Manchester United’s failings down to a lack of attacking variation
It depends how you want to interpret the number ‘1′. There is no shame in losing a league title by a single point, but the flip side is that when you’re a club as used to success as Manchester United, a mere one season without silverware is considered a failure.
The statistics about goals easily sum up United’s problems. They had the best defensive record, despite the fact that first-choice central defensive partnership Rio Ferdinand and Nemanja Vidic started just nine of the 38 games together.
Where they trailed Chelsea, however, was in front of goal. The raw ‘goals scored’ statistic demonstrates how far they were behind Chelsea in this respect, but perhaps becomes slightly irrelevant in terms of the league title when Chelsea were winning games 7-0 and 8-0.
United actually scored more goals this season than in their title-winning display last term, but the problem was the distribution of goals. Last season, United were the master of the 1-0 win – they won ten matches by that scoreline. This season, there were just four 1-0s. Their goal tally was inflated this season because they thrashed teams more often – four 4-0s, and three 5-0s.
The more salient statistic is that on six occasions United didn’t find the net, a fact that seems more alarming when compared to Chelsea’s record of scoring in 37 of 38 games (Birmingham were the only side to keep them out) or last year’s record, when it was three times (one of them after United had clinched the title).
This turned out to be crucial – a single goal in the scoreless game against Blackburn would have won them the title. And six shut-outs is all the more surprising when you consider that United had more than 50% of possession in every game all season with the exception of one (away at Arsenal, when they convincingly won by playing on the counter-attack anyway). They had the ball, so why couldn’t they find the net?
Losing two top-class players in Cristiano Ronaldo and Carlos Tevez last summer was clearly always going to be difficult to recover from, whilst Dimitar Berbatov’s lack of form, Michael Owen’s injury problems and Wayne Rooney’s own fitness worries played a part – had Rooney played against Blackburn, things could have been different.
But there is an argument that, in terms of quality, United were not that much weaker than last season. Rooney’s transformation into a world-class central striker, Antonio Valencia’s instant impact on the right wing and Nani’s vast improvement partially made up for the loss of Ronaldo, whilst Michael Owen scored only two fewer goals this season than Tevez did last season, despite being injured for the final three months.
United’s problem this season was not a lack of quality, but a lack of variation in attack. Ronaldo and Tevez were so useful for United in recent years not merely because of their ability, but because of their versatility. Both players could play on the left, on the right, as a central striker or just off the front. Given Rooney’s similar nature, and Nani and Park’s ability to play on either flank comfortably, United were so difficult to face, because the opposing manager was never sure quite what he would be facing – even when he became aware of United’s starting XI.
Owen and Valencia, however, are both limited to one position. Owen is a forward, plain and simple (although he has developed his game into a more all-round player in recent years) whilst Ferguson has acknowledged that Valencia is only comfortable on the right-hand side – before the match away in Bayern, he admitted dropping Valencia in favour of Park and Nani on the wings, because those two had the ability to switch midway through the game if necessary. If it was a factor in Munich, it’s fair to say that it will have been a factor at other points in the season, and handicapped Ferguson’s ability to tactically outwit opposing managers.
And of course, the lack of versatility of Valencia and Owen has a knock-on effect on other players in the side. Nani’s ability to play on either flank is of little use if Valencia’s right-sidedness dictates he must play on the left (Nani admits he prefers the right).
United’s lack of striking options when Rooney was injured late in the season suddenly became very apparent, especially with Berbatov’s lack of confidence. In that crucial game at Blackburn, the Bulgarian played alongside Federico Macheda (making his first start of the season) as United failed to score. United seemed rigid and inflexible. Last season, with Rooney, Tevez and Ronaldo able to interchange, the Blackburn defence would have been left guessing until the final minute. This season, United were simply too predictable when it came to breaking down the opposition on six occasions, and ultimately it cost them the title.
Ferguson’s shopping list this summer will surely feature an attacking player, but versatility might be as important as raw quality. Ferguson has become a fine tactician in recent years, and he needs the right tools to work with – this season he was constrained by too many players being one-dimensional.
Manchester United’s failings down to a lack of attacking variation
While I agree with the main message of the article, you seem to focus too much on the Blackburn game. The same corresponding feature was neither won by Chelsea or Arsenal.
There were the Burnley game or the Villa at home, which could have turned the things just as much. People tend to focus on the Blackburn because it was the last miss and it is easy to think if United had won it they would have won the title. However, if we are about to play the “what if” game then I would claim that had United won the Blackburn game, Chelsea would not have gone out uninterested in the Tottenham game.
However, I agree that there was a lack of options up front. However, for me the main issue was the lost defence stability due to major injury crisis (9 out of 10 defenders were injured for some games) which was what won the title last season in the first place.
The focus on the Blackburn game is because that was United’s only goalless draw all season, and therefore the only game when ’scoring’ rather than ‘not scoring’ would have resulted in United winning the title.
The Burnley and Villa games were also crucial, but 0-1 losses rather than 0-0 draws – a goal in either game wouldn’t have meant United won the league, they would have still lost on goal difference.
The importance in the Blackburn game was the nature of the result, not the timing of it.
As I already pointed out, neither Chelsea nor Arsenal won this corresponding fixture despite both of them taking the lead. So it is simplistic to say scoring “would have resulted in United winning the title”. I, for example, don’t expect Chelsea would have lost to Tottenham had United won at Blackburn. It is pointless to go into the what-if branching of the alternative futures. No doubt, United would have had better chances of ending up on top had they won this game, but there were lots of moments where this season could have gone in different direction and most of them are directly related with scoring more goals:
- had Carrick scored the pen against Burnley,
- had Rooney scored early against Chelsea,
- had United scored the extra time winner against Sunderland,
- had Nani scored his great chance at 3:0 against Bayern(this game was as important to the title as the Blackburn game),
- and of course had Valencia scored his 1-on-1 or had Berbatov scored against Blackburn…
I fully agree with the main point of the article that United were lacking options upfront and the team was much more one-dimensional when attacking as compared to last season.
However, for me, they are not champions anymore, because Van Der Saar, Ferdinand and Vidic played in only 21,13 and 24 PL games,correspondingly. You stated, in your nice article about Chelsea, how important was it to have their stars to drag them through the season times and times again. Well the trio that dragged United to the title last season with their 14 consecutive clean-sheets was not available for half of the season(on average).
given utd had the best defensive record, to bemoan absent defenders seem a little absurd. as you have just agreed, the reason utd didn’t win the league was a lack of attacking options, not defenders. ronaldo dragged utd to the title last season, not their defenders.
bingo.
No it isn’t. You are being short-sighted in looking at these statistics. Crucial points were lost during the defensive injury crisis, most notably due to having to play youth players or midfielders out of position. Utd dropped points in the game where Carrick had to fill in at centre-half. Furthermore, having to play Fletcher at right-back when he was bang in-form was a double blow: 1.) losing a natural RB and 2.) losing the most important midfielder who was driving the team forward as much as Rooney was at that point.
Admittedly they still ended up with the best defensive record, in large part because reserve defenders like Jonny Evans have been superb. But anyone who has watched United all season knows that they carry much more of an attacking threat when they have a settled defence. They can defend higher up the pitch and better when dropping deeper, and this helps their attacking game.
“So it is simplistic to say scoring “would have resulted in United winning the title”.”
