringing in Saha who was not as lethal but his link up play was A1 is not styles of play?
Yes, Ole's is very clear indeed. Freestyle football
posted on 29/9/20
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idiots that make those comments feel free to refer to them. Our squad is good enough to challenge for top 4. It is my believe with even better players this manager will not mount a challenge against Klopp or Guardiola.
posted on 29/9/20
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idiots that make those comments feel free to refer to them. Our squad is good enough to challenge for top 4. It is my believe with even better players this manager will not mount a challenge against Klopp or Guardiola.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the squad is good enough for top and Ole achieves that, but you don't belive he'd mount a challenge for the title were the squad good enough? Strange logic.
posted on 29/9/20
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idiots that make those comments feel free to refer to them. Our squad is good enough to challenge for top 4. It is my believe with even better players this manager will not mount a challenge against Klopp or Guardiola.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the squad is good enough for top and Ole achieves that, but you don't belive he'd mount a challenge for the title were the squad good enough? Strange logic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Only strange for someone like you. Getting top 4 and winning this league two different ball games. It is also the job of the manager to find these players to (1) improve and (2) turn the team to a winning machine ala Klopp. This is simple stuff.
posted on 29/9/20
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 14 hours, 47 minutes ago
Question to the people who are using words like 'diabolical' and 'catastrophic season ahead':
I haven't noticed any of you engaging in the topic of our shortened pre-season and being a couple of weeks behind other clubs in terms of fitness. Given the contrast between our last couple of games and the way we were playing (with largely the same personnel and tactics) during our extended unbeaten run before and after the lockdown, don't you think this sense of profound doom might be a little bit exaggerated?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve engaged in discussion and made the point about the disadvantage of being a game or two behind Palace myself. However, lack of match fitness doesn’t explain the fatal flaws in our defence or in Pogba’s lack of positive contribution; the latter could barely complete a ten yard pass against Brighton, nor could he recover the ball without committing a foul once ceding possession.
The squad was proven to be good enough for top four last season. Fair enough. Regardless, we have stood still in the transfer market while our competition have all made significant moves to strengthen (or in the case of City and Liverpool we’re so far ahead of us that we needed to make at least four, maybe five signings of quality in the window to have a chance of closing the gap).
The season will be “catastrophic” for Ole if we don’t get top four. He will lose his job.
posted on 29/9/20
The second point I meant to qualify was that good enough for top four last season has no bearing on if we are good enough this season. We will need to see improvement quickly, lose to Spurs going into fixtures against Chelsea, Arsenal and Everton and we could be talking about our season looking pretty disastrous before we’ve made it through 10 games.
posted on 29/9/20
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 14 hours, 47 minutes ago
Question to the people who are using words like 'diabolical' and 'catastrophic season ahead':
I haven't noticed any of you engaging in the topic of our shortened pre-season and being a couple of weeks behind other clubs in terms of fitness. Given the contrast between our last couple of games and the way we were playing (with largely the same personnel and tactics) during our extended unbeaten run before and after the lockdown, don't you think this sense of profound doom might be a little bit exaggerated?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve engaged in discussion and made the point about the disadvantage of being a game or two behind Palace myself. However, lack of match fitness doesn’t explain the fatal flaws in our defence or in Pogba’s lack of positive contribution; the latter could barely complete a ten yard pass against Brighton, nor could he recover the ball without committing a foul once ceding possession.
The squad was proven to be good enough for top four last season. Fair enough. Regardless, we have stood still in the transfer market while our competition have all made significant moves to strengthen (or in the case of City and Liverpool we’re so far ahead of us that we needed to make at least four, maybe five signings of quality in the window to have a chance of closing the gap).
The season will be “catastrophic” for Ole if we don’t get top four. He will lose his job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pogba is recovering from COVID-19. You might have heard of it? It’s this virus kicking around that has killed a million people in a few short months and can affect the respiratory system and brain for months after the patient’s recovery from the most serious symptoms.
Ole has said that Pogba still isn’t fit, that he’s being closely monitored by the club’s medics, and that he’s being given 60 minutes per game to try to help get him back up to speed.
And it isn’t Ole’s fault that the squad hasn’t been strengthened.
If the squad isn’t at the level of City’s or Liverpool‘s and isn’t helped up close to that level by the money men, should he be sacked if he still manages to make top four?
I mean, I’d argue that we now have the fourth best squad in the league, and are miles off the top two. So I’d expect Ole to challenge for third, but a fair result would be us finishing fourth. How much can realistically be asked of him?
posted on 29/9/20
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 8 hours, 24 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by rosso - for your protection, we’ve installed this camera (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 minutes ago
To be fair I think that showed that SAF was pragmatic and would change accordingly. That's one of the criticisms of Ole in that he sticks quite rigidly to his tried and trusted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SAF would also switch things up depending on the opposition, particularly in Europe.
He’d use man-marking, deploy defensive wingers, drop a forward back into midfield, tuck his wingers in or push them wide, etc.
He had underlying principles, and you could identify modes of play and a baseline tactical continuity across seasons, but he certainly was a pragmatist.
It makes me laugh when people say that Ole doesn’t have a style of play though. Our approach is so consistent that after watching three fecking games it’s patently clear how we play.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. There are a few similar comments that people like throw about in relation to Ole without actually thinking through what they are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t know whether they do it because they’ve made their minds up about him and decided to use any and all of the common criticisms thrown at managers to attack him regardless of applicability, or that they just don’t understand what they’re watching when they tune into games.
It isn’t uncommon to read the same posters criticising the squad as being full of mid-table (or Championship level) players, then lambasting the manager in their next breath for failing to compete with City and Liverpool
Which is it? You can’t have both.
