RedsUnite: a man utd blog

We’ve all had a day to dry our tears now. We’ve had time to sit and ponder our recent form and try to discern just what, exactly, is wrong with us. We were beaten by City for the second time this season and now we must figure out why that happened. Within the Manchester United community, however, the answers have varied widely.

Carlos Quieroz, left to field questions in place of Sir Alex who departed quickly from Old Trafford, offered this:

“We believe the team was affected by international call-ups. But talking about that would be an excuse. It was not our day. We didn’t play well and need to accept that. It was really unusual to see a couple of our players playing so slow, without tempo and making mistakes. That’s never happened before and if it is a coincidence we will let other people decide. The reality is that the players have been affected. Not only the English players but others like Ronaldo and Vidic were not so sharp.”

I agree with his assessment that “a couple of our players were playing so slow, without tempo and making mistakes,” but this is the Manchester Derby. Anyone who can seriously claim fatigue as an excuse when playing against their crosstown rivals, in a match to commemorate the Munich Air Disaster, during a season where there is almost no margin for error needs to have their mindset examined more closely. You have to get up for games like these.

Some have not even cared to analyze what happened. Over at Red Rants, Red Ranter wrote the following:

“…Recently, it has come to my notice that whenever I wrote a match report following a loss, I have invariably praised the opposition and given it due credit for being the better side. At least the last time when we lost to City it was bad luck, more than anything.

But yesterday, I couldn’t see much to say that United deserved anything out of this. I couldn’t even look to chide the Citeh fans, who were well behaved during the one minute silence.

Citeh got what they deserved, and so did we. I don’t want to really go deep analysing things for today because a lot was wrong about our display. I could have talked about Rooney’s and Evra’s absence, but those are excuses. The side we put out should have beaten a Man City side that have been well below par in recent weeks. It was derby day, an occasion to rise up to — enough motivation to win. And they didn’t. Maybe I am being too hard, or maybe it was the occasion that put undue pressure on them.

But they have to rise up to such occasions and not go missing. I am letting my emotions get the better of me here, which is certainly uncharacteristic of me. But I am feeling quite bitter about yesterday and so I will end what has been a rather incoherent post from my side.

See you when I get my spirits higher than this.”

Yesterday at The Republik of Mancunia, Scott offered us little in the way of an explanation and simply stated that we should take today to be thankful that we aren’t Scouscers. Today he endorsed Ryan Giggs’ who stated that:

It was probably the result that City deserved really. They played better than us. City scored at important times in the game and we didn’t recover. City could just sit back then and try to catch us on the counter attack. Defensively we didn’t play well. Attacking-wise, we just didn’t turn up. There was enough motivation for us - a massive game for the club, a derby and an important three points. We probably can’t afford to drop any more points now. We’ve got to make sure we don’t produce any more performances like that.”

Well, yeah, that pretty much summarizes it. Our defense and offense both failed to produce in a game of massive importance. But that doesn’t do much to explain our form. So I began scouring the internet for opinions of note. I began searching outside of the Manchester United community for an objective opinion on our form.

Sir Alex was held accountable for yesterday’s tactical issues. At Arsenal News Review, Myles had this to say about the Gaffer’s selections:

“Sir Alex’s team selection was a joke. It was madness, quite the wrong thing to do against City, a rope-a-dope counter-attacking outfit who bore you to tears and then nick a goal. As I said last week, Sir Alex gets self-indulgent. His old boys, Giggs and Scholes, just huffed and puffed, played from memory, while his Portuguese boys just showed off. United were dire. Really dire. At the start, United planted themselves far up the field against City’s deep 8-man defence and we saw 15 minutes of pedestrian sparring, then Petrov had a shot over the bar, and Ireland had a header saved. You can’t play Nani right, Giggs left, Ronaldo-Tevez down a crowded middle, and Scholes-Anderson in central midfield ! THAT WAS RIDICULOUS ! That’s not a team, it’s a fantasy.”

Now we’re getting somewhere. Those are sentiments that I echo fully. There was a lack of respect shown for City by fielding a side without a legitimate holding midfielder. Whatever you might think of the Blues, they aren’t entirely crap. They are stalwart in defense and a proven counter attacking side. Who in the side yesterday was going to stop their counter attack from getting to our backline? Anderson? Scholes, Giggs and Nani can’t tackle…at all. You need a Hargreaves in the line up to provide some barrier between the front and back lines. With the aforementioned side you are virtually playing a six man attack unit playing at various depths. That’s just silly.

To get a good feeling for how our supporters were feeling about yesterday’s disaster commemorating a disaster, I read some comments about the match over at Red Rants. There were some gems to be found there.

Some explanations, in my opinion, were slightly off the mark. Dan writes:

“ferdinand, giggs possibly vds all need to be dropped. are strongest formation today would have been a 4-3-3 ronny and nani forward with tevez, hargreaves carrick and anderson at mid. ferdinand is a lucky tosser, if he wasnt a CB he would be dropped.”

Nothing better than good, reasoned analysis. 4-3-3. Dropping Ferdinand, Giggs and VDS. Hard to argue with those insights. It got better from there, however.

K9 sites United’s tendency to get outmuscled in physical games. I think he has a point. He stated the following:

“Will someone please explain why Fergie is unable to see that his team are fucking up every game that is physical in nature? Every game we lost was a scrap, from start to finish. They start closing us down, and we start losing the ball and the plot. For pity’s sake Sir Alex, look at this closely. It’s our greatest weakness.”

Many argued that Fergie must come to a decision about who his first-team midfield pairing will be. I agree with this as well. Midfield pairings, like central defense pairings, require familiarity and chemistry. This revolving door in the central midfield will not work. It is understood that we have a wealth of talent at that position, but we must not seek to massage egos at the expense of the team. A first team pairing must be decided upon and they must get the bulk of the starts. I would suggest that Scholes and Hargreaves should be one pairing and Anderson and Carrick another. Scholes and Hargreaves should start the bulk of the matches, with Anderson and Carrick starting every third or so. They should always play together, however, so both pairs can develop a familiarity with their counterparts. While I think that Anderson and Hargreaves would be our strongest pairing, the pairings I have stated are well-balanced and would provide long-term strength.

Those of you who have made it this far, what do you think our problem is? I have mentioned a few weaknesses, but we all know our problems these days are multi-faceted. Let me know….