But it’s true
I really don’t know what your point is here – there were other times when United didn’t win because they didn’t score enough? Of course. Were there any other games where United didn’t score, where if they had have scored, they would have won the game? No – the Blackburn game was the only 0-0, hence that is the game where there was the most crucial difference between scoring and not.
I’ve no idea what your point is about how Chelsea would not have lost to Tottenham had United beaten Blackburn either, that’s just nonsense. Chelsea were still fighting for the league 100%, they just played badly.
> Were there any other games where United didn’t score, where if
> they had have scored, they would have won the game? No
Won the game, no, but the title, yes. At Stamford Bridge
Also, if looking at games where one more United goal would have made a difference for the title, then there were 6 of those.
I can as well make the point that there were 5 games in which if United had received one goal less it would have won them the title.
The whole focus on the Blackburn game seems random to me.
Yes, really random to concentrate on the one game where the difference between scoring and not scoring cost them the title. Crazy stuff!
Let’s leave it there.
agree that blackburn game cost us title no doubt about that, also i think were is need to mention just for objectivity’s sake that refereeing decisions in both chelsea games went against united, whats was clear for everybody who understands football. but main point that united needs to freshen up in front is 100% right, i also felt we were too one dimensional this season. and kosio point that chelsea would beat totenham if we beat blackburn is nonsense
Very good point made about Man U here, especially when everyone else would have you think that ‘No Ronaldo/Tevez = No Title’.
For me, the joy of watching Man U play in 2006-2009, as well as Guardiola’s Barcelona, is that you never knew what to expect. Chelsea’s 7-1 victory over Aston Villa was far more fun than their 8-0 over Wigan, because you didn’t expect it. Similarly, the teams of Barcelona and 06-09 Man U keep/kept their opponents guessing, which in turn kept everyone else guessing.
For me, that’s one of the two ultimate definitions of football (the other being Inter Milan’s win over Barcelona in the CL). It keeps everyone guessing, like a good novel, and it keeps the tactical fanatics (like me) happy.
Stu
An interesting article and it just goes to show that the media myth about ‘unbeaten runs’ is far less important than looking at the number of times a top team fails to win. Since three points have been awarded for a win, a draw for a championship challenging side can be as useless as a defeat.
As an aside, you allude to the fact that United went ‘one season without silverware’. I know the League Cup is not a major triumph, but it is a trophy nonetheless.
I agree Ronan. I’m a Tottenham fan and definitely believe the Carling Cup is a piece of silverware! Man Utd have one more honour this year, not a complete loss for them!
yeah its crazy then some people say people dont count carling cup as a trophy, so what exactly carling cup is if is not a trophy?? its a 3rd by importnce trophy in england.
Hi ZM. Nice reading. Your insigths are excellent and make fantastic reading.
I believe that your knowledge about football far exceeds mine and I also agree with you on allmost all aspects stated here, except when you state that ManU could have won had they scored against Blackburn. By similar logic, Chelsea would have won it earlier had they not gone down to Spurs. I just found that part of as debatable.
Also, I feel that it was a gamble from SAF not to have enough cover after selling Ronaldo and Tevez. Rooney coming into his own was expected, but not to have world class cover for Ronaldo/Tevez(highest scorers of the previous season for Manu) was an apparent suicide. SAF should have bought a world class stiker last season(a little versatile as you say). In the end it will go down as a season too late.
Excellent stuff though. Please use more diagrams while explaining tactics.
Maybe SAF expected Berbatov to step up?
Probably. Maybe Owen too. It would be interesting to see what the summer signings would be.
i think the reasons why fergie didnt bring replacment for ron & tev was pure financial restraint. its not because that fergie decided to gamble and didnt buy adequate replacements. i reckon he didnt had the funds, because dont forget world were in the middle of crisis, so its natural that american owners hit the brake (altough i think it was stupid jerk off reaction from americans, and it proved wrong do not replace ron & tev). that talk about available 80£ was of course nonsense.
As always, an in-depth analysis without losing its big picture, a great analyst and synthesist. Besides, both quantitative and qualitative elements are always used in a right manner, the effort behind the mere numbers and statistics and the cognitive judgment behind the reasoning.
Well done. I enjoy reading every single article written. Cheers.
Good piece, and I think you’re right in almost every conclusion.
But I think what United really need is an attacking midfielder who can play through the centre. With Tevez and Ronaldo, teh attcking players were like a carousel of interchanging positions and took turns dropping behind, but this season that position has seemed a problem. As it is, most of United’s central midfielders are defensive minded – Fletcher is a destroyer, though he does break into the box now and again, Carrick is a holding player, Hargreaves is a holding player, Scholes has become a deep-lying playmaker, Gibson hasn’t really matured enough for his games strengths to be clear, though his shooting is ferocious and it looks like SAF sees him as an attacking midfielder. Giggs sometimes plays behind the strikers through the middle but its not really his position. Only Anderson is specifically an offensive midfielder, and he was injured for half of the season and out of favour for much of the rest (and even then, United usually ask him to play as either a holding player or in a sort of box-to-box role – I’ve only seen him play in his natural position a handful of times in his career). So all of the creativity comes from the wings or from Rooney/Berbatov dropping deep for the ball, and performing as an attacking midfielder does.
SAF seems aware of this though, if the rumours of interest in Silva, Milner and/or Modric are to be believed..
Good Article , but I would think that the most important matches would be against Chelsea instead (which Bayern Munich played apart in it ) , both of the matches (Home and away) man utd lost by only 1 goal . And I strongly believe that if man utd got at least a draw in the home match , man utd might have won the epl by 1 point instead ?
Chelsea might have won the epl this year cause man utd gifted it / due to their huge amount of ‘goals’, but they might/will not be winning it again next year , cause each time man utd got 2nd , the next season they are Champions since 1994 .( if I am not wrong )
Last of all Chelsea has not won a single UEFA Champions League before , and sad to say they might never will .
And how do you know that they will never win the UEFA Champions League? Predictions? Did you predict an Inter Milan v/s Bayern Munich final?
err sorry about that I did not bold the word might .
When a title is won and lost on the difference of a single goal, the what-if game is easy enough to play. I’m not saying that you’re wrong – United’s tactics this season definitely seemed very predictable – but when it worked, it worked well. I could point to any number of games where the opposing manager was simply unable to deal with the combination of excellent supply, potent attack and solid defence that a working Manchester United team presents.
However, the “solid defence” was certainly not always there, especially when the season approached the halfway point – the United first-choice keeper and most of the first-choice (and second-choice, too) defenders were out through injury. At one point, Michael Carrick had to play as a centre-back with the reserve player De Laet (in the 3-0 loss to Fulham), and Fletcher was also pushed out to fill in the right-back slot (during the 1-0 loss to Aston Villa). So one might argue that the injury crisis which blighted United’s defenders played as much a role in Chelsea pipping United to the title by a point.
That said, Chelsea had their share of injuries as well; that they won is down to their superior squad depth.
Another good article ZM. I have one minor issue, which is that you don’t criticize Ferguson for signing these 1 dimensional players in the first place. The article makes it sound like Fergie is a victim of circumstance or bad luck, when it’s really his bad signings that led to his problems.
He was constrained in the amount of money he could spend last summer, though.
True, but when he spent money it was (as you pointed out) on a one footed winger and a pure central striker. I think that’s a failure on his part to allocate his limited funds properly.
