It still isn\u2019t clear whether Michael Carrick should get the Manchester United job on a permanent basis \u2013 might a two-year deal make sense?<\/p>\n
That would at least give a \u2018unicorn-type manager\u2019 time to emerge and eventually take over.<\/p>\n
Send your thoughts to theeditor@football365.com.<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Carrick uptick<\/p>\n
I\u2019m still on the fence when it comes to appointing Carrick full time. However, seeing as most letters have been in favour I thought I could at least play devil\u2019s advocate and try to explain the case against, or essentially, what\u2019s keeping me on the fence.<\/p>\n
The way I see it the arguments for Carrick are 1. He\u2019s winning games \/ getting points at title winning pace\u00a0 2. He\u2019s doing much better than Amorim with the same squad\u00a0 3. There aren\u2019t any better candidates available<\/p>\n
I\u2019m going to take these one at a time.<\/p>\n
1. Carrick is indeed earning points at title winning pace<\/a>, 2.2 points per game so far which is better than City and Arsenal have managed for the whole season. The issue here is that it\u2019s only 13 games and it\u2019s problematic\u00a0to extrapolate from such a small sample. For context earlier this season Aston Villa had a run of 12 wins in 13 league games including wins over City and Arsenal. This netted Unai Emery an average of 2.76 points per game which across a season would mean a record points winning season of 105, yet Villa aren\u2019t winning the league this year because runs of bad form balance out the purple patches.<\/p>\n United are not a title winning team so it\u2019s not reasonable to think results will continue to be this good, this might even be Carrick\u2019s purple patch. So if you\u2019re pinning Carrick\u2019s appointment mainly on his results then it\u2019s a soft argument at best.<\/p>\n 2. As we can see above, Carrick is doing better than any manager in the league since taking over<\/a> so its not only Amorim he\u2019s out performing. What\u2019s crucial though is the \u2018same squad\u2019 element. If you look at what players Carrick has had available then the closest we can get in comparison with Amorim is a 10 game run starting with Sunderland at home when Lamens became the keeper, to Bournemouth at home which is the last game before AFCON players left and before Bruno was injured.<\/p>\n During this period Amorim achieved 1.9 points per game so a difference of 0.3 to Carrick, which would effectively be worth 4 points. That\u2019s hardly a massive improvement and could simply be the new manager bounce. Without it the team would be in the 5th, comfortably in the Champions league places, and only 1 point behind Liverpool with the chance to go above them this week. If even one of Carrick\u2019s narrow wins had gone the other way then it would almost be equal.<\/p>\n Under Amorim Untied were amongst the best in the league in a whole host of attacking metrics like chances created, touches in the box, shots in the box, shots on target, possession, and xG. All of which have declined\u00a0since Carrick\u2019s appointment. Whilst results are what ultimately matter, the data suggests a decline in performance which again could make results unsustainable.<\/p>\n 3. I don\u2019t know which managers are actually available but I commonly hear only Enrique would be preferred over Carrick, which is a bit mad when you think about it. If you remove his caretaker role at United then his previous experience is guiding Middlesborough to upper mid table finishes in the Championship. Kieran McKenna has a better CV than that but I don\u2019t see fans scrambling for his appointment.<\/p>\n Buying in proven Premier League quality worked great with Mbeumo and Cunha yet the speed with which most dismiss Iraola is baffling, he\u2019s shown immense ability and acumen with Bournemouth whilst playing the high intensity attacking football we crave, and we definitely know he is available<\/a>.<\/p>\n Ultimately I think Carrick is just the easy choice because he\u2019s already here, we know him, and his tenure so far has felt really good. With the ups and mostly downs of multiple appointments over the years, along with the fatigue and stress that comes with that, then having something that\u2019s secure and familiar is difficult to let go of.<\/p>\n Carrick isn\u2019t the smart choice, he\u2019s the emotional one, but that\u2019s ok. There is potential to be better and if all he achieves is keeping United within the European places, holding the fort until that unicorn type manager becomes available, then fair enough. \u00a0<\/p>\n Assuming United don\u2019t mess it up from here, the board are obviously going to have a really tough decision<\/a> in the next month or so. After trying a host of different managers and styles, I think it\u2019s fair to say most United fans are probably just confused at this point. For me, I could probably argue it both ways.<\/p>\n It is inarguable and simply fact that the results since Carrick have come in warrant keeping this going. Further, he has done this with a midfield we were told is incapable of success, basically never having a first choice CB pairing available, numerous questionable decisions from officials and a front line that hasn\u2019t really been firing. The players look happy too. Further, he knows what a proper United looks like, having experienced it first hand for years. Club identity\u00a0and history is not really something to dismissed. So, keep him?<\/p>\n Or, you can look at the fundamentals and see that it\u2019s not really that different from Amorim, just United have been less profligate in front of goal and are conceding fewer chances. Many of the attacking and control metrics actually look similar to or worse than Amorim. There is no real dominance on display, and even the great results haven\u2019t really come with great performances. So, would a truly \u2018world-class\u2019 coach be able to deliver that?