A good read for you, and us

comment by There'sOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by CFC: Quad stoppers (U20729)
posted 22 minutes ago
Result massively flattered Liverpool. They weren't that good.

4-1 more realistic

Don't think the true aristocrats of Europe - Real - will be bothered
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The record was broken for most touches inside the opposition box since records began. It would have been a travesty had only four goals been scored.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It was a trouncing. But I think it's also fair to observe that the gap between shots and target and goals scored, or xG and goals scored, was wider than usual.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by There'sOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by CFC: Quad stoppers (U20729)
posted 22 minutes ago
Result massively flattered Liverpool. They weren't that good.

4-1 more realistic

Don't think the true aristocrats of Europe - Real - will be bothered
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The record was broken for most touches inside the opposition box since records began. It would have been a travesty had only four goals been scored.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It was a trouncing. But I think it's also fair to observe that the gap between shots and target and goals scored, or xG and goals scored, was wider than usual.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I don't really pay much attention to expected goals. We got in on the keeper on so many occasions, missed two great chances again just shooting past the keeper required but wide and yet expected goals was under three. They also don't count when the referee is taking pity and not giving a clear penalty because of the scoreline.

There are so many flaws with xGs, for example it assumes all players are equal. Gakpo is given the same chance as scoring that flick past De Gea as Weghorst would be given against Allison, who is known for his excellent one on one ability. Amongst a host of other reasons it's flawed.

I think the eyes are a much better judge than xGs. We spent the majority of the game attacking United, penetrative their defence and as I said about broke the record for most touches inside the opposition box since records began. If this shows us only three goals should be expected then something is seriously wrong with this metric.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by Alisson Wonderland (Formerly LGT) (U13718)
posted 9 minutes ago
RR - fair comment and perhaps I am being unfair on the system issues I saw on Sunday. I should think back to the mess we were in when Klopp first arrived and he was having to play the likes of Benteke. His first summer window saw the club bring in two of the most Klopp-like players around in Wijnaldum and Mane both of whom had a huge impact in terms of setting the press over their LFC careers.

Interesting comments about De Gea - I thought I saw rumours of an extension in the works? How does that align with ETH's lack of faith in his footballing ability?
----------------------------------------------------------------------



I'm deeply puzzled by those rumours because it's objectively true that DDG's shortcomings put a ceiling on our ability to progress in aspects of football that have been a hallmark of ETH's approach, and which he is tentatively trying to deploy. Possible explanations:

- The rumours are untrue.
- The club does want to upgrade but the club can only do a finite number of deals this summer, and it's not as high priority as I think it should be.
- They want him to stay because they value his cultural contribution to the squad.
- They want him to stay on a lower salary while easing in a younger, long-term successor.

A combination of the last two would seem reasonable to me. But really I'm hoping it's the first one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think stability might also be a factor. Within 12 months you'll have had a new manager, (probably) owners, (likely) club captain, CB pairing, central midfield pairing, striker (if the Osimhen rumours are real) so perhaps adding a new GK to the mix is just too much too soon? I know wholesale changes were required after Solskjaer but Chelsea and Forest are hardly shining examples of that approach.

Plus by extending by a few years you will still have a marketable asset on the books if it does come to a transfer in 12-18 months' time.

But overall I'd agree with you - no point in sticking with a key first team player when they so clearly don't suit the new manager's system.

comment by There'sOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by There'sOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by CFC: Quad stoppers (U20729)
posted 22 minutes ago
Result massively flattered Liverpool. They weren't that good.

4-1 more realistic

Don't think the true aristocrats of Europe - Real - will be bothered
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The record was broken for most touches inside the opposition box since records began. It would have been a travesty had only four goals been scored.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It was a trouncing. But I think it's also fair to observe that the gap between shots and target and goals scored, or xG and goals scored, was wider than usual.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I don't really pay much attention to expected goals. We got in on the keeper on so many occasions, missed two great chances again just shooting past the keeper required but wide and yet expected goals was under three. They also don't count when the referee is taking pity and not giving a clear penalty because of the scoreline.

