5 things we learnt from MUFC vs Liverpool.
THREAD. π§΅
THREAD. π§΅
(!) Now that the international break is over, this thread will go in detail on the game against Liverpool weighing positives & negatives to try and strike a neutral balance & see what we can change going forward.
1. United's build-up carries a lot of risks.
They used the 3-1-6 again but this requires movement & communication from your pivot player's in order to provide options, which Casemiro lacked.
The pivot partner (CM) was usually positioned high but sometimes lower.
The base Build-Up did have more player's at times but you need movement otherwise you get foeced to play back ‡οΈ
They used the 3-1-6 again but this requires movement & communication from your pivot player's in order to provide options, which Casemiro lacked.
The pivot partner (CM) was usually positioned high but sometimes lower.
The base Build-Up did have more player's at times but you need movement otherwise you get foeced to play back ‡οΈ
The problem with the 3-1-6 is having to constantly rotate & if you're late you get pressed easily ‡οΈ
As shown here in this mini thread, the build-up with the Midfielders has a lot do with communication.
As shown here for the 3-1-6 you need the FB to arrive into the pivot IF the CM is high.
The problem was United's fullbacks looked like they were "skipping" through the 2nd phase straight away & thinking about the final phase.
One of the fullback should stay in to the double pivot before.
The problem was United's fullbacks looked like they were "skipping" through the 2nd phase straight away & thinking about the final phase.
One of the fullback should stay in to the double pivot before.
Another Variation is for the CM to drop deep but then you need the other CM to push higher to play out.
x.com
x.com
The vertical approach has worked in the past as shown here, but it requires the team to not lose the ball in the centre of the pitch, which Casemiro kept doing.
If that pass happens then United break easily & have a go at the oppositons defence.
If that pass happens then United break easily & have a go at the oppositons defence.
But, if it doesn't happen then United are very vulnerable.
Liverpool's first goal ‡οΈ
It's not possible to tell if the instruction is for both FB's to join the last phase β Roy Keane noted in his post match views that the FB's were too high.
IF United want to do this, just because of security, they should structure a more 3-2 approach to decrease vulnerabilities.
Liverpool's first goal ‡οΈ
It's not possible to tell if the instruction is for both FB's to join the last phase β Roy Keane noted in his post match views that the FB's were too high.
IF United want to do this, just because of security, they should structure a more 3-2 approach to decrease vulnerabilities.
Liverpool's 2nd goal ‡οΈ
Collyer being deeper would drag 1/2 Liverpool forwards & give the FB & Receiver another passing option, instead Mainoo gets overloaded.
Collyer being deeper would drag 1/2 Liverpool forwards & give the FB & Receiver another passing option, instead Mainoo gets overloaded.
When United used a 2 in the middle approach it was easier to recycle possession & build play with patience ‡οΈ
The sequence could've been easier if Casemiro dropped earlier.
And you can see the options Mainoo has:
βͺοΈPlay wide into Winger
βͺοΈ Play back to Casemiro (Up-Back-Through pattern)
The problem here is we are are forcing the pattern for no reason at all when we can play wide.
The sequence could've been easier if Casemiro dropped earlier.
And you can see the options Mainoo has:
βͺοΈPlay wide into Winger
βͺοΈ Play back to Casemiro (Up-Back-Through pattern)
The problem here is we are are forcing the pattern for no reason at all when we can play wide.
It's a point that correlates with this ‡οΈ
2. The pressing & structural problems are on show off the ball β off the ball especially without Mount
Liverpool exploited this so Szobozlai pushed higher & Gravenberch regularly made runs in behind United's midfield β leaving United's rest defence outnumbered. ‡οΈ
In games with teams more physical & technical it is almost suicidal having both the deeper CM's high & the risk doesn't match the reward.
βͺοΈ Keep a solid 2 in Build-Up.
βͺοΈ Have one midfielder protecting the back line.
Liverpool exploited this so Szobozlai pushed higher & Gravenberch regularly made runs in behind United's midfield β leaving United's rest defence outnumbered. ‡οΈ
In games with teams more physical & technical it is almost suicidal having both the deeper CM's high & the risk doesn't match the reward.
βͺοΈ Keep a solid 2 in Build-Up.
βͺοΈ Have one midfielder protecting the back line.
Arne Slot in his post match interview stated that United's midfielders had to work harder when the ball is turned over β also stating United's FB's are high & wide with Casemiro in the middle.
This means the DM is on his own & the line of "working harder" means tracking back more mainly because of the distances between the midfield & defence.
An extra body in front of the backline stops United being overloaded and the DM will also marshal the backline.
This means the DM is on his own & the line of "working harder" means tracking back more mainly because of the distances between the midfield & defence.
An extra body in front of the backline stops United being overloaded and the DM will also marshal the backline.
3 & 4. Wide Areas β Use of the width β In build-up & attack (In Game Management)
United tried to use the wide areas a lot when catching Liverpool in transition but the focus on SHORT Build-Up was too heavy & Liverpool found it easy pressing us.
We were too central when we could've exploited Liverpool's narrow game-plan just as Brentford did.
The better instruction would have been to clip more balls to the wide areas & launch from Onana as they were getting pressed hard by Liverpool's front 4.
Onanas' pass map ‡οΈ
The problem however is without HΓΈjlund & physicality in midfield (formerly McTominay) it becomes hard to hold the first ball & the drop in energy levels makes the 2nd ball harder to win.
So, to fix this we need a stronger physical presence at CF/CM.
United tried to use the wide areas a lot when catching Liverpool in transition but the focus on SHORT Build-Up was too heavy & Liverpool found it easy pressing us.