<\/p>\n The fact is that the choice will be between Carrick and not-Carrick. And for the latter to be an option, I believe there has to be a pretty compelling option. And who is actually available? In the absence of a \u2018generational\u2019 coach, I think United probably stick with Carrick on a shortish \u2013 say 2 year \u2013 contract with a clear path to extension. Then the board can focus on what really matters: getting a quantity of actually good players in. The squad is going to have 1 CF and 1 CMF come the summer, and that\u2019s not going to get you far when we\u2019re back up to 50+ games a season. \u00a0<\/p>\n Nursing those semis<\/p>\n My 2 penneth on the 2 games so far.<\/p>\n Athletico v Arse \u2013 Surely that is the best way to use VAR \u2013 if you give a marginal penalty then it would make sense to double check such a crucial decision no? And then \u2013 as was the case \u2013 you realise that you\u2019d got it wrong as it was a clear cheating dive \u2013 you disallow it. All makes perfect sense to me and was the right thing to do. Pens can be easily and quickly checked \u2013 and as they are so important \u2013 why wouldnt you?<\/p>\n Tbh they may aswell just have a penalty shoot out with this tie and cut out the tedious middle man.<\/p>\n PSG v Bayern \u2013 bad defending?<\/a> Do me a favour! If you watched the game you will see that all 10 outfield players on both sides are part of the continuous attacking play \u2013 all contributing to moving the opposing teams around to suit them \u2013 all players including full backs and centre backs attempting shape splitting passes \u2013 all at an amazing tempo. This would not be possible if they were playing a rigid back 4 or 5. So PSG (and same can be said of Bayern) would not have scored 5 goals and possibly way more if they were a traditional rigid formation. That doesnt equate as bad defending \u2013 that just means they are concentrating on attacking.<\/p>\n I think Harry Kane was right when he said there was good defending too<\/a> \u2013 there was \u2013 but of course its going to be less rigid and more reactional if all your players are contributing to being offensive. That shouldnt be a criticism. Football is first and foremost about trying to win \u2013 and to win you have to score. Secondary to that is trying not to be beaten \u2013 but it should always be secondary. And very much so if you are one of the powerhouses of world football.<\/p>\n Both these teams\/clubs should be praised to the hilt for attempting to save our game from the dark side that has been gradually devouring over the last few years. Not only was it a scintillating watch but it was also played in a good spirit with hardly any winging, diving, sneaky fouls and no time wasting whatsoever. This is clearly a policy that the 2 sides have insisted on and striven (strove?) to achieve.<\/p>\n Lets hope the rest of the world takes note and attempts to do similar in the future.<\/p>\n Gives me reason to still love football. \u00a0<\/p>\n This may be a controversial opinion, but I thought there was nothing wrong with the defending in PSG-Bayern the other night \u2013 there just wasn\u2019t much of it.<\/p>\n This may be a bit haughty, but it wasn\u2019t a million miles from Villa-PSG at Villa Park last season<\/a>, when at 5-1 down Villa (ie John McGinn) decided, f**k it: time to go out on our shield. And then realised PSG\u2019s 2-0-8 formation actually stays the same when they\u2019re defending as well as attacking.<\/p>\n What we see here are 2 clubs who, give or take, don\u2019t need to worry too much about how they play in domestic football; and so act as if the rule changes in the last 30 years and their consequential tactical tweaks are just things that happened to other people.<\/p>\n Ending the back pass rule and diluting offside so that level = between, means backlines are now 40 yards further back than they were in the 80s; the sweeper now plays in front of them rather than behind \u2013 and often there are 2 of them. Wingers are now inverted so they naturally head infield to clog up play if possession is lost. And the extra defensive player means one fewer striker, with the remaining lone forward tasked with either running channels, holding up long balls out of defence, or false nining it in case the other billion players in midfield aren\u2019t enough. Scoring goals is just a nice bonus.<\/p>\n Upamecano, Marquinhos, Kim, Tah and Pacho are 5 of the best centre backs in Europe. Davies, Mendes, Hakimi, Stanisic \u2013 any of these full backs would upgrade every team in the premier league. A lot of us who grew up on Italian football in the 90s wrongly believe the default position in football is defence always beats attack unless something goes wrong. But Mendes \u2013 a ridiculously good player \u2013 being taken to the cleaners by Olise is just a reflection on how good Olise is, not some malfunction in Portuguese defensive football. Stanisic won\u2019t have fond memories of the evening, but Cafu, Lahm and Thuram bunched up in a Chipmunks-style trenchcoat could not have stopped Kvara and Dembele; sometimes players are just too good.<\/p>\n This type of game always brings out the pseuds who spy an opportunity to inform people they only enjoy goals because they\u2019re brainwashed infants; the real connoisseurs of the sport prefer a 0-0, sorry if you\u2019re too stupid to appreciate the beauty of a 10 yard throw-in played backwards to a defender.<\/p>\n But a 5-4 game means that a point is being scored on average every 10 minutes. How many sports is that true of? Even in test cricket, 10 mins with nothing changing on the scoreboard gets remarked upon. Football is (now) fundamentally a low-scoring game, and a f**king boring one at that. The premise of entertaining neutrals is pernicious and false \u2013 neutrals should sod off, I have no interest in my team playing in a way that suits people who don\u2019t care about the result. But if I\u2019m a neutral and I am being entertained, that doesn\u2019t mean what I\u2019m watching has no value. \u00a0<\/p>\n I think I\u2019m paranoid<\/p>\n
Dave, Manchester<\/p>\n
Ryan, Bermuda<\/p>\n
Shunt \u2013 LFC<\/p>\n
Neil Raines<\/p>\n