I'm still worried!!...

[desmondo]

It would be easy for those of us who don't agree with all of fergie's tactics to keep quiet right now after the wins against Barca and WH , but as I have said before , it's not about the results.

Right now we have won NOTHING , absolutely nothing at all and these two games were at OT. The honours will be dished out on the basis of what United do away from OT. You may laugh at me , but despite all the singing at OT and Fergies smiles I still think they are quite capable of blundering it all away by not being true to the very football that has brought them this far. Chelsea have a better away record than us and grind and fight like dogs to get results. We seem to want to leave it to the last 10 minutes of games when it gets desperate before we create chance after chance and score. This could easily have happened against Barca and could easily happen against Wigan if we try and play them on the break and sit back.

Last week against Chelsea , Anderson came off after a period when United were really coming into the game . So instead of driving at them and putting crosses into their box it was our box that came under pressure and it was Carrick who handballed when it could have been Essien. United would now be celebrating the Title. :rolleyes:

So , will everyone stop their "we win everything's fine , we lose then it's disaster" philosophy and look at what's really happening. It's been a long time since this team really did itself justice away from OT. Why? Because we have become passive impersonaters of negative teams that don't have our talent.

Ok , let's have the flak now!!!...........:eek:

[Keano4taoiseach]

I agree.

At times this seaon we have tried to play like Chelsea, e.g. against Chelsea last saturday, and it has been non-effective and only put extra pressure on the team.

Chelsea are programmed to defend and play defensive midfielders etc. It's not the United way.

Ferguson made one of the worst decisions of his career last saturday.

We went out and sat on our back-sides until they scored, then we attacked and forced them to concede, then we sit back again and eventually lost the match.

Against Chelsea, whenever we were behind, we were dominating the game :eek:

It was depressing to watch then as we resorted back to defending and showing know ambition when we equalised. That match was ours for the taking!!!!

Having said all of that, Fergie has gotten us to the CL final and one game away from retaining the League.

So, Trust in him not to make another ridiculous error. He is the master afterall. :)

[manutd004]

Well, if United win the double, then I guess Fergies decision of playing a slighlt weakened side against Chelsea was the right one.

I was slightly worried, but after the Barca and West Ham games I'm not anymore.

We are in the perfect position in the League at the moment, hoping that Chelsea will slip up against Newcastle but even if they don't, we are WELL capable of beating Wigan, no matter how hard it will be.

And then we have a 10 day break before the CL final, so the players will have plenty of time to rest up.

If we win the League, but don't win the CL, one excuse we can't make is tiredness.

[haggler]

sorry but if after the quality footie we have played all year we limp over the line in both i will be most chuffed l

[desmondo]

sorry but if after the quality footie we have played all year we limp over the line in both i will be most chuffed l
But limping over the line is risky isn't it. Why limp when you can run?

[manutd004]

But limping over the line is risky isn't it. Why limp when you can run?

Limping over the line is better than crashing.

[RedForceRising]

I agree to a certain extent, but once again, we played with quite a cavalier style last season and simply ran out of steam towards the end.

Fergie is not infaliable and has made mistakes in the past.

It's an interesting question, because in the past whenever we've not been true to ourselves we have been punished.

However, I still choose to trust Fergie, because he's got it right more often than not.

If we get it wrong in the last two games we will end the season empty-handed.

Then again, second in the league and finalist in the champions league ain't bad ey?

Seeing as our squad has a lot of youngsters.

Right now I'm more worried what I will do to Alan Wiley and that SOB of a linesman who gave that penalty against Carrick in the game against Chelsea. It hit his hand, but it was not a penalty.

[desmondo]

I agree to a certain extent, but once again, we played with quite a cavalier style last season and simply ran out of steam towards the end.

Fergie is not infaliable and has made mistakes in the past.

It's an interesting question, because in the past whenever we've not been true to ourselves we have been punished.

However, I still choose to trust Fergie, because he's got it right more often than not.

If we get it wrong in the last two games we will end the season empty-handed.

Then again, second in the league and finalist in the champions league ain't bad ey?

Seeing as our squad has a lot of youngsters.

Right now I'm more worried what I will do to Alan Wiley and that SOB of a linesman who gave that penalty against Carrick in the game against Chelsea. It hit his hand, but it was not a penalty.
I agree to a certain extent, but once again, we played with quite a cavalier style last season and simply ran out of steam towards the end.

...........I don't know about that , we won the league much more comfortably last season than it will be this season and it was the injuries in defence that cost us in the CL.

[Red Devil]

I too am in agreement with the sentiments of this thread, so far, sod all.

[manutd004]

Where have all the optimists gone? :rolleyes:

[desmondo]

Limping over the line is better than crashing.
You make the big mistake of thinking that playing negative is risk free and playing more aggressively is full of risks. Both have risks. I actually think there is more chance of us "crashing" if we give ground to teams and forget to pressurise the ball and allow balls to be slung/passed into our box. The way we slowly went into our shell trying to protect what we had (v chelsea) all lead up to the carrick penalty. The carrick penalty is evidence of the risks of sitting back and protecting what you have.

I would like to know what you mean by "crashing"? What is "crashing"? Where is the evidence that United have suffered this season (or any season) by playing positively and not sitting back? If you think that I (and those that think like me) believe United should go "gun ho" and be cavalier then trust me , we are not that naive. I see many teams pressing the ball and attacking who do really well with only half our talent and it's not cavalier it's just smart play.

If you give good teams time and space and possession they will normally hurt you. Barca had no cutting edge , Chelsea do. Some great coaches and teams have closed down opponents in midfield and tried to get possession of the ball and attack with great success. Look at how Italy came out of their shell in WC 2006.

[desmondo]

Where have all the optimists gone? :rolleyes:
I am the optimist , you are the pessimist. I believe United are better than Chelsea and in a toe - to -toe full on battle we will score more than them playing our brand of football . I am the optimist because I believe that United can impose their style and their football on a team as good as chelsea. You are pessimist because you seem to believe that we need to impersonate chelsea to win things and that United are not as good as I think they are.

I see no reason to allow any team to dictate to us how we should play . I think we should be b****ing well making other teams worry about us not vice versa . why? Because I am the optimist and I believe , you do not seem to. So why paint yourself as the optimist. The way we played against arsenal in the FA cup should be the way we play the next two games. If we do that we will have a much better chance than impersonating chelsea. So I ask you the same question , where have all the optimists gone?

[manutd004]

You make the big mistake of thinking that playing negative is risk free and playing more aggressively is full of risks. Both have risks. I actually think there is more chance of us "crashing" if we give ground to teams and forget to pressurise the ball and allow balls to be slung/passed into our box. The way we slowly went into our shell trying to protect what we had (v chelsea) all lead up to the carrick penalty. The carrick penalty is evidence of the risks of sitting back and protecting what you have.