Maybe, but they only spent £12m, on Valencia. It’s hard to lose Tevez and Ronaldo and replace them both with £12m, perhaps a consequence of the lack of cash was the fact that he couldn’t get two players as versatile.
strange to say constrained when the glazers went on record of saying that he could spend all of the money from ronaldo – seems that the reason he didn’t buy a multi-dimensional player was that he didn’t consider them good enough value.
/however/ if you look at the fact that he might actually have decided to risk not winning the PL and be accepting of second place, United only lost 800,000GBP or so from their failure to win the PL, which is a drop in the income ocean. A ‘frugal’ year last year may have given Ferguson enough this year to land a /real/ marquee signing or two – Messi & Aguero anyone?
I agree with Anonymous below when he essentially argues that it could actually be nani’s failure to deliver as a winger/provider in the first half of the season that ‘cost united the title’, if you want to look at it that way, even if most of the rest is speculation!
This criticising Ferguson’s signings seems a bit silly to me. He spent 16M on Valencia, a player who he actually tried to sign the summer before and was his vision of how to provide more width, which the team was losing as Ronaldo transformed into more of a striker. What a team that might have been with Ronaldo on the end of Valencia’s crosses!
Still Valencia has been an outstanding performer this year, so criticising him is extremely harsh. Owen was signed for free to provide goals. He did this until he got injured. His opportunities were further limited by the form of Rooney as they make similar runs and thus were rarely, if ever, played together.
In short: Budget constraints, and actually good value for money. Let’s not forget they lost the league by one point on the final day.
But also a key factor would be to consider who they could have got instead. They inquired about Silva but the deal didn’t happen. It might this summer. Villa didn’t want to leave Spain. Ribery is simply not worth the money being asked for him. In my view a massively over-rated player with deeply suspect temperament. Who should they have signed in a summer where Real had skewed the market so that 60M was the starting offer for any big name? This summer should be much more interesting.
this side is at the end of its cycle and it’s right to suggest as ferguson has tried to change the way of the side theres been teething problems, but theres a reason no side has ever won 4 consecutive league titles in england, it’s a tough job. Ferguson will clear out the players he feels who have lacked the mentality this year to be man united players- carrick, berbatov, foster, maybe tosic aswell. (vidic could also be sold to cover the debt payments and make the books looks reasonable) and then look to complete rebuilding his side. The failings were less to do with valencia only being good on the right, more that nani was gash for the first half of the year when alot of the losses took place.
This is a collection of Nani videos
everyone has being saying chelsea deserved to win the title but the fact is wht lost the title 4 manu was the 2 defeats 2 chelsea .. i mean in the 1st game a clear foul on brown led to the goal and dont even get me started on the ofside apart from that in the bolton game a clear hand ball agains terry wasnt given
wht do u think???
Every team had some dubious decisions / luck go their way – or are you cleverly forgetting about Man U’s 2nd leading goal scorer – “own goal”?
If he wasn’t in such good form this year Man U would’ve lost way more points this year.
I think you’re being ridiculous. Since I began watching EPL in 2005 Man U has benefited more from refereeing decisions than any other team I can think of. Chelski were better this year, and so Man U lost. Really, though, when either of those teams wins the league it’s bad for the sport, because their business models (spending the wealth of an oligarch and building up massive debt, respectively) are unsustainable. This sport needs a salary cap like American basketball or football, and the straight-up buying of players under contract need to be curtailed in favor of trades and free agency.
I don’t think either Man Utd or Chelsea have spent nearly as much as Real or Barcelona do in one summer.
I do agree that refereeing decisions cost Man Utd this year. I don’t mind the occasional refereeing blunder, I’ve seen plenty of those during the Arsenal-Utd rivalry but ever since Benitez’s rant last year, the FA seem to have actually made sure Utd get less than equal treatment.
Explain to me exactly why having teams that are consistently the best is bad for the sport? Yes Chelsea’s success in recent years has come from Abramovich, but their marketing team has done excellent work selling them around the world. Spurs have spent a huge amount in recent years too but nobody ever mentions this. Are all rich owners bad for the game? Is money bad for the game? You are placing the sport on a pedestal and need to get real.
And you dare to criticise Man Utd’s business model? You are, I’m afraid to say, a fool if you think Utd’s model is a bad approach. Yes they are now owned by the Glazers that have put them in massive debt, but how do you think they became such an attractive takeover target in the first place. They are still the most valuable sports franchise in the world. (Incidentally most of the rest of the top 10 come from rich American francises like the NY Yankees.) Utd’s sponsorship and marketing teams are widely held to be the finest in football if not all of sports.
Finally, what is so great about the salary cap and trades system? I am an avid watcher of the NHL, a league which has implemented this structure and has enormous trouble with it. Reasons for this:
1.) Too many of the best markets with the most fans are penalised and languish halfway down the league. Not good for the game in my opinion.
2.) Genuine superstars rarely get the chance to play together and when they do, it is rarely for long. Not good for producing history-making teams, ergo not good for marketing the game, making it popular, and simply not as fun to watch.
3.) Hockey has to deal with a league in two countries, Canada and the US. This causes great financial problems. To do so in Europe would be stupid and if selected countries implemented it and not others, those leagues would be left behind.
It may not be perfect, but capitalism is here to stay in football. Get used to it. The alternatives are no better.
ZM,
I find the analysis too simplistic, though you do hit the nail on its head, the lack of versatility. Spot on.
Two points:
- Ryan Giggs’ injury has been so glaringly left out. He was the star of their first half of the season. He became the centre- midfield creator that they so craved for. And Ryan-Wayne combo produced some really fine results.(Nani was hardly in the picture, then.) But again United’s failings have been lagely masked by an excellent defensive season. Coming back to the point, Giggs was never the same afterwards more so to do with Fergie’s preference for Scholes and the change in formation.
- I seriously don’t get it when Berbatov is branded a flop, which he isnt. Just that people expect him to be a player he isnt shouldnt corrupt their judgement. He isnt a out-and-out goalscorer. To ask him to match Rooney’s versatility – his sudden rise as a lone striker – is not his fault. I believe Sir Alex was left with no options.. berba could have still succeded had United had Arsenal’s supportcast.
Spot on. I think its funny how ManU fans crave for Arsenal’s creativity and Gooners crave for some ManU stones in the midfield and back. I am not sure ManU needs anything other then a striker. Berba is just to slow for that team. Their best shape is 4-5-1, counterattacking style, which demolished Arsenal in February. Now, it is bit hard to play that way when you know you need to win a game, say against Chelsea last month, or without Rooney (or Henry) as that lone striker. If ManU spends this summer, it should be for Benzema who could come cheap from Real; definitely cheaper then last summer. I don’t think they have the means to spend Ribery/Villa type cash, and probably Fergie does not want to anyway…
Re Berbatov:
The ignorant, sweatshop-loving, British sports “journos” turned him into a scapegoat and failure. He has proven numerous times in his pre-ManU career his exceptional qualities both as a link player and versatile front man. He does not have to prove anything to anybody.
He was utilized in an ambiguous and an inefficient way by SAF. Whenever he was played as a lone front man, ManU’s absolute lack of creative midfielders to feed him was exposed. As a link player, on many occasions he was too far ahead of his teammates in reading the game: he is the ManU player who finished the season with the highest number of assists. Despite his injury.
