So because it was close to half time you think everyone should have been back defending. Are you not allowed to score in first half injury time then?
It's easy to say in hindisight but why in that situation would you want to settle for a point, yes a point and win the rest and you would have won it, but then again a win, and you still had some room for error in the last few fixtures.
You where at home against a Chelsea reserve team, who you where completely dominating. Only time it would have been acceptable to play for a point is if you only needed a point to win the league.
I know SAF who has 13 PL titles would have thrown everything at that Chelsea side if in the same situation to try to get the 3 points. You don't win titles by settling for 1 point.
Patently obvious that you and yourvnew manager dont suit each other.
I merely point out you wont score from a hollywood pass with 30 seconds of half to go nor should 7 out of 11 players be so far advanced when the should be seeing out the half.
3-1 up in next game and won final 4-0 peoves a point was enough but we have no clue from manager nor players.
Im quite confident you great manager would not have thrown anything like that at chelsea nor would he have indulged gerrard second half either shooting with his tired legs from all over park rather than play properly.
. I think there was another United player listed too. This was a top 10, the bias was incredible.