I would like to know what you mean by "crashing"? What is "crashing"? Where is the evidence that United have suffered this season (or any season) by playing positively and not sitting back? If you think that I (and those that think like me) believe United should go "gun ho" and be cavalier then trust me , we are not that naive. I see many teams pressing the ball and attacking who do really well with only half our talent and it's not cavalier it's just smart play.

If you give good teams time and space and possession they will normally hurt you. Barca had no cutting edge , Chelsea do. Some great coaches and teams have closed down opponents in midfield and tried to get possession of the ball and attack with great success. Look at how Italy came out of their shell in WC 2006.

I never said that.

But you see, I would rather wait until the end of the season and judge Sir Alex's decisions then, and not with two games to go when we've still got the chance to win 2 trophies.

You were one of the people stating that the way United played in the first leg of the semi-final against Barca. We won the tie. So that means Sir Alex was right.

If United win the double, will you admit that Sir Alex's decisions were right all along?

I am the optimist , you are the pessimist. I believe United are better than Chelsea and in a toe - to -toe full on battle we will score more than them playing our brand of football . I am the optimist because I believe that United can impose their style and their football on a team as good as chelsea. You are pessimist because you seem to believe that we need to impersonate chelsea to win things and that United are not as good as I think they are.

I see no reason to allow any team to dictate to us how we should play . I think we should be b****ing well making other teams worry about us not vice versa . why? Because I am the optimist and I believe , you do not seem to. So why paint yourself as the optimist. The way we played against arsenal in the FA cup should be the way we play the next two games. If we do that we will have a much better chance than impersonating chelsea. So I ask you the same question , where have all the optimists gone?

I never said anything about the way we played. I also believe we are good enough to beat Chelsea (as I said in another thread.) And I have admitted in other threads their were mistakes made against Chelsea.

I just said that I would rather limp along, than crashing.

And if you saw my post after the Chelsea game, you would see that I said Sir Alex's decision to take off Anderson was wrong.

We won 4-1 today. Is that not attacking enough for you?

[desmondo]

I agree to a certain extent, but once again, we played with quite a cavalier style last season and simply ran out of steam towards the end.

Fergie is not infaliable and has made mistakes in the past.

It's an interesting question, because in the past whenever we've not been true to ourselves we have been punished.

However, I still choose to trust Fergie, because he's got it right more often than not.

If we get it wrong in the last two games we will end the season empty-handed.

Then again, second in the league and finalist in the champions league ain't bad ey?

Seeing as our squad has a lot of youngsters.

Right now I'm more worried what I will do to Alan Wiley and that SOB of a linesman who gave that penalty against Carrick in the game against Chelsea. It hit his hand, but it was not a penalty.
Right now I'm more worried what I will do to Alan Wiley and that SOB of a linesman who gave that penalty against Carrick in the game against Chelsea. It hit his hand, but it was not a penalty.

........But don't you see? We gave the initiative back to chelsea once we had got the goal and let them come on to us. We only have ourselves to blame. We'd be celebrating the title already if fergie had been a bit braver and the players had believed a bit more. Refs and linesmen give decisions like that , it's the risk you run if you allow teams to take the initiative. I watched the first chelsea goal again today , and if you look at it you will see that Drogba gets way too much time to cross the ball to Ballack. What was that about ? Why defend a header in your own box when you can defend against the cross? All it would have taken is for us to put more pressure on the ball , but the players seemd content to just watch chelsea play.

[antdevil78]

It would be easy for those of us who don't agree with all of fergie's tactics to keep quiet right now after the wins against Barca and WH , but as I have said before , it's not about the results. :

it is at the minute. i could handle two **** performances if it meant taking home the prem title and CL

[manutd004]

it is at the minute. i could handle two **** performances if it meant taking home the prem title and CL

So true.

[desmondo]

I never said that.

But you see, I would rather wait until the end of the season and judge Sir Alex's decisions then, and not with two games to go when we've still got the chance to win 2 trophies.

You were one of the people stating that the way United played in the first leg of the semi-final against Barca. We won the tie. So that means Sir Alex was right.

If United win the double, will you admit that Sir Alex's decisions were right all along?



I never said anything about the way we played. I also believe we are good enough to beat Chelsea (as I said in another thread.) And I have admitted in other threads their were mistakes made against Chelsea.

I just said that I would rather limp along, than crashing.

And if you saw my post after the Chelsea game, you would see that I said Sir Alex's decision to take off Anderson was wrong.

We won 4-1 today. Is that not attacking enough for you?
We won the tie. So that means Sir Alex was right.

If United win the double, will you admit that Sir Alex's decisions were right all along?

......why is it always about results? Teams can win things despite poor tactics as well as because of them. We won that tie by a whisker , one deflected shot in our box and goodnight moscow , against a team that was very low on confidence and on it's way out. I personally think that the Barca game could easily have been more comfortable and we showed them too much respect. I actually thought that roma were a better team.

[desmondo]

I never said that.

But you see, I would rather wait until the end of the season and judge Sir Alex's decisions then, and not with two games to go when we've still got the chance to win 2 trophies.

You were one of the people stating that the way United played in the first leg of the semi-final against Barca. We won the tie. So that means Sir Alex was right.

If United win the double, will you admit that Sir Alex's decisions were right all along?



I never said anything about the way we played. I also believe we are good enough to beat Chelsea (as I said in another thread.) And I have admitted in other threads their were mistakes made against Chelsea.

I just said that I would rather limp along, than crashing.

And if you saw my post after the Chelsea game, you would see that I said Sir Alex's decision to take off Anderson was wrong.

We won 4-1 today. Is that not attacking enough for you?
Maybe my optimists rant was misplaced if you thought that bringing on O shea was a poor decision.

[manutd004]

We won the tie. So that means Sir Alex was right.

If United win the double, will you admit that Sir Alex's decisions were right all along?

......why is it always about results? Teams can win things despite poor tactics as well as because of them. We won that tie by a whisker , one deflected shot in our box and goodnight moscow , against a team that was very low on confidence and on it's way out. I personally think that the Barca game could easily have been more comfortable and we showed them too much respect. I actually thought that roma were a better team.

Results bring silverware.

I too want to win in style. But winning the games left with poor performances won't mean we haven't won it in style.

[desmondo]

it is at the minute. i could handle two **** performances if it meant taking home the prem title and CL
So could I ...but that's hardly the point is it? The question we should ask ourselves is which kind of performances will give the best chance of good results. If you look at the season overall the evidence is there. I personally would be quite happy to see United play two of the most boring games ever if I thought that it was their best chance of winning the double , but then I look at the players we have and I find myself thinking that a negative approach is not our best chance. Do not think that I am not interested in results , I'm barmy about winning that's why I want us to be playing in our opponents half rather than taking photos of the other team and putting in last ditch tackles in our own box. My God man , don't you get all twitchy when United start playing like Sven's England?

Results bring silverware.

