I tend to think like most on here,if we had chased the goal earlier we could hve left ourselves more open,and with the strikers they have could have cost us the game.we were making chances so it was best to keep it tight,and wait for a time.when it became obvious,we might be running out of idea's then change it,which is what AVB did.
It's interesting that there are such diverse opinions on this game. Some think Benny was poor, others think he played well. Some think Dempsey was at a loss, others think he was man of the match. Some picked Bale as man of the match, others think he was anonymous until the subs. Some think AVB played the game wrong others think he observed and changed it to the good. However, we all think Ade was crap so at least we agree on something. Or do we?
I often wonder whether any of us know anything. Agree re. Ade, have been thinking and airing that opinion for weeks. COME ON JD! Hot streak please, fire us to the CL
Thanks notso that makes me look good because he did use his tactical nous to win us the game, therefore I can't complain.
Oh for a technical area in the first half! In the context I put in, thats just about as non-descript answer anyone could put. Sounds like a wriggle out to me.
Plus in saying what you did you clearly agree he didn't have any first half, which is all the debate was about. So thanks to you aswell!
Ade was man of the match by a mile Spurf, not sure what you were watching, did you not see when he... When he... Ermm, you know when he did... Oh bollocks to it he's bloody useless.
I like Man Utd. They are a team whose glory must be admired. But SAF has broken the transfer record nearly a dozen times in his reign. It's not an occasional thing. He spends big. His success is built on it.
yeah, even the "small" sum of £18m paid for a relatively unproven youngster in Phil Jones eclipses our transfer record
Chelsea have spent £100M since last summer; City £500M in 4 years; Real- how much? Bayern- how much? It's all relative. Utd's net transfer spending is less than Sunderland in the past 5 years. There is no doubt that the Glazers have tied his hands. He's had to bring through young players and he's been unable to compete with these other clubs when buying established players.
I do agree we didn't have a first half but so did AVB. I don't think I have been inconsitent at all but let me put my comments in context. I am an observer of games I doubt you will find much in the way of comments from me on pre game tactics for any game. My playing days are too far in the past and the game has changed far too much for me to claim any great expertise on modern tactics. It's why I rarely comment much on formations apart from obvious comments on who I would like to see playing. Others on this forum have a far greater understanding of the modern game than I do. I will always comment on management in general and decision making because I do have a lot of experience in these areas. That's why most of my critic of Harry was on management rather than the football itself. It's on that basis that I support AVB in the City game because IMO he did all the right things once the game panned out. One of the tests of AVB I have been looking for is how responds in a game when things are going wrong and in this game for me he passed with flying colours.
Tbf, United didn't need as big a rebuild, buying in Jones, Young etc came to how much? You also agreed to pay Rooney 1/4 mill a week to keep him, thats 12m a year, as good as a signing i'd say. Last summer you merely needed a couple of tweaks, Kagawa and RVP were how much?
I think you've under-rated yourself to an extent Spurf, I know you know a little more about the game today than you're letting on here. I also agree with the changes and the subsequent result, who wouldn't! and aswell as this one went, lets not forget the poor ones in other games which made no difference either. My point here is a starting lineup takes more thought and you have more time to do it, changes during a game are reaction to a situation and decisions have to be made in minutes not hours/days. Its his pre-game planning with no pressure thats still questionable and i think a fair point to make and discuss, its not a witch-hunt. On the City game first half, of course no-one knows what the outcome would be in a different formation. Some have suggested that had we kept Demps and Sig wide, we'd be over-run in MF??, do we really think the City players have would stayed in the middle and let them have free run out there...of course not, they'd have dragged their markers out with them leaving more space in the middle...where Bale was. You don't need to be a tactical genius to see that, fairly simple stuff no? and imo, all viewable from the dugout and correctable from the tech area, we could have been dead and buried by HT. Suggestions that this was intentional to hopefully nick a draw at the end is just plain daft.
it works both ways though, if we had sent players out wide it not only would have given Bale more space in the middle but it would have given the man city midfield more space also, and they were already carving us open. Its all about calculating your risks. Doing such a move in the first half is too risky. But after 65-70mins and 1 down the risk is nullified as you're heading towards a defeat anyway.
I really can't let this go without making some response. For me to be making comments about AVB some 48 hours after the game is not talking "with hindsight". I said it during the first half from my seat in the stand. As usual, it is non acceptable to even dare to question the guy as even more excuses are created for him. I don't like him, I don't particuarly rate him and I still feel he is out of his depth with us. Frankly, I think he got out of jail on Sunday as he didn't have a clue what to do. That we went in only a goal down was due to luck rather than his tactical know-how. It is not 'churlish' to criticise the manager, it is called having an opinion. After we won at OT I said much the same because I thought that day his tactics were barking mad and even with "hindsight" and knowing we won, I still think they were. Of course City have a superior squad and of course it was a great day and a great result. But there are some of us who like to look beyond the result and pick the bones out of what may or may not have been improved upon. If that means being critical of our manager, then it's about time some on here learned to accept that, because for many months there has been a tendency to pounce on anyone who says anything anti-AVB, as seems to be the case here.
But the players were congested in the middle in forward areas, not in midfield. Tevez, Nasri and others were getting space and time in midfield. The Spurs full backs were both pushing forward and getting no support because all three of Dempsey, Sigurdsson and Adebayor were making runs towards the penalty spot. It looked to me that Spurs were playing an attacking game, but not to AVB's plans, because these players were not holding wide positions. It only changed in the second half and paid dividends.
Whose numbers in the MF area would have been reduced with players out wide, Bale for example gave Clichy a torrid time for 25 minutes, so much so he needed help from Milner, making them lopsided, this gave City something a whole lot different to think about than steam rolling the MF as is being suggested. No-ones knows is the answer really, but I think we got to to HT only one down by the skin of our teeth, and if thats an intended tactic, for future I'd like to know beforehand so I can take the relevant amount of valium!