But again, huffing, sweating and puffing – that’s what the Brit crowds and tabloid “journos” like.
There is merit to the argument that United failed to win the EPL and didn’t progress in the CL because they were predictable in their shape and lacked variation in attack. If nothing else the statistics prove this. Frank Lampard scored 22 goals from midfield for Chelsea, Ryan Giggs got five for United. But this only tells part of the story. Before the season began it was obvious that Chelsea had more players in their squad capable of putting the ball in the net, all it needed was for Carlo Ancelotti to find formations and tactics to allow them to do this. So it proved, of the five most attacking players (see chart) in each team, Chelsea’s contributed 79 goals, while United’s fell far behind with 51, which is a deficit of 28 goals. Alex Ferguson would have been happy with this return if, as ZM suggests, his team had produced more one nil wins and managed to put the goal in the back of the net more often. Both Ferguson and his assistant Mike Phelan commented on this in post-match interviews time and time again, and it was also obvious that when United suffered their defensive crisis that an inability to score would cost them.
Staying purely with the arguments surrounding the purpose of the sport itself and leaving out luck, refereeing decisions, loss of form, injuries and illogical opnion, ZM’s argument is valid, and it will be interesting to see how both Ancelotti and Ferguson address next season. Ferguson has already admitted that he does not plan to add to the squad but ZM’s comment that he needs a versatile attacker and more likely a midfielder who can score goals would indicate that James Milner should be a target because of his all-round versatility. Ancelotti, more than Ferguson, doesn’t need to add to his squad and with players like Michael Essien returning from injury (likewise Owen Hargreaves for United) he has admitted that he is happy with the players available to him. Going back to the statistics this would mean that Chelsea, in 10-11, will have more threat in front of goal, unless Ferguson can find goals in his existing squad.
It doesn’t always add up that the team with the most attacking options and a return of goals wins the league, but it is obvious that the team that scores goals and stops goals has a better chance and if this is what we can expect next season, given the relative strength of both squads at Chelsea and United, then it will be the team recording scores in most fixtures stepping up to collect the trophy, just as it has been this past season.
Right now, with all their defensive players fit, there isn’t much between these two. The main difference is that Chelsea have players all over the pitch, no matter who Ancelotti selects, who can score goals, while Ferguson has far too many players who don’t find the target as much as they should, Carrick, Anderson, Nani, to mention three.
I agree with AS IS, Berbatov did not fit easily into United’s shape and Ferguson will need to find a way to bring out the best in him. Berbatov may surprise some people next season, and there will be other surprises, not least a chink in the strong argument that Chelsea and United are favourites for the title next season. They are, but, if they have another season like the past one, and both Arsenal and Manchester City manage to improve their performances we might actually get to see a real title race.
But the argument here is simple, if United are to get Chelsea’s title away from them they will need to be more versatile and more accurate.
Ferguson has hinted that he is ready to bring in the younger players so what we might be looking at next season is a battle between Ancelotti’s experienced veterans and Ferguson’s latest fledglings.
And among those is one Darron Gibson, who might be the attacking, scoring midfielder that United need to get the kind of goals we associate with Lampard and the like.
Bah, referee’s get things right most of the time, get things wrong sometimes. It’s quite a challenge to see things exactly right every time as it happens in real time. The fact is that it’s the same for all teams. This injustice is an integral part of the game.
Take any single observation of a referee getting something wrong and you’re ignoring another decision that incorrectly went your way somewhere along the line. Over the course of the season, or even a single game, these things tend to balance things out unless you’re so blinkered that only decisions that go your side’s way are “right” and decisions that don’t are “wrong”. When you compile all the observations, and show that close decisions systemically went against your team, then we can have an intelligent conversation about how it was the referees that lost you the title.
The tone of this article seems to suggest that the Premier League title somehow belongs to United and any other side winning it represents some kind of aberration. Even though they weren’t champions, I thought Manchester United actually out-performed general expectations this season and did very well to push Chelsea to the last day. If you could replay 100 iterations of this season, I’d think that 9 times out of 10 they’d be further off the top spot than they were.
It was a very competitive league this year which was great to see. Chelsea were worthy Champions and closed things out in some style. The 1 point spread just makes the “what ifs” that much more tempting since you can point out so many single moments that could have changed things.
“The tone of this article seems to suggest that the Premier League title somehow belongs to United and any other side winning it represents some kind of aberration.”
I do not get that from this article at all. Care to support your assertion or will you just let it hang there?
“The tone of this article seems to suggest that the Premier League title somehow belongs to United and any other side winning it represents some kind of aberration.”
Well, 11 out of 18 Premiership titles hardly refutes that.
Not really sure what the point is there, really. Does the article even mention refereeing decisions?
Nice article. I think too much is being made of the defensive issues. If you look back at all the line-ups for the seven losses then only one game, Fulham, was lost with a significantly weak back line and quite frankly Fulham played us off the park that day so even with a stronger team maybe only a point could have been achieved which wouldn’t have made any difference. Next year Nani and Valencia have to step up and chip in with a few more goals.I think a creative attacking midfielder/forward is needed. A fit Hargreaves and maybe a goalkeeper though maybe this position can be addressed the following season. Essentially no major overhaul is required as the hysterical press keep suggesting.
Not sure if I entirely agree with the point about Valencia being one dimensional. I think he can play a number of different postions e.g. Doesn’t he play as an attacking central mid/second striker for Ecuador?
Drogba and Lampard scored more than United’s top 5 scorers put together? Bet it’s been a while since you could say that.
I agree that United looked one-dimensional at times. I believe that it was also down to a lack of creativity coming from the centre of midfield. With Scholes playing a deeper Pirlo-esq role and Fletcher being primarily a destroyer they lacked spark and imagination. There is also a clear lack of ability on the left of midfield. I think it is quite apparent that Nani plays considerably better from the right. So, alongside Valencia, that leaves United with 2 quality right midfielders and no quality on the left. Giggs no longer has the pace or stamina to play that position regularly. Park, for all of his hard work lacks any kind of creative flair. After a promising start Obertan practically disappeared and Tosic doesn’t look like he will make the grade.
In my opinion Sir Alex should make a creative left winger his main priority. Aside from that he needs to decide on whether or not he is going to play 4-4-2 or 4-5-1. If he is to go with the former he needs to cut his losses on Berbatov and bring in a goalscoring striker. If he wants to go with the latter he needs to buy either a goalscoring central midfielder or one who oozes creativity. I think a new Gk can wait until next summer and, so long as Vidic stays the defence is fine. Smalling is coming in to provide extra cover and it is unlikely that they will be ravaged by injuries at the back to any where near the same extent next season as they where this.
Spot on, I agree completely. The question is do they have the money to do what is needed?
1. “he needs to decide on whether or not he is going to play 4-4-2 or 4-5-1″
Do you actually read these articles? If you had clicked through ZM’s link to his team of the decade discussion of Man U (http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/03/20/teams-of-the-decade-3-manchester-united-2006-09/) you would see that much of the team’s success has come with the use of versatile players and numerous formations. Lack of versatility was a problem for them this year and coincided with missing out on the title, and yet you think they should “decide” on a formation and make personnel decisions because of it. How does that make sense?