I too want to win in style. But winning the games left with poor performances won't mean we haven't won it in style.
....it's not about style it's about effectiveness. United are a far more effective team when they come out of their shell and contest possession and take the initiative in a game at a higher tempo. I'm not that interested in pretty football. Barcelona are a joke of a team to have that much possession and not score. Pretty triangles but crap. The same reason why arsenal faded away.

This team are set up to attack and pass the ball fluidly and quickly and put other teams (any team) under pressure. We are just soooooooo much better and effective when we do that. Attack really is the best form of defence.

[sparkic]

For me tactics has never been a problem...just the selection of squad in the Chelsea game...like already stated the Anderson off for O'Shea was also fustrating for me

[moondog]

Since this subject has been brought up again - I would like to inject something into the conversation.

I coached hockey at a fairly high level in Canada - though obviously a few stratospheres below the level of the EPL. The two sports are very, very similar in terms of the various strategies and styles of play. My experience has shown me that all teams have an identity and usually that identity reflects the coach or manager. Some teams are fast, some are physical, some are hard to breakdown while others play a more wide open or attacking style. Importantly, you tend to select players for a team based on that identity.

The bottom line is, once you have an identity, it is extraordinarily difficult to change it. If you do succeed, it is even more difficult to change it back.

What I have seen this season is exactly that. For years SAF has searched for a tried and true method for success in the CL. He has seen teams like milan and even liverpool reach the promised land by sitting back, absorbing pressure and
strategically playing for draws when the situation calls for it. The problem is, that is not United's identity. United typically have never sat back and do not play for draws.

Players - regardless of their good intentions to 'buy in' to the system - do not react well to fundamental changes of this sort. Milan had success because they stuck to their identity. They play the same way in serie a.

We have seen this kind of attempted metamorphosis at United this season, and it has been diffcult. It really hit home to me after the two roma qf ties. We had not been outplayed or dominated by anybody previously. From the roma games on, it was happening all too frequently. And when United needed to change back to their real identity (i.e. when they went behind) you could see how hard it was to regain the attacking mentality.

Many have tried, few have succeeded.

SAF is a genious, and he will likely pull off the impossible - to change a team's identity and somehow be able to change it back, with success.

[yangch0000]

i am no good at writing long essays.
i would just say that even at fergie's age, he is still learning. the success in europe has eluded him for the past 20 yrs. the emergence of benitez brought new considerations into his strategy. it is no secret that benitez has been successful in europe, even with some of the ppl saying that he has been riding his luck, but his track record says he is doing something right.
we can see the change in tactics in europe compared to past seasons. we are playing more cautiously, and we attack when we smell blood, we sit back and absorb the pressure a lot of the time. it is not that the team or fergie does not want to go out and attack the opposition, it is because this strategy has only won him one european trophy, and quite miraculously. it is because fergie now realise that strong offence can win you league titles, but it is strong defence which will win u european titles.

so, i am saying that fergie has gotten it right in europe this season, we only conceded one goal in the knockout stage so far, and we got into the final. however, the same tactic cannot be applied to league football. there is no away goal rule, a goal is a goal in league.

but i have to defend fergie for sending out a weakened team against chelsea, beacause we also have to take into consideration of the energy level of the players. we played on wednesday night against barcelona, and played chelsea on saturday noon. so the players had only one day rest as they trained in barcelona on thursday before coming back. and we had to play barcelona again in three days time on tuesday night the following week. so fergie had to change his team, he simply cant play the same team for three straight matches. and against chelsea, without our offensive players on the field, fergie decided to defend the 1-1 result, with the game against barcelona in mind and the fact that we still have a three pts lead over chelsea and a significant goal difference, which was a great result to come out with given the circumstances, and fergie trusted his defence to withstand the pressure from chelsea. and from the moment onwards when we decided to defend, if not for carrick to give that penalty away, chelsea hardly had any clear cut chances to threaten the goal from then onwards.

ppl would say that we look better when we are trying to attack the opposition, and i totally agree with that. with the attacking talents we have, we shld have attack every opposition, when the attacking players are on the field. against chelsea, we didnt have a fully fit rooney, a tired team who hardly had any rest before the game and had travelled some distance. so i believe, given any other day, under different circumstances, we would have broken chelsea home record. but clearly, on that day, european commitment has costed us abit.
however, before the match, when i saw the teamsheet against chelsea, i still have the confidence that we can defeat chelsea with that team, however, we showed too much respect to chelsea, and it backfired.

some ppl might also want to compare our team selection against chelsea's. chelsea pretty much played with the same team over the three matches. but we have to look at chelsea's schedule over the two weeks. chelsea played everton on friday night before the first leg with liverpool on tuesday night, which will give their team enough rest. and they play us on saturday noon, and then on wednesday night against liverpool. so compared to us, they had one extra day of rest before every big match, and also, they did not have to travel to spain to play against a foreign team.

so, my point here is that we shld stick to our attacking philosophy, send out our best attacking talents, when we can afford to do so, but we have to cope and make changes when certain circumstances does not allow us to do so.

[versa]

This posting has absolutely got nothing to do with the West Ham game, which we kept a positive approach throughout, expressed and enjoyed ourselves, and thus got the outcome we richly deserved. And I am just as happy as everybody else in this forum...........

....it's not about style it's about effectiveness. United are a far more effective team when they come out of their shell and contest possession and take the initiative in a game at a higher tempo. I'm not that interested in pretty football. Barcelona are a joke of a team to have that much possession and not score. Pretty triangles but crap. The same reason why arsenal faded away.

This team are set up to attack and pass the ball fluidly and quickly and put other teams (any team) under pressure. We are just soooooooo much better and effective when we do that. Attack really is the best form of defence.

Effectiveness is indeed the key, style or no style. Getting a result ineffectively is only good enough for that game but may not be good enough for other games or a healthy approach down the road and beyond.

And some members said it is not the tactic but the performances of the players that let the team down occasionally. Really? Playing Rooney at the wings or leaving Ronaldo all by himself with much unwanted company is of course going to dull and blunt our cutting edge upfront. That is tactic and also clearly betrays the real intention. And the end result would of course be Rooney defending together with his team mates as one unit till the final whistle instead of him running at and striking fear into the hearts of our opponents.

But we now seem to be celebrating results, never mind the performances. Who cares about the performance, approach or tactic seems to be the order of the day amongst fans; we live for the day. Throwing away a 5-point cushion is ok as long as we nick it in the last game; everything is still hunkie dorie. Giving away the ball shamefully from start to end at Nou Camp is perfectly ok too as long as we have won the tie in the end so Fergie must be right and no question should be asked. But how long can we thrive by getting by? Is the closing of gap by rival teams not a concern at all?

The more worrying thing is actually this attitude and approach of the team and the fans for the immediate future and thereafter.

We always pride ourselves as the team that play the "attractive brand of attacking football" and gleefully joined others to scorn at Mourinho-led Chelski for playing negative, boring, result-oriented and unattractive football, even as they won back-to-back EPL titles not too long ago. We also scorned at teams from other leagues eg Italian teams for playing defensive football, especially when away.

