• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Ange in or out?

Ange in or out?

  • In

    Votes: 94 63.1%

  • Out

    Votes: 55 36.9%
  • Total voters
    149
glorygloryeze said:
Hmm... are we looking at this the wrong way?
Ange, with the formation c)ck-up that yesterday seemed to be from all accounts, is he not actually showing that perhaps he DOES see the need to change some things tactically?
Click to expand...

It did occur to me.

It also occurred to me that the player's heads are so scrambled from what they've been fed by Ange and his coaches for 18 months, that they couldn't make the change easily. It should have been a straightforward adjustment that left us tighter at the back. Instead, it was more of the same but in a different formation.
 
Muttley said:
It did occur to me.

It also occurred to me that the player's heads are so scrambled from what they've been fed by Ange and his coaches for 18 months, that they couldn't make the change easily. It should have been a straightforward adjustment that left us tighter at the back. Instead, it was more of the same but in a different formation.
Click to expand...

going to a 5 with Sarr in front, should have made us more compact

we were not
 

Yiddo said:
Apparently the club are still backing Ange according to A Gold.
Click to expand...

​

The Charge of the Light B rigade​

By Alfred, Lord Tennyson
I
Half a league, half a league,
Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.
“Forward, the Light B rigade!
Charge for the guns!” he said.
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.

II
“Forward, the Light B rigade!”
Was there a man dismayed?
Not though the soldier knew
Someone had blundered.
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die.
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.

III
Cannon to right of them,
Cannon to left of them,
Cannon in front of them
Volleyed and thundered;
Stormed at with shot and shell,
Boldly they rode and well,
Into the jaws of Death,
Into the mouth of hell
Rode the six hundred.

IV
Flashed all their sabres bare,
Flashed as they turned in air
Sabring the gunners there,
Charging an army, while
All the world wondered.
Plunged in the battery-smoke
Right through the line they broke;
Cossack and Russian
Reeled from the sabre stroke
Shattered and sundered.
Then they rode back, but not
Not the six hundred.

V
Cannon to right of them,
Cannon to left of them,
Cannon behind them
Volleyed and thundered;
Stormed at with shot and shell,
While horse and hero fell.
They that had fought so well
Came through the jaws of Death,
Back from the mouth of hell,
All that was left of them,
Left of six hundred.

VI
When can their glory fade?
O the wild charge they made!
All the world wondered.
Honour the charge they made!
Honour the Light B rigade,
Noble six hundred!
 
Muttley said:
It did occur to me.

It also occurred to me that the player's heads are so scrambled from what they've been fed by Ange and his coaches for 18 months, that they couldn't make the change easily. It should have been a straightforward adjustment that left us tighter at the back. Instead, it was more of the same but in a different formation.
Click to expand...
It wasn't a straightforward adjustment. It had Gray, an 18 year-old already playing an unfamiliar role, to move to RCB a role he has never played before. On top of that he was expected to step into midfield. It was crazy to expect a relatively inexperienced 18 year old to play that role.
Just play a flat back 4 with Gray playing as a DM, a role he knows. Keep it as simple as possible.
 
DubSpur said:
Obviously you only need to get more goals over the two legs. We're not going to consistently blow teams away in one of the legs. We will need to keep it tight in at least one leg in most rounds. If Everton can score 3 against us anyone can.
Click to expand...
That was a tactical call Ange got wrong
It’s why he has to go
But we can still do plenty better
 
P.D. said:
Luckily they're even worse than us, I don't think we'll be in a relegation battle but more so because there's a few really poor teams. We probably end up around 50 points.
Click to expand...
I looked at our remaining fixtures and even being generous with our results giving us away wins at poorer opposition etc I got us to 39 points. You can see my predictions in the "can we avoid the drop" thread. I'd say 45 points absolute tops. No way i can see us getting 50 points unless something drastic changes from the last year and a bit.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
That was a tactical call Ange got wrong
It’s why he has to go
But we can still do plenty better
Click to expand...

I don't get it. You've been so steadfast in your defence of Ange: almost myopic even ("we need to judge properly after 10 games in a season" etc), why is only yesterday hat changed your mind on whether he stays or goes?

I'd say there have been FAR WORSE than yesterday and much more evidence way before yesterday for you to come to that view: Brighton second half ("i didn't use any subs because i don't want to have a false victory"), reaction to dropping late points vs Roma ("Don't you just want to be entertained"), bending over for Liverpool in the league, collapse second year in a row vs Chelsea, a whole number of headless checken defensive displays...why only yesterday, when he actually did try and be flexible are you now saying he should go??
 
DubSpur said:
It wasn't a straightforward adjustment. It had Gray, an 18 year-old already playing an unfamiliar role, to move to RCB a role he has never played before. On top of that he was expected to step into midfield. It was crazy to expect a relatively inexperienced 18 year old to play that role.
Just play a flat back 4 with Gray playing as a DM, a role he knows. Keep it as simple as possible.
Click to expand...

LCB and RCB are the effectively the same.
 
DubSpur said:
It wasn't a straightforward adjustment. It had Gray, an 18 year-old already playing an unfamiliar role, to move to RCB a role he has never played before. On top of that he was expected to step into midfield. It was crazy to expect a relatively inexperienced 18 year old to play that role.
Just play a flat back 4 with Gray playing as a DM, a role he knows. Keep it as simple as possible.
Click to expand...

Moving to 3 at the back is straightforward. As a RCB your job is to defend but you have a little more license to get forward at the right time. You should know that your wing back is always on your outside and barely leaves the touch line. Then you have the double pivot centre midfield working as a pair.

What is it with this manager that he always has to make the relatively straightforward so damn complicated? It's a true weakness.
 
Muttley said:
I think it is deeper than that. I'm starting to think it is how he thinks about the game and his footballing blindspots. He could play any formation and it still wouldn't always work because of how he sets it up.
Click to expand...

Yeah, maybe the club have been thinking that since March, hence the hollow summer window, the little activity now etc

I mean, why do a Man Utd: spend a load of money on buying players for a coach you don't really believe in?
 
elyid said:
Oooh Controversial.

Even as an amateur CB switching from RCB to LCB is very different.
Angles, positioning, how comfortable you are passing the ball to the wing etc. all different. Especially if you've played on one side a lot.

Should have just stuck with a back four and put Davies LCB.
Click to expand...

I didn't see the obsession with getting Davies back in. He should have been on the bench.
 
glorygloryeze said:
Yeah, maybe the club have been thinking that since March, hence the hollow summer window, the little activity now etc

I mean, why do a Man Utd: spend a load of money on buying players for a coach you don't really believe in?
Click to expand...

Which is why we need to somewhat separate the scouting and buying from the manager. I said when Conte was in charge playing counter attacking football ahead of a deep back 3 that Paratici's buys were more suited to front foot, progressive football. The transition of the squad to Ange proved very quickly that.

Behind the short term injuries, Ange has a fantastic squad. Can he get the best out of it? Not for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back