Holmesy

You can’t really argue against it either, as much as we all want to see Tonali in the lineup.

Is he still here?

I put it on here ages ago and it got tumbleweeds. People don't know what they're missing. It's bloody brilliant

The weirdest thing about the appointment is Ten Hag's Ajax team had a really strong identity and discernible playing style, and then he comes to Man Utd and does a Steve Bruce. It can't all have been the players doing it themselves at Ajax, surely?

Professional footballers should be fined heavily for not beating the first man. You kick a fucking ball for a living. No excuse!

Longstaff is making a difference here. Credit where it’s due, he’s having a solid game

What a fucking goal!

Daniel Levy doesn't want to win things, it ramps up expectation and puts him under pressure to spend more. He's like a more cunning, savvy version of Mike Ashley.

Well they're never going to turn a profit on him and we've never seen how Liverpool operate under Slot. If he doesn't want him filling a squad place, who knows. Maybe cough up the £50m or whatever it might take to get him. I'd rather spend that money on him than Guehi

I had a thought that's about to get me dog's abuse, but fuck you guys, i'm saying it anyway. Listening to the radio the other day, it sounds as though Slot doesn't rate Nunez. As a loan with an option to buy, on the right and as an alternative option to Isak, I reckon he would be a decent pickup. Gordon - Isak - Nunez has pace, unpredictability and bags of energy. I don't think it will happen for a number of reasons but it would be a lot more exciting than DCL. Come at me motherfuckers!

I mentioned Iraola on here as a possible replacement for EH IF he was to go, and I got pelters for it. For me, he fits the bill - a young, progressive, tactically astute manager who has proven he can make a team better than the sum of their parts. And that latter part is the biggest telltale sign of a good manager for me. Rafa is a perfect example

I can't see Mitchell being remotely interested in us signing DCL. His remit is to make our transfer activity more fit for purpose. DCL would be an expensive stopgap at best. Yes, he offers us something different and Eddie seems keen on having a proper, physical centre forward but Mitchell will take one look at the costs and his injury record and bin the idea

Doesn't help that we keep giving contract extensions (and no doubt, payrises) to players we should be trying to get off the wage bill

I'm with you. 100% There was a guy on the radio this morning talking about Ange, saying he has one plan and when that doesn't work it's more of the same. No plan B at all. I'm so surprised Eddie fits into that category as well - when he came it was all about how he's a student of the game and spent time learning from other managers, and now we're stuck in this cycle of rinse and repeat.

Interestingly, I think I heard that Man City have played more direct balls than any other team this season (unless I dreamt it). The different between Pep and every other manager is he continually iterates, evolves and adapts. All build around possession-based football but never standing still and becoming stale. This Man City team are a far cry from his vintage Barca tika-taka team but still ruthlessly efficient. Every time he sees teams starting to find ways to combat his tactics, he changes it up eg. by going more direct. Asking Eddie to change isn't something the club should ever do, but expecting him to continually improve and evolve should be. It should be a requisite of any manager we hire.

Chelsea could have put the game out of sight in the first half with the chances we allowed them due to our ridiculously high line and inability to keep possession though. I don’t think anyone doubts our ability to create chances, it’s the fact we gift the opposition so many and allow them to run through us at will that’s so troubling.

Hopefully. I think it'll come down to whether Eddie wants one or not though, and the fact we don't currently have one suggests he doesn't?

I tend to agree. He's the guy responsible for our defensive setup as well I believe? While other teams are bringing in specialist coaches to focusing on incremental improvement and details, we (one of the most ambitious clubs in the league apparently) are not.

Most clubs in Europe would give their right arm to sign Isak. Someone that offers something different to Isak makes sense but more??

Man City are so precise with their passing that they can afford to be a bit more high-risk because they ultimately have less defending to do. They also win the ball back quickly or commit cynical fouls in good positions to negate counter-attacks. We lose the ball so often, and our players aren't quick enough to commit cynical fouls so we need defensive cover more than most. I actually agree with you on Onana. I had no idea how good he was until I saw him play for Villa

If that is the case then fair play to them. That Trippier/Miggy partnership was one of the highlights of EH's reign - such great movement

Exactly why it makes sense to focus overseas - less-affluent clubs more willing to let their prized assets leave because they can't turn the money down. If that what Mitchell means by 'not fit for purpose', I couldn't agree more. Why make life so hard for yourself trying to battle with a team that considers you a rival and doesn't need the money when you could sign an equivalent player for half the money and a lot less hassle.

https://www.facebook.com/share/sanQoeRerK8oPqR1/? some absolute gold in the comments

There was a definite discernible pattern in the season where Miggy was on fire. Those little intricate moves around the box, dinked balls over the top, overlaps etc. were definitely orchestrated. Once that well ran out though, it's been difficult to identify anything that resembles a planned move

His attitude has always been high risk, high reward and he accepts that playing a high defensive line leaves us exposed at times but balances it out with more attacking prowess, so a #6 probably isn't in his nature because it's one fewer attacking options. According to his quote, we have 3 players who can play there already but none of them ever have, so I just don't think it's on his radar at all. His teams have consistently finished in the top 5 for goals conceded in the PL, with our 4th position season being the exception. But I imagine they would also be in the top 5 for chances created (although I can't find anything to back that up). But there's a naivety to it that just doesn't sit well at all. Our 4th placed season showed that balancing a solid defence with an effective attack gets you much greater rewards. He's too intelligent not to realise that so is he just trying to make a point to the board?