But are we slowly heading down the same direction that we scorned at? Are we degenerating in our approach and thought process, slowly and surely but not that obvious yet, as we seem to slowly starting to lose some self-belief and confidence, and thus starting to get 'tactical' and 'play it safe' like in Nou Camp or in Stamford Bridge when we had no reason to give back the initiative to merely try to 'secure' a draw? Are we going to be a Mourinho-styled United in time to come as we get more 'tactical' and 'safe'? Will you be happy or just glad? As United fan? As a football fan?

I would rather we play to our strength always, play to win with our massive firepower that we actually possess than to be 'tactical' about it and defend for dear life to avoid defeats. That is not our strength; we are not Italians. And certainly far from being positive or healthy at all. It is not being naive as expounded in previous threads that we are just putting ourselves at more risks in actual fact. 'Accidents' are more likely to happen against us than for us if the ball keeps flying into our box rather than in the oppposite box. We will never beat Arsenal 4-0 again like we did with a containing approach rather than with a conquering approach, showing clearly who's Boss and who they are succumbing to.

I still prefer us to lose an odd game while taking the game to the opponents, showing them what we are made up of. At least we can remain optimistic about our approach and 'tactic', maintain our self-belief and confidence, giving self-doubt no chance or whatsoever to seep through to destroy us silently but psychologically for the next games and much beyond. This could well be the reason why we are still around at this level after all these years.

Call me a paranoid, but I do share Desmondo's concerns for United. Let’s hope we are truly paranoid and that subtle negative influences are not already starting to rear its ugly head, perhaps not prominently yet in this season or next...

Oh, heaven forbids.

P.S. Even if we win the Double this season, it does not change the concerns mentioned for the future.

[RedForceRising]

... fergie does not want to go out and attack the opposition, it is because this strategy has only won him one european trophy, and quite miraculously. it is because fergie now realise that strong offence can win you league titles, but it is strong defence which will win u european titles.

so, i am saying that fergie has gotten it right in europe this season,
so, my point here is that we shld stick to our attacking philosophy, send out our best attacking talents, when we can afford to do so, but we have to cope and make changes when certain circumstances does not allow us to do so.

What a good post!

It sums up what a lot of different posts have been trying to say.

In the league, when we can we should play to our stregths, which is too attack. But when we have injured attacking players and a busy schedule then surely the manager has to make changes.

And as you pointed out, in Europe Fergie's approach in the past has back-fired and it's OK for him to try something new and check it out, he was right to do so.

We've lost many matches in Europe we should have won against Dortmund, Leverkusen, Porto and Monaco.

There only thing I can fault Fergie for is non-tactical, which is not buying a classic Nr 9 centre forward at the beginning of the season or in the January window.




The more worrying thing is actually this atitude and approach of the team and the fans for the immediate future and thereafter.

We always pride ourselves as the team that play the "attractive brand of attacking football" and gleefully joined others to scorn at Mourinho-led Chelski for playing negative, boring, result-oriented and unattractive football, even as they won back-to-back EPL titles not too long ago. We also scorned at teams from other leagues eg Italian teams for playing defensive football, especially when away.

But are we slowly heading down the same direction that we scorned at?

I still prefer us to lose an odd game while taking the game to the opponents, showing them what we are made up of. At least we can remain optimistic about our approach and 'tactic', maintain our self-belief and confidence, giving self-doubt no chance or whatsoever to seep through to destroy us silently but psychologically for the next games and much beyond. This could well be the reason why we are still around at this level after all these years.

Call me a paranoid, but I do share Desmondo's concerns for United. Let’s hope we are truly paranoid and that subtle negative influences are not already starting to rear its ugly head, perhaps not prominently yet in this season or next...

Oh, heaven forbids.

Another great post. Lots to think about.

I think it is important to remember that necessity is the mother f all invention and that Ferguson probably thought it would be best to Play Ronaldo upfront, because quite honestly he was quit anonymous last season against the big teams in the CL when he was on the wings.

The broader issue address is very important, but as we have shown on numerous occasions this season, we attack whenever we can.

Against Barca, we were perhaps too ridiculously defensive to a point where it could have becomedangerous for us, but honestly, their players are so good on the ball that if we had given them the space they could have finished us.

Once our players start to attack they don't stop, so Fergie probably didn't want to give out any mixed signals, but made them adhere very strictly to his game plan.

Players are always going to try and nick a goal, so he told the back 4 to stay behind the half way line at all times and play a more "catenaccio" style of football.

I know what you;re saying about substance/identity vs results.

But if you're in a tie over two legs in a tournament, I think Fergie is entitled to try something different, because his past experience has led him to believe that a different approach is necessary.

Having said that, if we had a Drogba or Torres, we might be playing differently in Europe, so I think it boils down to Fergi doing what he thinks is necessary with the resources that he has.

[carlyluvsunited]

......why is it always about results ?

That's a hell of a funny question ... :rolleyes:

If you win games you win trophies.

If you lose games you fade to oblivion.

The way you write these things makes the whole scenario look bad.

Simple fact ... In the Champs League if you draw away ...

And win at home you will make the final - FACT !!

Fergie went to Barca with 2 wishes. Don't concede a goal and don't lose the
game !

He got 2 out of 2 ...

He went to Chelsea and as I said before ... he tried a cheeky move.

Rest four of his best players .... then slip into The Bridge, grab the point that
would all but make us Champions and then get home again !

Now that was risky, that was brave, that took big balls to do that !!!

He was 4 minutes away from achieving it too ... :eek:

But despite this ...

He got us to Moscow !!!

He will win the Premier League again next week ... Number TEN !!!

ALL BY ACHIEVING RESULTS - BY WHATEVER MEANS HE DEEMS NECESSARY !!!

I trust Fergie implicitly ! If he chooses to have us defend for 90 minutes to
achieve a result which will benefit us in the future ... then way to go Fergie, I'm
with you !!!

If he chooses to play defensively to try and rest players for The CL ... and get a
point too at The Bridge .... well it's unusual, it's madness, it's also brave and
risky - but if he feels it's right ... then way to go Fergie, I'm with you on that too !!

Sure it is lovely to watch all the free-flowing, fast attacking football ... but he has
one, yes ONE Champions League Final to his name in 22 years and that's just
not good enough !!!... He feels a NEED to win this again ... the guy is running
out of time so this year he has tried a different approach in his desperation to
double his wins in this competition.

He is now one game away from winning it again !!! Oh and Premier Title
number TEN !!! ......and still they complain !!!!

[versa]

I know what you;re saying about substance/identity vs results.

Yes, that is a controversial one.

Even if it works for us in this CL, there is no guarantee that it is The Formula and will win us next term. Just look at Liverpool. Why can't they win the CL again under the same manager employing the same strategy? Is it sustainable?

For this season at least, the reason is apparent - subtance/quality matters too. Chelsea is just too strong for them to handle. And if we are going to give Chelsea the initiative like we did at Stamford Bridge, they will overpower us too. It would be most sad because we know we can more than match them if we really have a go at them, force for force, power for power.