Sorry to pick on you again Josef, but do you actually THINK about what these articles are talking about. Yes, the 06-09 team worked great with a mixture of phenomenally well-rounded (Rooney, Saha, Tevez) and versatile (Rooney, Tevez, Ronaldo) frontmen. But teams go in cycles. That team has now disintegrated. What Ferguson did by bringing in Valencia is to bring back some rigidity to the team structure. He can now play in his preferred way again: quick ball down the wings. So yes, he does now need to decide whether he signs a new striker, and what kind of striker as Rooney appears to be able to play with just about anybody, and commit to 4-4-2 or go for an attacking playmaker (maybe Anderson, if not Milner, Modric, Silva) and go 4-5-1.
ZM
Another great article and hitting the bull’s eye as well ( cuz both aren’t really mutually inclusive ). But i bet you didn’t expect to be attacked this way for mentioning the blackburn game. Let me help you out.
Guys ZM didn’t intend to play a ‘what if’ here, and would be wrong to do so as many of you have jumped out to tell him so. The blackburn match just portrays the problem united had this season of being one dimensional and lacking versatility, which a manager like Allardyce exploited really well. In the previous seasons teams would find really difficult to keep united goalless because of the versatility of the players. But even then had united scored against blackburn maybe ….:…( now this is playing the ‘what if’ card)
As the game continues to evolve towards multi-dimensional skill sets (particularly on the forward line) and Lobanovski’s notion of the “universal player” perhaps draws closer and closer, the qualitative aspects of performance will continue to gain importance relative to the aggregate, quantitative.
In turn, success may be more and more influenced at the level of strategy first and foremost, prior to tactics. In a sense, Ferguson’s miscues were primarily strategic and those in turn confined what he could do tactically.
Terrific article. This is a wonderful site.
I agree. football currently has more and more players who cant be defined by one position they play in and managers are very happy with this as this allows them to be unpredictable and the team to dynamically change shape within the game as well. versatility is in
That’s an interesting observation. The question of the importance of versatility was put to Fabio Capello in an interview with Four Four Two magazine last month. He acknowledged that it means there are “possibilities during the game.” However, he still prefers the specialist, saying 11 specialists will beat 11 players who can play in different positions.
Interestingly, players with versatility used to be known, rather unflatteringly as “utility players” as if “versatility” = “not that great in any position”. Nowadays, like you say, the ability to play in different roles gives a manager great flexibility. I think ZM has noted elsewhere the Manchester United midfield’s ability to rotate in different roles allows Sir Alex to bring different qualities to bear in different positions.
utility players currently or previously were those with less skill and adaptable to the tactics of different positions. But these days you get highly skilled players mostly in advanced positions who are able to switch between positions within the game or game to game without much effort.
This could be due to the overlap of roles in advacned midfield and the forward these days due to which players are able to adapt to differnet tactics.
Usually if you have a solid defense the attackers within the team can be used dynamically
While the lacking versatility may have been an issue throughout this season I think the reason ManUtd lost the title is somewhat more simple: There is no functional backup for Rooney as a scorer.
Despite all the heat he’s been getting Berbatov is an excellent player, he’s not suited to the role as a lone striker at all though. He will have a few moments of brilliance in a game but for that to take effect he needs a hard working forward like Rooney or Tevez at his side. Berbo did not start that many matches alone up front, considering ManUtd lost by a point ( or two, given goal difference ) those few games may well have made the difference.
Sir Alex will need to bring in another attacker with a high workrate and reliable conversion rate or as some other posters have pointed out a left winger who can score double digits a season to win the title in 10/11.
“Despite all the heat he’s been getting Berbatov is an excellent player, he’s not suited to the role as a lone striker at all though.”
People say this line often, but it’s simply nonsense. Versatility is crucial in the modern game, and when you are only comfortable playing a formation few teams play anymore (front 2), you are no longer an excellent player. Berbatov is one dimensional and not even that great at that dimension. Extremely talented, not an excellent player.
Barcelona’s Xavi is a very one dimensional player as well and it has cost the club on several occasions. Does that mean he is not an excellent footballer ?
I don’t think so, but your mileage may vary.
That’s less important for central midfielders though, especially considering most sides’ tendency to play three of them.
The woes of Berbatov and Ibrahimovic this season at clubs used to a more fluid attack has been very interesting, though.
Beg to disagree with the second statement (pls see my reply to vijay’s comment above). As a link player, Berbatov may only enhance the fluidity of ManU’s attack (the ManU player with most assists for the season). As a lone striker, he exposes the creative deficiencies of ManU’s midfield, which is more comfortable with the straightforward game of Rooney: that vulnerability was deciphered by opponents in Europe.
I agree, but there are two crucial differences
1) Xavi is absolutely bloody brilliant at his one thing. Berbatov is more like “good”. If Xavi was merely good his one dimensionality would be a bigger issue.
2) It’s rare that a Xavi-like player isn’t needed in Barca’s side (and increasingly everyone elses), so he’s almost always a good fit for the team. Berbatov OTOH is only useful when playing 2 up front, which is a dying trend.
There are still a couple areas where versatility isn’t that important like centre mid & centre back (even that seems to be changing), but everywhere else it is becoming more and more important.
ZM
Having in mind incredible performance that Zoran Tosic demonstrated against best sides in Bundesliga, would he be the better choice for a winger since he plays the same whether it is left or right or at center ???
I cannot believe the club haters have found a way to criticize the article. ZM wrote ‘WHY’ Man Utd have lost the title – that does not mean he says title is rightfully Utd’s. And this is discussion about their tactical approach to a game(the last topic is same on Chelsea) and what exactly has changed from last year. One genius interprets this as a ‘What if’ game!
I know hating clubs is a big part of football but please don’t bring it here which is I am sad to say the last sane place for sensible football discussion.
If you have any thing to discuss about tactics please do so, otherwise stop being a chauvinist.
word.
Good call on the significance of all the matches they were held scoreless. It’s really easy to use stats too simplistically, for instance counting all the extra goals in an 8-0 win as being as valuable as the one goal in a 1-0 win.
ZonalMarking: – Man Utd spent SEVENTEEN (17) Million on Valencia, not 12 Million (I presumed you hit the wrong key, but you used the figure twice in the same post, so I have to correct you).
A lot of pundits think that Valencia has been good for Man Utd this season – I don’t agree – I don’t think he’s been particularly bad, but he’s not good enough to be a Man Utd regular, and Fergie has made a mistake in buying him. Nani has stepped up to the plate on occasions but has been inconsistent (if he consistently performed at his best then he would become a World-Class player, but I’m not sure he has that in him) – I found your article extremely interesting and agree with all your points (although the squabbling with other posters about the “what-if” situations, i.e. Blackburn/Chelsea etc needs to stop). I have my own views on Man Utds progression in the last few years, and I’ll share them now:
Basically, Man Utd have not replaced Roy Keane and David Beckham (a wild accusation, I know, but I’ll explain why now…..). At the turn of the decade Man Utd had the best midfield in the world – Giggs, Scholes, Keane and Beckham (Butt was an able deputy for Keane) and augmented that with excellent strikers (Yorke, Cole, Solskaer, and after that Van Nistlerooy). Once they sold Beckham, and Keane was no longer the force he once was, Fergie had to rebuild the midfield (he still had excellent strikers at this point). In short, he did a rubbish job of it (remember Kleberson and Djemba-Djemba? Also Fergie failed to use Veron in the correct role). This was at the time that Arsenal had their “invincibles” season, and after that Mourinho cleaned up the Premiership with Chelsea for two years.