There are so many flaws with xGs, for example it assumes all players are equal. Gakpo is given the same chance as scoring that flick past De Gea as Weghorst would be given against Allison, who is known for his excellent one on one ability. Amongst a host of other reasons it's flawed.

I think the eyes are a much better judge than xGs. We spent the majority of the game attacking United, penetrative their defence and as I said about broke the record for most touches inside the opposition box since records began. If this shows us only three goals should be expected then something is seriously wrong with this metric.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think the metric claims to tell us "what the scoreline was supposed to be" - it's supposed to provide a baseline for the accumulated worth of the chances that came to pass, which then provides useful context in looking at other things. E.g. (touching on what you said) revealing players who consistently overperform their xG, which gives us a snapshot of their finishing ability. Another example is giving a more nuanced picture than 'shots / shots on target' stats which dominated discussions until recently, with a side taking lots of low percentage pot-shots might be seen as unlucky to lose to the side that created fewer (but much better) chances.

Anyway, my point wasn't to suggest that a scoreline closer to the xG would have been a fair reflection of Sunday's match. Just that it's a bit freakish for that proportion of good chances are finished. That's down to the fantastic, sharp performances of your players (together with the meltdown of ours in giving up so many chances), so it's not 'bad luck'. But I think it is a bit of a freak occurrence (in the same way that our 8-2 versus Arsenal was back in the day). Which is no comfort to a United fan, and shouldn't detract from your satisfaction.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by There'sOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by There'sOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by CFC: Quad stoppers (U20729)
posted 22 minutes ago
Result massively flattered Liverpool. They weren't that good.

4-1 more realistic

Don't think the true aristocrats of Europe - Real - will be bothered
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The record was broken for most touches inside the opposition box since records began. It would have been a travesty had only four goals been scored.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It was a trouncing. But I think it's also fair to observe that the gap between shots and target and goals scored, or xG and goals scored, was wider than usual.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I don't really pay much attention to expected goals. We got in on the keeper on so many occasions, missed two great chances again just shooting past the keeper required but wide and yet expected goals was under three. They also don't count when the referee is taking pity and not giving a clear penalty because of the scoreline.

There are so many flaws with xGs, for example it assumes all players are equal. Gakpo is given the same chance as scoring that flick past De Gea as Weghorst would be given against Allison, who is known for his excellent one on one ability. Amongst a host of other reasons it's flawed.

I think the eyes are a much better judge than xGs. We spent the majority of the game attacking United, penetrative their defence and as I said about broke the record for most touches inside the opposition box since records began. If this shows us only three goals should be expected then something is seriously wrong with this metric.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't think the metric claims to tell us "what the scoreline was supposed to be" - it's supposed to provide a baseline for the accumulated worth of the chances that came to pass, which then provides useful context in looking at other things. E.g. (touching on what you said) revealing players who consistently overperform their xG, which gives us a snapshot of their finishing ability. Another example is giving a more nuanced picture than 'shots / shots on target' stats which dominated discussions until recently, with a side taking lots of low percentage pot-shots might be seen as unlucky to lose to the side that created fewer (but much better) chances.

Anyway, my point wasn't to suggest that a scoreline closer to the xG would have been a fair reflection of Sunday's match. Just that it's a bit freakish for that proportion of good chances are finished. That's down to the fantastic, sharp performances of your players (together with the meltdown of ours in giving up so many chances), so it's not 'bad luck'. But I think it is a bit of a freak occurrence (in the same way that our 8-2 versus Arsenal was back in the day). Which is no comfort to a United fan, and shouldn't detract from your satisfaction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes I understand that. However it isn't an accurate reflection of the game for me.

I was simply stating for example, if we take somebody who regularly out performs his xGs, say Messi and he's put through on the keeper, it is more accurate to say his xGs is closer to 1, then say Weghorst who doesn't score many goals. Therefore it doesn't give a fair reflection of the game as Messi's chances of scoring have been put on the same level as Weghorst.

I agree it can be useful but to use it to say the game should have been closer, ie. 4-1, is fantasy land stuff.