I don't know about others but I firmly believe we could have beaten Barca both home and away, given their not-so-great defence and our firepower. I firmly believe we could have sealed the title at Stamford Bridge if we had not surrendered our initiative and kept up the pressure after the equaliser. It is precisely this why-can't-we-believe-a-bit-more-in-ourselves agony that lingers and caused me to wonder what is happening and what may happen.

I sometimes can't help but reminisce about our golden 90s. Not just the achievements alone but that we always attempt to overpower opppositions by strutting our stuff and taking the game to them. Perhaps times, quality and oppositions have changed, but the psychology and mental approach need not.

And for quality, I believe that our current quality is good enough for us to win things.

[Keano!]

Its what football does......destroys your nerves!


We've got the advantage and two more wins = two nice shiny trophy's!

I'm almost 100% sure that we've got the league wrapped up.

Should we somehow blow the league title away, I'll be looking back on Reading
(h), West Ham (a) and Middlesbrough (a).

I seriously doubt we'll loose to Wigan and I doubt Chelski will beat bot Newcastle
and Bolton....



Lets show optimism and support the team as we close in on a magnificent
double!

[fazman]

It would be easy for those of us who don't agree with all of fergie's tactics to keep quiet right now after the wins against Barca and WH , but as I have said before , it's not about the results.

Right now we have won NOTHING , absolutely nothing at all and these two games were at OT. The honours will be dished out on the basis of what United do away from OT. You may laugh at me , but despite all the singing at OT and Fergies smiles I still think they are quite capable of blundering it all away by not being true to the very football that has brought them this far. Chelsea have a better away record than us and grind and fight like dogs to get results. We seem to want to leave it to the last 10 minutes of games when it gets desperate before we create chance after chance and score. This could easily have happened against Barca and could easily happen against Wigan if we try and play them on the break and sit back.

Last week against Chelsea , Anderson came off after a period when United were really coming into the game . So instead of driving at them and putting crosses into their box it was our box that came under pressure and it was Carrick who handballed when it could have been Essien. United would now be celebrating the Title. :rolleyes:

So , will everyone stop their "we win everything's fine , we lose then it's disaster" philosophy and look at what's really happening. It's been a long time since this team really did itself justice away from OT. Why? Because we have become passive impersonaters of negative teams that don't have our talent.

Ok , let's have the flak now!!!...........:eek:


Have to agree with your comment on the chelsea game I believe it was taking anderson off that cost us that match . I can only presume he is carrying a injury because he hasnt seen a minute since .

[desmondo]

Yes, that is a controversial one.

Even if it works for us in this CL, there is no guarantee that it is The Formula and will win us next term. Just look at Liverpool. Why can't they win the CL again under the same manager employing the same strategy? Is it sustainable?

For this season at least, the reason is apparent - subtance/quality matters too. Chelsea is just too strong for them to handle. And if we are going to give Chelsea the initiative like we did at Stamford Bridge, they will overpower us too. It would be most sad because we know we can more than match them if we really have a go at them, force for force, power for power.

I don't know about others but I firmly believe we could have beaten Barca both home and away, given their not-so-great defence and our firepower. I firmly believe we could have sealed the title at Stamford Bridge if we had not surrendered our initiative and kept up the pressure after the equaliser. It is precisely this why-can't-we-believe-a-bit-more-in-ourselves agony that lingers and caused me to wonder what is happening and what may happen.

I sometimes can't help but reminisce about our golden 90s. Not just the achievements alone but that we always attempt to overpower opppositions by strutting our stuff and taking the game to them. Perhaps times, quality and oppositions have changed, but the psychology and mental approach need not.

And for quality, I believe that our current quality is good enough for us to win things.
I don't know about others but I firmly believe we could have beaten Barca both home and away, given their not-so-great defence and our firepower. I firmly believe we could have sealed the title at Stamford Bridge if we had not surrendered our initiative and kept up the pressure after the equaliser. It is precisely this why-can't-we-believe-a-bit-more-in-ourselves agony that lingers and caused me to wonder what is happening and what may happen.

That's how I feel. Everyone will say we are wrong because we may end up winning the double anyway. But I seriously don't think it needed to be as close as all this. Fergie may pull it off , he may not. The outcome is not as relevant as people think because you can only play a match once. If there was a parallel universe in which United had taken the initiative in these games and had beaten chelsea and thumped barca 3-0 then we would then know that playing negative was not the right way to go. The problem is we can't know this.

What a good post!

It sums up what a lot of different posts have been trying to say.

In the league, when we can we should play to our stregths, which is too attack. But when we have injured attacking players and a busy schedule then surely the manager has to make changes.

And as you pointed out, in Europe Fergie's approach in the past has back-fired and it's OK for him to try something new and check it out, he was right to do so.

We've lost many matches in Europe we should have won against Dortmund, Leverkusen, Porto and Monaco.

There only thing I can fault Fergie for is non-tactical, which is not buying a classic Nr 9 centre forward at the beginning of the season or in the January window.



Another great post. Lots to think about.

I think it is important to remember that necessity is the mother f all invention and that Ferguson probably thought it would be best to Play Ronaldo upfront, because quite honestly he was quit anonymous last season against the big teams in the CL when he was on the wings.

The broader issue address is very important, but as we have shown on numerous occasions this season, we attack whenever we can.

Against Barca, we were perhaps too ridiculously defensive to a point where it could have becomedangerous for us, but honestly, their players are so good on the ball that if we had given them the space they could have finished us.

Once our players start to attack they don't stop, so Fergie probably didn't want to give out any mixed signals, but made them adhere very strictly to his game plan.

Players are always going to try and nick a goal, so he told the back 4 to stay behind the half way line at all times and play a more "catenaccio" style of football.

I know what you;re saying about substance/identity vs results.

But if you're in a tie over two legs in a tournament, I think Fergie is entitled to try something different, because his past experience has led him to believe that a different approach is necessary.

Having said that, if we had a Drogba or Torres, we might be playing differently in Europe, so I think it boils down to Fergi doing what he thinks is necessary with the resources that he has.
Against Barca, we were perhaps too ridiculously defensive to a point where it could have becomedangerous for us, but honestly, their players are so good on the ball that if we had given them the space they could have finished us.

..........this is a very interesting point. I'm not against being defensive per se. But in both Barca games we DID actually give them space as well as possession and instead relied upon our defence to make last minute challenges. If you look at how Barca pressed the ball and tried to nick possessiion back off us and then compare that with how we stood off in midfield (minimum 5 yards away) then you may understand my frustration. I'm a massive fan of teams putting pressure on the ball rather than defending basket ball fashion. Some of our midfielders might as well have not been there because we just stood off and let them pass round us. Dangerous!

