STM

It auto capst it.

While I agree. The same could have been said of Gordon.

I'm not sure I've ever seen this thread or this forum so United in supporting another side. Look at us getting on. Glorious.

It's sad to see. An old giant of English football on its knees.

3

I'm not sure it can be clawed back mind. Sometimes a loss of belief and form can be fairly terminal. There's no doubt the talent was there. Might be one of the plus points of hiring Tuchel.

Don't kid yourself, Mount would have been excellent anywhere else. Spurs under Ange, Chelsea under Poch, here under Eddie.... He's been entirely miss managed, and injured of course.

It won't be Casemiro against us...... It will be Evans.

I don't think Ten Hag or his players can climb out of this slump, not with the injuries they have. They aren't playing for him, they have no defence, it's a right mess.

Man United want to thank their lucky stars that their opposition on Sunday are shite and have nowt to play for.

Evans just retire man.

A fair point but I'd suggest much of them were out of necessity, rather than choice.

Palace please get that second man.

Soft but always been the same for keepers.

Perhaps the worst Man United side I've ever seen. Man United to win 1-0.

100% I'm as guilty as anyone.

Spot on. I was genuinely shocked at when I heard the above. Like it was so simple as player in=player out.

Seems like we've gone first with an offer. I've said before that our footballing pitch will be very good, whether that beats the financial offer of someone like Chelsea, that remains to be seen. In fairness to the lad, feel like he could easily get an offer from a Milan, Bayern, Dortmund etc. Which would be tempting to anyone.

I'm sure we will pay what they are asking, or there abouts. Really seems weird to me that Freedman could be our director of football mind. Was a bit of an average Joe as a player and felt synonymous with the Championship. I recognise that means nowt like. Would be like if someone in 10 years time told me that Chris Brunt was becoming sporting director.

Its astonishing how many journalists still don't understand transfer fees/amortisation etc. I was watching everything is black and white podcast with Andrew Musgrove and he said he wouldn't sell Wilson for anything less than 30m (I know its ridiculous) his reasoning was that it would cost "at least that" to replace him.... but that's not how it works right? Correct me if I'm wrong but let's use a hypothetical where we wanted to replace Wilson with Solanke and let's say we got 12m for Wilson and Solanke cost 50m. 12m for Wilson is now full profit on our books. 50m for Solanke would be (let's say 5 year deal), 10m each year for the next 5 years. So in affect, Wilson for 12m would pay for the first year of Solanke on the books? Of course I'm aware that we need to be able to pay for the other 4 years but someone confirm I'm at least along the right lines.

No worries. We can all see the advantages of having another big lad in the back 4. It's more to do with the ability of the individual.

It's just bollocks. Of course having a big full back has its advantages.... when they are as good as Ake and Co. We've got Dan Burn trying to do the same thing. So we get the good side in the air but we don't get the good side on the ground. We've looked much more balanced with Hall LB and Burn CB and we shouldn't be switching back. If we sign a quality LB who is also a 6ft+, fantastic.

The reason those City players can play fullback is because they are absolutely exceptional players, who cost over 100m quid to aquire. Just wait until Pep signs a traditional left back. Quick Quick, we need a tradional one.

So you've already changed your arguement? You said tall full backs, not a tall side. Everybody already knew that in order to be a really top side you need to have a certain physical presence in your side.