During this time, an interesting thing happened at Man Utd: they bought Rooney, who has always been top-class; Ronaldo developed into the World-Class player he has now become, and they acquired Tevez, who has also shown himself to be World-Class. Along with Berbatov providing ample support for these three players (Berbatov has not been bad at Man Utd, it’s just that Man Utd were expecting him to be the next Cantona, which he now clearly isn’t), Fergie now had a potent and flexible enough forward line which meant he could now play three in central midfield (thereby eradicating the problem of not having good-enough midfielders to play two in central midfield) along with three out of the four above-mentioned strikers to provide a real cutting-edge up front. Now that that strike force has been dismantled (Ronaldo and Tevez leaving), Fergie has been left with a sub-standard midfield (which only functions when he plays three in central midfield) and a sub-standard attack (which NOW only functions when he plays four in attack – i.e. two wingers and two strikers – leaving two in central midfield, which I’ve just argued he hasn’t got the players for), meaning he has an unbalanced team (you could argue that actually, he has a VERY balanced team – both the midfield AND the strike-force are crap – lol). He needs to rectify this by either replacing the current strike-force (simple, but highly-expensive) or replacing the current midfield (not as expensive, but far more complicated – there are only a handful of players in world football who can play in midfield and truly control a game – a la Keane, Vieira, Gerrard and who now? – you tell me ZonalMarking – or anyone else).
So my simple but wild accusation that he hasn’t truly replaced his world-class midfield (including Keane and Beckham) is not so far from the truth………
……although it could be that Owen Hargreaves was the answer to all Fergie’s prayers, but we’ll never know, cos he turned out to be a crock…….
Apologies for the error on Valencia’s fee.
I’m not sure about the point re:replacing Beckham and Giggs. It’s fair to say that today’s midfield doesn’t really compare to the Beckham-Keane-Scholes-Giggs line-up, but then I think you can say the same about Arsenal’s and Ljungberg-Vieira-Gilberto-Pires, or Parlour-Vieira-Petit-Overmars. Whether we’re looking back with rose-tinted specs, or whether the midfield game has simply changed, I’m not quite sure. Whether players like Vieira and Keane are around in the modern game is another question, but on paper I think a Hargreaves-Carrick-Fletcher partnership is fine – just a shame one’s injured, one’s off-form and the other struggles to play consistently well regularly.
Your point about the 4-man attack / 3-man midfield dilemma is really interesting though. If Ferguson think the same, I wouldn’t be surprised to see him sign a couple of players and play a slightly lopsided attack – Rooney as a central forward, one wide forward, a traditional winger on the opposite side, an attacking midfielder and two holding players. Basically a skewed 4-2-3-1? I think lopsided formations will dominate the next few years in football and wouldn’t be surprised to see Ferguson as an innovator.
Hello again my very-learned-friend,
I do agree that a midfield of Hargreaves-Carrick-Fletcher is fine, but he needs sufficient quality in his three attacking forwards, which he doesn’t have at the moment – which is basically the point you are making in your article, which I agree with. I don’t think Valencia is good enough to be part of the attacking three that Fergie needs in front of his three-man midfield – he’s bought a dud again. Your idea about a lop-sided midfield is a good one – maybe Anderson will get his chance again? I think Nani,Rooney and Berbatov (honestly) are good enough to be in the attacking contingent, but Fergie needs to get someone else World-Class, and, as your article suggests, MORE VERSATILE (I write in capitals cos I can’t seem to write in Italics). I wonder who that may be…….maybe someone at the World Cup will stand up……anyway, thanks for your reply, I have to go to work now (boo hoo)………
I’m not sure about Valencia being a dud. If you examine his performances over the season, he brings relatively good levels, and consistently, to the game; he excels at penetrating down the right flank and delivering accurate crosses into the box. He seems quite pacy and is very good at beating his man to get those crosses in. Why do you think he’s not good enough?
Admittedly, an in-form Nani on the right is quite a bit better than an in-form Valencia on the right – he’s good enough at beating his man when he’s playing well, plus his technical ability and creativity are apparently better than Valencia. But that doesn’t mean Valencia’s not good enough.
“Why do you think he’s not good enough?”
I’m just guessing about truthandinsight’s perspective here, but maybe he feels that just being a fast, hardworking dude who can swing in crosses is not enough given the need for versatility in today’s game?
Valencia: tons of assists this year. Good defensively. Worked very well against Bayern and Milan, not so well against Chelsea. Overall can’t see what the problem is.
Totally disagree with your opinion of Antonio Valencia, but thats what it is, an opinion and its sites like this that allow us to express these opinions.
I dont see what else you really want from Valencia on the right-wing.
You say we havent replaced our midfield, which we havent. Keane is obviously the hardest of the midfield “greats” to replace, though I feel the failure to sign Michael Essien was crucial.
Yet, I think we have a ready made replacement for Beckham in Valencia. I think maybe you have the rose tinted glasses on when remembering Beckham, but he wasnt exactly the most versaltile player in the world either.
Valencia has proven time and time again that he can consistantly get to the byline and deliver accurate crosses into the danger area. Versatile he is not but far from a dud.
How can you say that versatility is key, yet praise Berbatov’s performances at United, who arguably is one of the most unversatile at the club?
Not criticising your post, just requesting some…enlightenment.
Very good article and I strongly agree.
Surely the conclusion you could make from the goal scorings statistics at the bottom is that Man U really need an attacking midfielder of the Lampard mould capable of scoring 15-20 goals to supplement Rooney, Nani et al. This is especially true for games(quite a few) this season where Berbatov was benched and Rooney was the lone frontman.
Basically, the author is completely understating the departure of CR9, a player who should be regarded as the best if not one of the best in the world. The truth of the matter is in the facts themselves: from 06-09, Man U was the best in the world! They won the EPL title how many times in a row? If memory serves it was 4 right? They then had back to back champions league finals! Back to BACK! Winning 1. This record far surpasses Barcelona’s current accomplishments. Perhaps “far surpasses” is a bit of an overstatement, but not by much. It is incredibly difficult to win the league 4 times in a row and get to the CL final twice in a row winning it once. We saw this year how Barca failed in an attempt to reach the CL final twice in a row, even though they were perhaps the better team when compared to Inter. The reason is that the CL is basically a cup tournament. The better team doesn’t always win. This shines a new light on just how impressive Man U was from 06-09.
Come to this year. Not only do they fail to win the league but they get kicked out of the champions league in the quarter finals! That is a drastic fall. Especially when you take into account that Bayern actually outplayed Man U in 3 of 4 halves during their 2-leg tie. A Bayern which was not too strong to start with, and which was also missing their best player in Robben, their best striker in Gomez and their best midfielder in Shwienstiger (sorry, spelling was horrible), for the first leg. A leg they were dominated in, despite only losing 2-1 due to a lucky first minute goal.
Now we know that Tevez wasn’t a huge loss. In fact, Tevez rarely played for Man U last year as he was relegated to the bench. However, Christiano Ronaldo’s absence has been greatly missed. This was their best player and the core of their attack. CR9 was their focal point.
To say that they really didn’t miss him that much because Rooney changed his role and a few other role players stepped up is misdiagnosing the problem and ignoring the facts. Man U, 4 in a role EPL trophies, back to back CL finals, winning the CL one of those times —to, Man U, trophy less. The difference? CR9 was missing.