[dlan4327]

I know what you mean about being true to our brand of football but frankly we did that last season and it got us all the way to the semi's just so we could experience what it's like to get spanked at the San Siro. Europe just doesn't favour attacking football. You may talk about Barcelona back in 2006 but even they had an appreciation of defence in their own way. They knew how to dominate possession which in a way is defence.

Also they had Ronaldinho at the height of his powers. Whoever had Ronaldinho at that time was always going to win. One last thing people might be tempted to say well we have Ronaldo now but, with all due respect, Ronaldo now is nowhere near Ronaldinho then.

P.S. Could someone explain why Keano4Taoiseach's avatar? I was just getting used to the fat shirtless man and now I have to come to terms with the well built shirtless man. Seems kinda random.

[versa]

I know what you mean about being true to our brand of football but frankly we did that last season and it got us all the way to the semi's just so we could experience what it's like to get spanked at the San Siro. Europe just doesn't favour attacking football. You may talk about Barcelona back in 2006 but even they had an appreciation of defence in their own way. They knew how to dominate possession which in a way is defence.

Also they had Ronaldinho at the height of his powers. Whoever had Ronaldinho at that time was always going to win. One last thing people might be tempted to say well we have Ronaldo now but, with all due respect, Ronaldo now is nowhere near Ronaldinho then.

P.S. Could someone explain why Keano4Taoiseach's avatar? I was just getting used to the fat shirtless man and now I have to come to terms with the well built shirtless man. Seems kinda random.

He is not impersonating FU's identity to break the double registration rule. Just his body would do. :D ;)

[desmondo]

I know what you mean about being true to our brand of football but frankly we did that last season and it got us all the way to the semi's just so we could experience what it's like to get spanked at the San Siro. Europe just doesn't favour attacking football. You may talk about Barcelona back in 2006 but even they had an appreciation of defence in their own way. They knew how to dominate possession which in a way is defence.

Also they had Ronaldinho at the height of his powers. Whoever had Ronaldinho at that time was always going to win. One last thing people might be tempted to say well we have Ronaldo now but, with all due respect, Ronaldo now is nowhere near Ronaldinho then.

P.S. Could someone explain why Keano4Taoiseach's avatar? I was just getting used to the fat shirtless man and now I have to come to terms with the well built shirtless man. Seems kinda random.
In some ways it's not so much about attacking football v defensive football but it's more about passive football v proactive football. I don't have a major problem with United playing on the break so much if there is more urgency to press the ball and get opponents to make mistakes. Where I really struggle is when I see the opposition looking far too comfortable in possession and gaining confidence by passing it around with ease right to the edge of our box. That to me is both defensive and passive . What I want United to do is defend aggressively in midefield as a team by pressing the ball more often and putting the other team under pressure. I did not see that at the Nou Camp or the Bridge.

[pass_me_a_rizla]

Where have all the optimists gone? :rolleyes:

they are being balanced out by the pesstimists.

[Jazz 16]

I can see a lot of valid points and good posts in this thread but if we win
the double then I wouldnt be too worried about the style of our play or
tactics in the future.(because clearly they would have worked)
The Wigan game is away and we will more than likely HAVE to go out and win
it so Fergie will be playing 2 up top and going for it in style. Im sure of it.

The game against Chelsea is a different matter altogether. Its one we must win
but I can see fergie playing 'negatively' or playing 4-5-1.
Whether thats the right thing to do or not ramins to be seen.
We have to wait for the result to judge that one.

If we do end up winning the double I couldnt care less how it happens as long
as it happens.
As some have said before we have won nothing yet but to be in this position
at this stage of the season is very satisfying.
If we win the next 2 games we are champs of England and Europe.
Happy days.

[versa]

they are being balanced out by the pesstimists.

I don't believe there are any serious pessismist in a United fan. We are not supporters of some struggling clubs on the wrong end of the table or League. Lol.

They are only realists or pragmatists that say it as it is, genuinely concerned, see both sides of things and have their feet firmly on the ground. That does not mean that they think United will win nothing or will never win anything. None of the posts ever mentioned that!

And if you indeed have been following related threads, you will read that the 'moaners' are actually more positive than the optimists! Because they actually believe that we are better than most of us think, can do better and should have sealed the title by now, instead of looking forward to the next game or next result to be in our favour or as our comfort pillow. Lol.

But as Jazz, the Angel, pointed out rightly too, if we sweep the Double, all are as elated and ecstatic. Although winning is one thing, other issues of concerns raised are quite another for our immediate future and beyond, and should not be conveniently swept under the carpet too.

[RedForceRising]

..........this is a very interesting point. I'm not against being defensive per se. But in both Barca games we DID actually give them space as well as possession and instead relied upon our defence to make last minute challenges. If you look at how Barca pressed the ball and tried to nick possessiion back off us and then compare that with how we stood off in midfield (minimum 5 yards away) then you may understand my frustration. I'm a massive fan of teams putting pressure on the ball rather than defending basket ball fashion. Some of our midfielders might as well have not been there because we just stood off and let them pass round us. Dangerous!

Erm..we gave them space, but it was limited. The midfield stayed ahead of the back four so their back line couldn;t advance too much and our defenders very seldom went past the half way line. In the first leg they only did so a few times a game.

In the second leg Evra and Hargreaves were a little bit more adventerous but not by much.

If Rooney were fit, I think we might have been a bit more attacking, but he wasn;t so Fergie did what he thought was right.

I think we have to remember the factors that Fergie has to balance out.

No Vidic, 3 new members in the team in Hargreaves, Tevez and Nani. Only one fit striker. Ronaldo's tendency to be marked out of the big European games, our poor performances in Milan last season and other past European failures.

Could we have won it away and home, by being our swash-bucling selves? Maybe. But I think Fergi is a better judge than any of us and the job has been done.

Against Chelski in the final where there obviously no 2nd leg, I'm hoping to see a more aggresive tactic, because as you have pointed I fancy that with a full team including Ronaldo, Vidic and Rooney, we could win against them.

It will be interesting to see who plays in midfield, because if Vidic is fit, I think Brown will play on the right and Hargreaves will partner Scholes and Ronaldo in midfield.

Hopefully Rooney and Tevez will start. I think he might let Giggs start, but forgive me, I hope he starts with Park. Based on form and energy, he would be more effective than Giggsy.

[desmondo]

Erm..we gave them space, but it was limited. The midfield stayed ahead of the back four so their back line couldn;t advance too much and our defenders very seldom went past the half way line. In the first leg they only did so a few times a game.

In the second leg Evra and Hargreaves were a little bit more adventerous but not by much.

If Rooney were fit, I think we might have been a bit more attacking, but he wasn;t so Fergie did what he thought was right.

I think we have to remember the factors that Fergie has to balance out.

No Vidic, 3 new members in the team in Hargreaves, Tevez and Nani. Only one fit striker. Ronaldo's tendency to be marked out of the big European games, our poor performances in Milan last season and other past European failures.

Could we have won it away and home, by being our swash-bucling selves? Maybe. But I think Fergi is a better judge than any of us and the job has been done.