We were too central when we could've exploited Liverpool's narrow game-plan just as Brentford did.
The better instruction would have been to clip more balls to the wide areas & launch from Onana as they were getting pressed hard by Liverpool's front 4.
Onanas' pass map ‡οΈ
The problem however is without HΓΈjlund & physicality in midfield (formerly McTominay) it becomes hard to hold the first ball & the drop in energy levels makes the 2nd ball harder to win.
So, to fix this we need a stronger physical presence at CF/CM.
United using the width ‡οΈ
United once again were VERY sloppy with the final ball.
We had chances to hurt Liverpool in transition, by beating their press & getting down their RHS early in the game & LHS when Amad came on (Wide Areas).
United didn't get down the LHS much after the initial 20 ish as Trent came more central β Erik should've counteracted by asking Rashford to follow his path, a man marking role.
There was more than enough chances to punish Liverpool even when we beat their press, that we didn't capitalise on.
United once again were VERY sloppy with the final ball.
We had chances to hurt Liverpool in transition, by beating their press & getting down their RHS early in the game & LHS when Amad came on (Wide Areas).
United didn't get down the LHS much after the initial 20 ish as Trent came more central β Erik should've counteracted by asking Rashford to follow his path, a man marking role.
There was more than enough chances to punish Liverpool even when we beat their press, that we didn't capitalise on.
Brentford using the width in the previous game.
This does go back to decision making but simply waiting might not be the solution.
When United attack under Erik, the forwards rotate a lot in an attempt to catch the oppositon off guard β it makes for some aesthetically pleasing goals & a lot of unpredictability.
When United attack under Erik, the forwards rotate a lot in an attempt to catch the oppositon off guard β it makes for some aesthetically pleasing goals & a lot of unpredictability.
In this case, maybe a more structured attack could be the solution?
Bruno having freedom but centrally only, Rashford being inside the pitch, The CF on the shoulder, & the RW to roam?
This could work in favour even though there's an area of predictability β but these will favour the player's being in their favoured positions & give them more comfortablilty to execute
It was more to do with pass & move but into familiar positions.
Bruno having freedom but centrally only, Rashford being inside the pitch, The CF on the shoulder, & the RW to roam?
This could work in favour even though there's an area of predictability β but these will favour the player's being in their favoured positions & give them more comfortablilty to execute
It was more to do with pass & move but into familiar positions.
5. Losing the ball in the middle of the pitch.
This is what creates ping pong games & doesn't allow for control.
This scenario was prevalent throughout the first half when United were relatively on top, but we didn't capitalise & moments like this do play into it.
United did well squeezing the opposition at times but as you can see decisions like this put us on the back foot & don't allow us to sustain attacks to keep the momentum on going.
Really good squeeze but we cheaply lose it ‡οΈ
This is what creates ping pong games & doesn't allow for control.
This scenario was prevalent throughout the first half when United were relatively on top, but we didn't capitalise & moments like this do play into it.
United did well squeezing the opposition at times but as you can see decisions like this put us on the back foot & don't allow us to sustain attacks to keep the momentum on going.
Really good squeeze but we cheaply lose it ‡οΈ
Changes?
Overall United were average, the game was lost throughout 40-70 minutes, mainly because of not making changes to the midfield as we were being overloaded quite easily.
1. United could use a more structured double pivot.
As shown in the 3rd goal when Collyer positions high & Mainoo gets trapped.
Probably Ugarte β Mainoo, this will & would've stopped them being overloaded in the centre of the pitch so the CB's & CM's can play fluidly in build-up.
2. When transitioning into the Attacking phase β one fullback should stay to give the rest defence some security in case of a turnover.
As shown in the first goal, Dalot & Mazraoui have both been pushed high to transition into a (3-1-6) attacking shape & give United's attack an overload to Liverpool's defence.
To stop this from happening you need better ball playing DM's or switch to a structured 3-2 build-up that turns into a β‘οΈ 3-4-3 then into a β‘οΈ 3-2-5/3-1-6.
3. Maybe a change that could bear fruit was the Attacking structure change talked about above.
The positive from this approach is that we've already seen how many opportunities we've created in the opening 3 games but not all player's are comfortable with the positions they are picking up, & this problem is kind of showing all over the pitch.
It's a change that should be made if we continue to lack clinciality & execution in the final 3rd.
Overall United were average, the game was lost throughout 40-70 minutes, mainly because of not making changes to the midfield as we were being overloaded quite easily.
1. United could use a more structured double pivot.
As shown in the 3rd goal when Collyer positions high & Mainoo gets trapped.
Probably Ugarte β Mainoo, this will & would've stopped them being overloaded in the centre of the pitch so the CB's & CM's can play fluidly in build-up.
2. When transitioning into the Attacking phase β one fullback should stay to give the rest defence some security in case of a turnover.
As shown in the first goal, Dalot & Mazraoui have both been pushed high to transition into a (3-1-6) attacking shape & give United's attack an overload to Liverpool's defence.
To stop this from happening you need better ball playing DM's or switch to a structured 3-2 build-up that turns into a β‘οΈ 3-4-3 then into a β‘οΈ 3-2-5/3-1-6.
3. Maybe a change that could bear fruit was the Attacking structure change talked about above.
The positive from this approach is that we've already seen how many opportunities we've created in the opening 3 games but not all player's are comfortable with the positions they are picking up, & this problem is kind of showing all over the pitch.
It's a change that should be made if we continue to lack clinciality & execution in the final 3rd.
Loading suggestions...