Even Sir Alex Furguson admitted this. A reporter asked him a question regarding the summer transfer window a few weeks ago. This reporter asked him about big money signings, who they were going after, etc. Sir Alex said that there was no big money transfer he was going after. That the only way he would pay more than even $50 million pounds for one player, would be in order to get Christiano Ronaldo back, lol.
Sorry to interrupt you dude, it’s back to back 3 titles not 4. And you got it right, the difference between this year and last 3 was CR9(formerly known as CR7).
It’s pretty safe to say that United sorely missed Ronaldo, not only for his quality, but his ability to play anywhere in midfield or up front. That said, if Tevez had stayed with United, considering the generally poor form or injury-proneness of all the forwards (i.e. they either played well and got injured or stayed healthy and played poorly), I think he would have come in very useful – plus, he’s also versatile enough to play anywhere in a front-three.
your analysis is facile enough that there’s no point rebutting it.
I just find it appalling that Fergie, the one who rules Old Trafford with an iron fist and shunted out so many great players like Keane, Beckham, etc because he didn’t like their attitude, still talks about getting Ronaldo back without a trace of shame. Ronaldo was and is the most egotistical player I’ve seen in a long time. Never liked him, only admired his skill but good riddance. Real Madrid and Ronaldo deserve each other.
Sorry to interrupt you dude, it’s back to back 3 titles not 4. And you got it right, the difference between this year and last 3 was CR9(formerly known as CR7).
Terrific analysis, as usual. But I concur with the others who think goals scored is too blunt of a measure–even if it is the crucial one.
The way I look at United’s performances, and I think SAF does the same if his post-match comments are any indication, is by the number of chances created. There weren’t too many instances where United simply failed in this regard. Where they failed was in taking them. How many times did SAF say something to the effect of “We should have won 6-0″? Well, the difference between United and Chelsea was that the Blues WERE winning matches 6-0 (and beyond).
I think United’s problems could be more effectively diagnosed by a metric that considers chances and possession — efficiency — rather than just goals. Indeed they were more predictable in attack, which Bayern and Chelsea eventually were able to break down, but they were also terribly inefficient. Berbatov and Owen are the obvious targets. Berbatov’s weakness in converting crosses seemed to be such that teammates, toward the end of the season, stopped serving him.
I agree that the lack of pressure on the left after Giggs’ injury was significant. United are much more difficult to beat when they have players, like Giggs, Nani and occasionally Fletcher, who can run at the defense from the middle 3rd to the corner of the box. Those runs often create easier goals, much like the ones Kalou and Lampard score for Chelsea. You don’t win matches 7-0 and 8-0 by scoring overhead kicks and diving headers. You win them by making and taking your easy chances.
“Berbatov’s weakness in converting crosses seemed to be such that teammates, toward the end of the season, stopped serving him.”
The elementary solution would seem to be sending balls to feet in this case…
Totally agree with the comments about Valencia. I´d argue that SAF´s main achievement of the last decade (with considerable help from Carlos Queiroz amongst others) was to switch from the traditional 4-4-2 to a more subtle, flexible attacking system in which versatile players can easily interchange and alter the team´s shape during the game. Whilst Valencia is a good player (who would have been a perfect replacement for Beckham) and has had an impressive first season with Utd, he simply isn´t suited to the type of football and system Utd now want to play. He also poses very little goal threat.
I agree, somehow I feel like Valencia is a super offensive fullback. He is simply not a player suited for the modern game but his crossing skill and his incredible speed keeps him on level with other wingers. they should try playing him and nani on the right at the same time.
Excellent article, although on a minor point, United scored 86 goals not 83. I think some respondents here have overstated the importance of Ronaldo to United’s title victory last season, I’m not saying he hasn’t been missed but frankly it was the defence (24 clean sheets) that “dragged United to the title” last year. Given that United and Chelsea won the same amount of matches in the league this season, it could be argued that the fact Chelsea were able to put out a stronger defence more often made the difference. I would certainly agree with the overall argument that United’s lack of attacking flexibility, especially in the absence of Rooney, played a key role in United struggling in key games though.
On a side note, although the “Big 4″ have been weaker this season, the top 3 sides all scored over 80 goals. With teams like Spurs, Man City, Villa, and arguably Everton having improved, it would seem that the teams in the lower half of the league have been much worse defensively this year.
The defence was important yes, but without Ronaldo many of those clean sheets would have been 0-0s instead of 1-0s. A great defence is pretty much worthless if you can’t score at the same time, which is what Ronaldo did.
And yeah, the lesser teams have been absolutely shocking defensively. How people can maintain the idea that the EPL has great defences is beyond me.
Totally agree, with Ronaldo & Tevez gone and Anderson & Giggs injured UTDs attacking options are limited to Rooney (invariably assisted by Valencia)and the occasional Berbatov/Nani cameo.
However even with Giggs and Anderson ‘back’ next year the need for multiple avenues to goal is not fulfilled, Anderson has hardly scored at all and Giggs cannot be relied upon to play week-in, week out.
With Carrick/Fletcher/Hargreaves the base of the midfield looks solid but there is a need for real creativity and goal scoring ability. I feel the focus should be on players who can handle central over wide roles and for a while now i have wondered how a trequartista-type player would work at OT.
I suggest someone in the Sneijder/Gourcuff/Modric category… maybe even, dare i say it, Gerrard (if Torres leaves and no real squad improvement is done I think he would have the incentive to leave liverpool).
The World Cup allows a chance to get a look at some of the talent around the world who could suit… but then again, remember Kleberson.
So the question becomes, who should SAF put on his shopping list?
I think this season has really showed the prowess of Chelsea’s squad, and the lack of flair from United’s.
Sure we can blame injuries, lack of form, etc. But when you look at the Chelsea’s bench compared to Utd’s, I’d take Chelsea’s any given day.
We have to strengthen our squad with better buys, and SAF has always been spot-on in managing players on the bench. Away with the Carricks, Andersons, Hargreaves, Berbas – And in with some new blood. We lack the creative spark and when you look at the trio of Nani, Rooney and Valencia – you’re only getting goals from one man (bar a few crucial ones from Nani). You just don’t have the confidence in Utd scoring anymore and that’s sad. If Rooney gets crocked after World Cup, you could quite possibly wave goodbye to any challenges next season.
ZM -> I believe you’re generally a very good football analyst, and everyday I log on to this page religiously. You have good insights on team tactics, and moving forward who would you recommend (a few buys and sales) for Utd ?
here is the thing, i think nani is a much more complete player on the right then on the left, his ability to do something decent on the left against semi decent fullbacks means he generally gets pushed there but when he plays on the right he can be magic. valencia is a good player but simply put your wasting nani away on the left, im thinking obertan was bought with that view of rotation in coming years.
with the midfield united essentially play a very safe midfield, very little in the way of the attack happens in the midfield(unlike chelsea and arsenal where their main creative outlets are found), the midfield becomes the staging area which can begin the attack. imho fergie is basically taking mourinho’s style and tampering with it, he is using alot of asymettric players to fill out problems areas in the left and right. watch the games of chelsea’s winning side in 04/05, especially the wing play and you have united right there.