Against Chelski in the final where there obviously no 2nd leg, I'm hoping to see a more aggresive tactic, because as you have pointed I fancy that with a full team including Ronaldo, Vidic and Rooney, we could win against them.

It will be interesting to see who plays in midfield, because if Vidic is fit, I think Brown will play on the right and Hargreaves will partner Scholes and Ronaldo in midfield.

Hopefully Rooney and Tevez will start. I think he might let Giggs start, but forgive me, I hope he starts with Park. Based on form and energy, he would be more effective than Giggsy.
Space ? We gave them a heck of a lot more space than they gave us!! They pressed us hard every time we had possession and did not stand off. They consistently managed to nick the ball off us as we tried to pass it and build attacks especially in the 1st leg. "Pressing" the ball and closing down opponents as a team is something that I have seen some very good talented teams do very successfully in the past. What I often see United do is mark space rather than players and shuffle around sideways allowing other teams to pass the ball around in the middle of our half. It's what I call basketball/netball defending because it looks as if it's against the rules to tackle a player. Sven used this form of defending with England and in Portugal 2004 got found out by sitting too deep and conceding possession.

If pressing the ball was good enough for the likes of Barca then why not for us? I have never understood it. My thoughts on this is that you should make it as hard as possible for your opponents to thread passes together and hold on to possession. You should always try to make it as hard for your opponents when they have the ball as they are making it for you.

I think Barca were a really poor and ineffective team at creating chances from possession. Chelsea will not be (and already haven't been) so wasteful. If we take photos of chelsea whilst they come on to us they will win. We have to contest possession of the ball and get closer to their players. If we had done that at the bridge Drogba would never have had the time to look up and cross for Ballack.

[RedForceRising]

If pressing the ball was good enough for the likes of Barca then why not for us? I have never understood it. My thoughts on this is that you should make it as hard as possible for your opponents to thread passes together and hold on to possession. You should always try to make it as hard for your opponents when they have the ball as they are making it for you.

I think Barca were a really poor and ineffective team at creating chances from possession. Chelsea will not be (and already haven't been) so wasteful. If we take photos of chelsea whilst they come on to us they will win. We have to contest possession of the ball and get closer to their players. If we had done that at the bridge Drogba would never have had the time to look up and cross for Ballack.

Dude.... they were ineffective at creating chances, because of the way we played!
If we had pressed and tackled like you suggested, the likes of Iniesta, Xavi and Messi, would have zipped past any outstretched leg.

In the first leg it happened to Evra, Brwon and Scholes.

They are so quick with the ball that if one of our players were to make a challenge, they would just have to flick the ball away and there;s the free kick.

I used to represent my high school in football, it is reallly, really tough to defend against players who are good with the ball. If you tackle them, you must be 100% accurate, otherwise they're past you or you give away a foul and might get carded.

I agree that this style should not be necessary against the likes of Chelsea, but I'm going to be comfortable with Fergie's decision.

And for the record, we have been very entertaining this season and we are 2 to 3 times more entertaining than Chelsea or Liverpool, so if fergie thinks there are certain games where being entertaining is going to get us killed, than damn it, he's right!

Peace!

edited - ...because as I was writing Barcelona put three past Valencia. Barca haven;t managed to win in something like 8-9 games, but if you let them, they WILL take you from behind. Granted Valencia's form is horrendous, but they have decent players, so I'm ok with Fergie making the team play ugly once in a while. I have no fear that it will be permanent, because we have played beautiful football all season, second only to Arsenal AND we're on top of the table.

[bryan cherrett]

i really do wonder how negative we can be...for most of the teams their season is already finished,like the scousers but we have two final games and if we win them we will be celebrating a double...thanks sir alex and keep going

[sweet fa]

in all honesty this team is still in the making,when chelsea won the league in 05 every football fan in the premier league thought they would dominate for at least 5 years before anybody got near them well fergie somehow stopped them at 2 titles.
utd have improved as a squad again this season but we have got a couple of glaring weaknesse's ,firstly we need a striker who can spearhead utds attack with a physical prescence and secondly we need a quality right back because that position is a big weakness at the moment.wes brown is a decent squad player to have but he makes far too many mistakes to be a first choice player and i have always said that of him.
fergie will improve the team again in the summer and if he gets it right utd will be dominateing for a couple more years,by the way i can't see utd failing to win the premier league this year not from this position.

[burnzy1987]

we just need to be cautious and not take anything for granted!

both games are winnable.....but i for once will be pooing my pants if we dont get an early goal in either...

[manutd004]

I know what you mean about being true to our brand of football but frankly we did that last season and it got us all the way to the semi's just so we could experience what it's like to get spanked at the San Siro. Europe just doesn't favour attacking football. You may talk about Barcelona back in 2006 but even they had an appreciation of defence in their own way. They knew how to dominate possession which in a way is defence.

Also they had Ronaldinho at the height of his powers. Whoever had Ronaldinho at that time was always going to win. One last thing people might be tempted to say well we have Ronaldo now but, with all due respect, Ronaldo now is nowhere near Ronaldinho then.

This is a very good point, one which I totally agree with.

I can see a lot of valid points and good posts in this thread but if we win
the double then I wouldnt be too worried about the style of our play or
tactics in the future.(because clearly they would have worked)
The Wigan game is away and we will more than likely HAVE to go out and win
it so Fergie will be playing 2 up top and going for it in style. Im sure of it.

The game against Chelsea is a different matter altogether. Its one we must win
but I can see fergie playing 'negatively' or playing 4-5-1.
Whether thats the right thing to do or not ramins to be seen.
We have to wait for the result to judge that one.

If we do end up winning the double I couldnt care less how it happens as long
as it happens.
As some have said before we have won nothing yet but to be in this position
at this stage of the season is very satisfying.
If we win the next 2 games we are champs of England and Europe.
Happy days.

This is a great point as well. In finals (of course, the last Prem game is a 'final' as we could win the Prem at the end of it) playing attacking, 'gung-ho' football doesn't necessarily get the result, as 'negative football' as some people put it, doesn't wield the desired result either. But whatever we decide to play, as long as we win I couldn't care less at this point :p.

I don't have a major problem with United playing on the break so much if there is more urgency to press the ball and get opponents to make mistakes. Where I really struggle is when I see the opposition looking far too comfortable in possession and gaining confidence by passing it around with ease right to the edge of our box.

What I want United to do is defend aggressively in midefield as a team by pressing the ball more often and putting the other team under pressure

Mate, I misunderstood you. I understand what you mean now. I thought you meant we should go out every game no matter what and throw players forward at will. :rolleyes:

But yeah, that point annoys me too, but its the way we seem to always play, no matter who we play. In the squad, the only players who seem to press the ball in midfield or up front are Park, Tevez, Fletcher, Anderson and Hargreaves (although Hargreaves has been playing RB recently.)