Ultimately, it's a lot of woulda-coulda-shoulda. The game wouldn't have panned out like that if Rashford had finished with the quality of Salah and Gakpo, before the rout began... Or if Gakpo hadn't scored with that outrageous finish for the third goal... But that's the nature of football: the things we remember most vividly come from players defying the expectations of average performance level.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 53 seconds ago
Ultimately, it's a lot of woulda-coulda-shoulda. The game wouldn't have panned out like that if Rashford had finished with the quality of Salah and Gakpo, before the rout began... Or if Gakpo hadn't scored with that outrageous finish for the third goal... But that's the nature of football: the things we remember most vividly come from players defying the expectations of average performance level.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course.

TH game pressing principles were partially on show in this game.

TH likes normally to have zonal defending which goes into man marking but it was weird to see Utd go man for man defending in the second half.

He has two pressing variations.

The first one is whereby the two wingers run towards the two opposition center backs to press them which means the opposition fullback become the spare players. The fullbacks are instructed to push higher to defend against them.

The second one is about blocking off the centre of the pitch which he does with the positioning of his centre forward staying in the middle of the two opposition center backs. He likes a number 10 who can help in this to defend the dm. Weghorst should have played as your centre forward for this pattern as he was very slow defending against Fabinho.
He wants to direct the build up to the players who aren't good passers of the ball. This tactic led to the first goal. Your pressed on the side of Trent and Konate as he rightly thought Trent was the danger player in the build up. It was very easy for Alisson to make a diagonal kick to Robbo as he had the freedom of Anfield. He clearly identified Robbo as the weakest passer of the ball in our backline.

Sometimes little details can decide a game as we didn't create a lot before the first goal.

If I were a United fan, my long term concern would be that there is a great deal of similarity between Ten Hag's man-to-man system (out of possession) and Bielsaball. It looks good when it works but when it doesn't it leaves the team open to some heavy defeats and it relies on players winning their individual battles. That categorically didn't happen at the weekend.
———
There’s not many similarities at all. We haven’t suffered hammerings for tactical issues, it’s down to the mental weakness and indiscipline of a group of players that have often been getting stuffed for five years.

comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 11 minutes ago
If I were a United fan, my long term concern would be that there is a great deal of similarity between Ten Hag's man-to-man system (out of possession) and Bielsaball. It looks good when it works but when it doesn't it leaves the team open to some heavy defeats and it relies on players winning their individual battles. That categorically didn't happen at the weekend.
———
There’s not many similarities at all. We haven’t suffered hammerings for tactical issues, it’s down to the mental weakness and indiscipline of a group of players that have often been getting stuffed for five years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Its amusing to hear / read United fans who have been lauding some players suddenly finding excuses after a thumping (Neville included). Some more balance is needed is assessing them and some have been getting carried away. United have been on a superb run of form without necessarily blowing anyone away. Even the win vs City was a bit of a smash and grab. They have become, like Klopp said, an effective results machine, which, reading between the lines implies that this has been done in an effective way rather than a dominating way. I would agree with this.

I also find some similarities with Ole's good form. Often United would play ok and moments of brilliance would turn games, results coming from these rather than dominance. As Ole tried to evolve United into a more dominant team its all broke down. Now a lot of that is due to personnel, but some of the underlying issues remain in terms of the ability to dominate. A keeper who can pass like an outfielder. A GK who will sweep and a dominate CB with pace. Energy in the CM, wide attackers also willing to press and track, a quality no.9.

ETH seems to have United playing in this effective manner within the limitations of his squad, which is credit to him, but I would say you will need some pretty significant spending to truly give him the XI that can dominate. A striker alone is £100m in this market.

I also think United fans need to be a bit careful in their recent glee. ETH is a newboy on the block, bringing a different United forward. It takes time for the opposition to begin to assess and understand the threats and weaknesses and this league is pretty ruthless in this respect and sometimes it just takes one team to "show the way" and others will try and replicate the success.

This is not to diminish what ETH has done, most will be surprised at the level of progress made so far. A cup won, albeit with a friendly draw. It will be interesting to see how United go forward from here, rebuild confidence and if they can hit the ground running, and how opposition look to stop them and pick at any weaknesses.