There are sticks to beat Ole with, if people really want to do that. Not developing a style or mode of play and a clear tactical approach isn’t one of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idiots that make those comments feel free to refer to them. Our squad is good enough to challenge for top 4. It is my believe with even better players this manager will not mount a challenge against Klopp or Guardiola.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the squad is good enough for top and Ole achieves that, but you don't belive he'd mount a challenge for the title were the squad good enough? Strange logic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Only strange for someone like you. Getting top 4 and winning this league two different ball games. It is also the job of the manager to find these players to (1) improve and (2) turn the team to a winning machine ala Klopp. This is simple stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It isn’t the job of the manager to find those players, sorry. That’s not how the club works.
That’s been explained to us by all of Woodward, LVG and Mourinhox
posted on 29/9/20
It isn’t the job of the manager to find those players, sorry. That’s not how the club works.
That’s been explained to us by all of Woodward, LVG and Mourinhox
-----------------------------------------------------
...and as someone mentioned on another thread I think, Liverpool's recruitment operation has made a huge but not widely appreciated contribution to Klopp's success. Yes, Klopp is a great coach and better than Solskjaer. But it turns out that massively successful buys such as Salah and Robertson weren't his choices, but recommended by the transfer team.
This is where we've failed more than anywhere else: think about not just the quality of recruitment, but the ROI that Liverpool have achieved over the last few years thanks to having the right structure around the manager. (This stretches back to before Klopp when you think about the spectacularly successful Suarez and Coutinho purchases.) Spurs have similarly punched above their financial weight with consistently smart recruitment.
posted on 29/9/20
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
It isn’t the job of the manager to find those players, sorry. That’s not how the club works.
That’s been explained to us by all of Woodward, LVG and Mourinhox
-----------------------------------------------------
...and as someone mentioned on another thread I think, Liverpool's recruitment operation has made a huge but not widely appreciated contribution to Klopp's success. Yes, Klopp is a great coach and better than Solskjaer. But it turns out that massively successful buys such as Salah and Robertson weren't his choices, but recommended by the transfer team.
This is where we've failed more than anywhere else: think about not just the quality of recruitment, but the ROI that Liverpool have achieved over the last few years thanks to having the right structure around the manager. (This stretches back to before Klopp when you think about the spectacularly successful Suarez and Coutinho purchases.) Spurs have similarly punched above their financial weight with consistently smart recruitment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is where we’ve most frequently and consistently failed. Even when the right targets have been agreed on and acquired, we’ve often signed them at the wrong time (Maguire and Bruno) or paid way over the odds (Maguire, AWB, Fred, if he can be counted).
The most serious and damaging failure has been in the scattergun approach to the appointment of managers, which has seen the players’ on-pitch progress overturned and squad go through the grinder four times in eight years. They just don’t understand how to build a footballing strategy.
posted on 29/9/20
Agreed Rosso.
Incidentally, while the blame for this resides with Woodward and the Glazers, I'm sceptical at the notion they are utter, preening morons. I suspect in addition to personal failings and unwillingness to lose control, there may be a sense that there's more than one way to run a club and a belief, held in good faith, in the Fergie model with footballing decisions all dictated by the needs of the manager. After all, there are examples of clubs doing badly with a DoF in place. It's not a panacea. Maybe that legacy has created a blind spot. The Fergie model worked when Fergie was there and he was complemented by Gill.
I suspect that apparently winning formula was their starting point, and then lack of specialist knowledge, reluctance to cede control, and confused thinking makes it hard to eliminate that blind spot.
posted on 29/9/20
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 7 minutes ago
Agreed Rosso.
Incidentally, while the blame for this resides with Woodward and the Glazers, I'm sceptical at the notion they are utter, preening morons. I suspect in addition to personal failings and unwillingness to lose control, there may be a sense that there's more than one way to run a club and a belief, held in good faith, in the Fergie model with footballing decisions all dictated by the needs of the manager. After all, there are examples of clubs doing badly with a DoF in place. It's not a panacea. Maybe that legacy has created a blind spot. The Fergie model worked when Fergie was there and he was complemented by Gill.
I suspect that apparently winning formula was their starting point, and then lack of specialist knowledge, reluctance to cede control, and confused thinking makes it hard to eliminate that blind spot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, that all makes sense.
And you can stir in, from the Glazers’ perspective - the business perspective - an unwillingness to change something that isn’t broken, particularly when they may have had thoughts about cashing in in the backs (or even fronts) of their minds.
You don’t commit to undertaking a significant and potentially risky restructuring when you don’t see an obvious and immediate business case for doing so if you’re also considering realising your investment in the near term.
posted on 29/9/20
Good point
posted on 29/9/20
If the squad isn’t at the level of City’s or Liverpool‘s and isn’t helped up close to that level by the money men, should he be sacked if he still manages to make top four?
-
If only that’s how football worked. If we don’t get top four then there’ll need to be exceptional circumstances that allow Ole to keep his job. Unless the Glazers have totally given up on United.
Brady - Evans connection looking good for the Buccs so fare. Gronk beginning to look like his old self... I can see why their attention would be elsewhere.
posted on 29/9/20
comment by The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
posted 7 minutes ago
If the squad isn’t at the level of City’s or Liverpool‘s and isn’t helped up close to that level by the money men, should he be sacked if he still manages to make top four?
-
If only that’s how football worked. If we don’t get top four then there’ll need to be exceptional circumstances that allow Ole to keep his job. Unless the Glazers have totally given up on United.
Brady - Evans connection looking good for the Buccs so fare. Gronk beginning to look like his old self... I can see why their attention would be elsewhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think we’ll get top four.
But some people seem to think a top three or four finish isn’t good enough and that he should be out of the door regardless.
Page 5 of 6
6