I do feel that we need to press more and put the opposition under pressure too. That is why I felt we needed Anderson on instead of O'Shea. Not only did O'Shea mean we sat back, but, not only does Anderson press, adds bite to the midfield and challenge to try to win the ball, but he has the abilty to take the ball forward when we do counter. That is why in the CL final I would play a central 3 in midfield of Scholes, Carrick and Anderson with Tevez and Ronaldo supporting Rooney. (I previously wanted Park to play. If we played the Pool I would say Park, but I feel he will be bullied by Chelsea's physical play)

Quick on the counter, plenty of men forward and pressure on the ball. Thats what I think we need to play to beat Chelsea.

P.S Sorry for the misunderstanding. ;)

[carlyluvsunited]

"United's trademark style of attacking football !!"

How many times have we ... gone through the league stages quite easily ?

Quite often as it happens ... average teams so we kick their butts ...

Then on to the last 32, 16 and 8 ...

Last 8 is where we always seem to finish up without too many problems ...

Then the problems start !!!

Lst 8 game is dependant on who we draw ... we may/may not win.

And as for the semi finals ... :rolleyes:

This kind of 'Cavalier' style of football is rubbish !!

It beats the teams in the Prem League ... As can be seen by Fergie's 10 Titles !

But as soon as we have come face to face with Europe's 'Big Guys' ...

They spank our bottom and send us home !!!

Fergie changes the tactics .... and now we make the final !!!! :eek:

Read into that what you will ... :o

[dckyfoxes]

At the moment... we should stay positive... We have a game away to Wigan, let's take it to them... They have nothing to play for and we have everything to play for... At the moment we have nothing... In my heart we are the champions...

[sparkic]

As long as Fergie choses the strongest team we shall win imo...

[desmondo]

"United's trademark style of attacking football !!"

How many times have we ... gone through the league stages quite easily ?

Quite often as it happens ... average teams so we kick their butts ...

Then on to the last 32, 16 and 8 ...

Last 8 is where we always seem to finish up without too many problems ...

Then the problems start !!!

Lst 8 game is dependant on who we draw ... we may/may not win.

And as for the semi finals ... :rolleyes:

This kind of 'Cavalier' style of football is rubbish !!

It beats the teams in the Prem League ... As can be seen by Fergie's 10 Titles !

But as soon as we have come face to face with Europe's 'Big Guys' ...

They spank our bottom and send us home !!!

Fergie changes the tactics .... and now we make the final !!!! :eek:

Read into that what you will ... :o
The problem with this analysis is that it is based on the outcome of matches rather than what actually happens on the pitch at the time. Take Dortmund 97 for example. United were incredibly unlucky in both games and should have had a lead from the first leg but in my mind fergie had that down as a "gun-ho cavalier" game. The reality was that if those games were played 100 times again United would win 85% of the time at least.

Against Milan last year we just had an injury ravaged defence and made 2 or 3 bad mistakes in defence that could happen in any game. Look at real madrid (0-0) and monaco (0-0). Both away results were deemed successes but away goals cost us dearly because we were too negative in the 1st leg. Against Porto (2004) I thought we protected what we had too much and they scored in the last minute. There's also the consideration that a lot of the time United have been drawn and gone out against the eventual winners of the competition.

I keep saying this but I think it's a mistake to think that the only choice is between the performance at the Nou camp (negative) and cavalier football . There is a balance in between. Milan last year were positive away from home in the first leg looking to take advantage of our wobbly defence and then they went and won it.

[desmondo]

This is a very good point, one which I totally agree with.



This is a great point as well. In finals (of course, the last Prem game is a 'final' as we could win the Prem at the end of it) playing attacking, 'gung-ho' football doesn't necessarily get the result, as 'negative football' as some people put it, doesn't wield the desired result either. But whatever we decide to play, as long as we win I couldn't care less at this point :p.



Mate, I misunderstood you. I understand what you mean now. I thought you meant we should go out every game no matter what and throw players forward at will. :rolleyes:

But yeah, that point annoys me too, but its the way we seem to always play, no matter who we play. In the squad, the only players who seem to press the ball in midfield or up front are Park, Tevez, Fletcher, Anderson and Hargreaves (although Hargreaves has been playing RB recently.)

I do feel that we need to press more and put the opposition under pressure too. That is why I felt we needed Anderson on instead of O'Shea. Not only did O'Shea mean we sat back, but, not only does Anderson press, adds bite to the midfield and challenge to try to win the ball, but he has the abilty to take the ball forward when we do counter. That is why in the CL final I would play a central 3 in midfield of Scholes, Carrick and Anderson with Tevez and Ronaldo supporting Rooney. (I previously wanted Park to play. If we played the Pool I would say Park, but I feel he will be bullied by Chelsea's physical play)

Quick on the counter, plenty of men forward and pressure on the ball. Thats what I think we need to play to beat Chelsea.

P.S Sorry for the misunderstanding. ;)
That's Ok ....I'm often misundertood! It's tough one because you are trying to get the balance between being positive (but not getting caught on the break) but also being smart at the back (but also not inviting pressure and defending too deep). Sven's England to me always seemd to err on the wrong side of inviting pressure. So when United playe like this I worry. One big consideration in this is what players you have at your disposal. Chelsea have deliberately bought players like Makele , essien etc to make themselves hard to beat. United have bought flare players who can beat defences and score goals. This is why they drop points drawing games and we drop them by losing games.

To me , if we have players like , nani , ronaldo , anderson et al then it says to me we should use them effectively . If fergie had planned to win the CL in a negative style then he should have bought some different players. Even Hargreaves (who looks like a defensive buy) seems to be very attack minded these days. Carrick is no Makele.

[Drew9]

desmondo ... do 1 you meg

[desmondo]

desmondo ... do 1 you meg
What? I'm sorry I have no idea what this means

[Jazz 16]

What? I'm sorry I have no idea what this means

Dont mind him :rolleyes:

drew-pipe down lad, if you have nothing constructive to say, then dont say
anything at all.

[Drew9]

yeah i hear what your saying jazz, but why be negative, every single club in europe wants to be where we are and people are posting threads saying their worried c'mon be a bit positive here whats there to be worried about !!

[desmondo]

yeah i hear what your saying jazz, but why be negative, every single club in europe wants to be where we are and people are posting threads saying their worried c'mon be a bit positive here whats there to be worried about !!
Why are you telling me this? Tell this to the team instead. I'm the one who thought they should have gone out at the bridge and had a go at them and see what happened. You talk to me about being positive , but being positive is precisely what I am saying United should be.

[Natalie]

worried because wigan don't make it easy for anyone
and at places like blackburn and west ham we only gt a point

[Drew9]

well your wrong there cos we lost at west ham actually, and secondly desmondo it's a good point and i agree with you, just the title of the thread annoyed me :) we have nothing to fear mate, relaxed football at wigan is what we need im confident we'll do them
i spose the one dissapointing thing about this is that we wont be celebrating it in front of our own fans will we, always dissapoints me like at southampton a few years back and at boro oh well as i said im confident we're going to win the league :) appologies dess