I think you’re spot on about Valencia, I’m surprised to hear that he plays anywhere but wide right for Ecuador because he has no semblance of a left foot, plays almost no through balls and consistently makes getting an, albeit generally high quality, ball in his priority. Of course, part of the reason why Rooney’s scored so many headed goals this year is because Valencia’s been floating them onto his head, but having a player in your attack who is glued to the right hand flank and often murders attacks by his fixation with crossing has hampered United’s generally fluid attack. Then again, he does do more defensive work than Nani or Ronaldo.
Agree with the general feeling here that United’s midfield hasn’t been top quality for a while, they’ve been helped by the fact that their defence has been consistently good but I get the impression that their tactics have almost been to give the ball to one of their quality attackers and wait for something to happen (obviously something of an oversimplification)
As for signings, Guti looks like he’ll be available this summer, he’s got an absolute wand of a left-foot and as a stop-gap he might be a good option?
signing Guti would be wrong, I suggest picking up a younger and better player who surely is bound to leave his club anyways – Gourcuff. and I suggest turning valencia into a fullback and play him and nani together on the right.
Good article as usual, but the Author does need to accept that others do have points of views, and s/he doesnt always have to have the final say – case in point Kosio and Andrews comments.
Berb is the ‘creative midfeild role’ for anyone? He can hold the ball up, pick a pass, my only worry is, doesnt run too much.
Good analysis, ZM! The way the season had developed, it was a surprise to see Utd top of the table ahead of the Chelsea game at OT. But it was an even greater surprise to see them lose the title in the end. The game against Blackburn was pivotal. Berbatov dropped too deep and United were too static. Berbatov holds the ball up well, releases it well, but fails to make the run into the box afterwards.
But of course it was losing against Chelsea that swung it. Fergie will have to take part of the blame for that. He clearly prioritized the Champions League before an historic 4th consecutive league title. Ahead of the CL quarter finals, he should have selected the team against Chelsea first of all, knowing that a result in that game would mean United had their fate in their own hands. Had he not played Rooney in Munich (he had looked knackered in the previous game), or at least taken him off at half time, United could have been champions now. I believe they would then have secured a draw against Chelsea or gotten a goal at Blackburn (and may have seen off BAyern too…).
Yes, United were very fluid with TEvez and Ronaldo. But the margins were decreasing – their best season was 07/08, the next season they did not play that well. Berbatov, Owen and Valencia work better in a 4-4-2. Which is a great option to have. With a creative midfielder (Anderson was beginning to find form before that injury) or a good left footed winger, United would also have the perfect set up for 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 and would have had a greater wealth of attacking options than ever.
United lost the Title because of the second graph in the article.
For too much of the season they only had one guaranteed outlet for goals, and that was Rooney. It was very reminiscent of the Van Nistelrooy days where, if you could stop him from scoring, generally you could stop United from scoring. Chelsea, meanwhile, had two. If Drogba didn’t get you, it’s highly likely Lampard would. There was also Anelka first half of the season and Malouda second,
Once Nani came into form during the run-in, United had another bonafide match-winner, but by then points had already been lost at places where they shouldn’t have been – notably at home to Villa and away to Burnley (although while Coyle was there, going to Turfmoor was far from easy). Two people who you go into games believing can score isn’t enough. You need more from midfield.
Carrick had a very poor season, never really recovering from the schelacking he received in Rome. In the absence of Ronaldo and Tevez, and the return to a more rigid formation (be it 4231 or 442) he needed to chip in with more goals and dominance.
When Carrick plays well, United are sublime, but too often this season he was found wanting. Had he kicked on, and scored, say, 10 goals (including the penalty he missed at Turfmoor!) United probably would have won the Title, and may even be in a third consecutive Champions League final. But he did none of those things.
United have their own mini-Lampard in Darron Gibson, and I expect he will play more next season to produce more goals from midfield (because something tells me Carrick won’t). And Nani will hopefully be delivering the entire season, and Valencia will be more settled and should score more… but the truth is though, United need to find a backup for Rooney.
While Berbatov remains a useful member of the squad, he is not a direct backup to Rooney and necessitates a change in style. Macheda looks like he could be that backup (style-wise), but it all depends on how quickly he will perform and progresses. Ferguson may need to look for a stop-gap solution to the problem if the youngster isn’t ready for such responsibility.
Also, despite Valencia’s inflexibility, he’s had an excellent season and remains a superb out-ball for the team. His crosses have been part of why Rooney’s goal tally is so big.
Defensive stability is also important. I take your point, ZM, that not scoring enough cost them. But equally not having a stable defensive base for much of the season held them back as well. Off the top of my head having to play Fletcher at RB gave Ashley Young plenty of space from which to cross at Old Trafford, and Agbonlahor then swept behind Brown to head home. With Rio in there, Brown is out wide, so that goal probably would never have gone in and it’s likely United would have scored (once Villa took the lead their goal became charmed and no matter what United did they couldn’t break it down). And of course the 3-0 pantsing at Craven Cottage probably wouldn’t have happened if United had been able to actually play defenders and not two midfielders and a LB in a back three.
Muhammad, you are right in your assessment of Carrick’s importance, negative evidence of which we witnessed abundantly this season. However, he lost his form before the CL final last year – I think it coincided with the heavy defeat at OT against Liverpool (Vidic also took a long time to recover from this). In fact, over and above defensive injuries and loss of Ronaldo, I think the main reason for United not winning the league must be attributed to Carrick’s poor season. His role in that side is very, very important, and when he plays well he is very effective (although I think you should never expect him to notch ten goals in one season). Defensive injuries cost United before christmas, injured forwards in the latter stages. But injured/out-of-form midfielders cost them throughtout the season.
nah, while Vidic was certainly ruined between the two Liverpool visits to Old Trafford (he seriously regained his mojo after the 2-1 win this season) Carrick was fine after the 1-4, scoring the title-winning goal at Wigan – an example of why he SHOULD get around 10 goals a season – before being utterly pantsed by the three best players in the world at the same time in Rome. Poor guy.
The article is spot on.
To me, United are obviously missing versatility in forward play and creativity from midfield. Fergie should go for broke to bring in either David Silva or Yoann Gourcuff (or both if we’re selling a couple!). Silva would be my first choice as he is highly, highly versatile, able to play either wing or behind Rooney. He’s a tailor made replacement for Giggs in my opinion. Gourcuff would be great too. He would have the added value of free kick delivery, something United are severely lacking without Ronaldo, and with Giggs and Hargreaves only able to play sparingly.
Another interesting note was made at Manutd.com. We had the most corners in the league and only scored 2 of them. No doubt that has a lot to do with Vidic being injured so much this season, and, of course, Ronaldo being gone. Hargreaves will also help with his delivery if he is healthy next season.
Flexibility is not the problem. Lacking a 2nd goal threat is the main problem for United. In pass years, they have always 2 players that can score consistently, something that is seriously lacking this season as evident in that 2nd highest scorer for the team- own goals.
Flexibility is a plus not a necessity. Switching wingers is getting over rated. Even the best players have their preferred side. Ronaldo on the right, Messi on the left, Robben on the left, Ribery on the right, Silva on the left, Lennon on the right etc. Yes they are able to switch sides, but they always play better on their favored end of the pitch.
So much being talked about. Isn’t it very simple why United finished 2nd – Chelsea are a better team… way better than the 1 point margin suggests. And for all the talk about United missing key players, I just have one thing to say – Micheal Essien.