Boring, boring Manchester United

There is a growing unrest among United fans over their team’s ineffective and unattractive style of play

Seven league titles, three domestic cups, two UEFA Super Cups and one Champions League – thus reads the CV of Manchester United’s manager, Louis Van Gaal.

An illustrious list of achievements without a doubt, and one that will stand the test of time, just as his Ajax team of the mid 90’s did. What Van Gaal achieved with the likes of Clarence Seedorf, Patrick Kluivert and Edwin Van der Sar was record-breaking at the least and impossible to replicate at the most.

Ajax ended the 1994-95 season as the unbeaten league winners and European cup winners – a staggering achievement for a team with an average age of 23.

In the process of doing the League and European cup double, Ajax scored a total of 133 goals – an average of 2.6 goals over the 51 games of Eredivisie and Champions League combined.

Fluid, attacking and effective football that simply blew the opposition away by numbers alone.

Try telling this to most Manchester United fans, and they will simply refuse to believe that their manager was capable of any such feat.

Old Trafford has been fortunate enough to witness some of the most exciting football ever played in England or indeed Europe, but sadly those days seem to be a distant memory now. Today, the Theatre of Dreams hosts what seem to be wars of attrition in the guise of a football match.

Fans that travel to away matches in the hopes of witnessing a semblance of an exciting match trudge back home with the same feeling – what kind of football are we being forced to endure?

Here’s an interesting snippet, one that explains Van Gaal’s much-famed “philosophy”.

Safety first football is Van Gaal’s philosophy. If the opponent doesn’t have the ball, they cannot score. Fair enough. All big teams like to hog the ball. That’s the way of football.

But it’s the bottom three statistics that should set the alarm bells ringing. If it takes a team an average of 80 passes to create a chance and shoot, then clearly there is a huge disconnect between build-up and chance creation, one that needs to be addressed immediately.

Possession is only good when a team relentlessly attacks the opponent’s goal. Or at least aims to attack the opposition. The fact that United are last in the league in terms of chances created per passes and shots per passes suggests that the fear of losing the ball is far greater than the advantage they would gain from attempting to attack the opposition’s goal.

This is not an innovative philosophy. This is simply a tactical ploy to never concede a goal.

It’s the cousin of the much maligned “parking the bus” tactic, where a team accepts its shortcomings and looks to keep its shape at all times, only looking to capitalize on the opponent’s errors.

The only difference is teams that “park the bus” do not want to hog the ball. Instead, they want the opponent to be the proactive team and itself to be the reactive team, working on the counterattack.

Such a tactic is suitable for a lower-table side against an admittedly better opponent, but not for a footballing powerhouse that prides itself on attacking, risk-taking football.

Of course, hogging the ball has its place in football. A 1-0 lead is perfectly defended by dominating possession and controlling the game via a slow-tempo – this frustrates the opponent into making mistakes and overcommitting, thereby creating space for the second goal.

But you have to score first, and score early, to earn the right to play in this manner. Manchester United are currently doing neither.

System over individual

You can count the number of individually creative players at Manchester United on one hand. Martial, Memphis, Mata. And judging by his latest performances, we can perhaps add Jesse Lingard to that list.

All the above players are much better used in a central position, from where their pace, range of passing, dribbling and chance creation abilities can open up opposition defences and allow the team to create more chances, and consequently shots on goal.

Yet it is these very players who are forced to work out wide, tracking back to help their fullbacks and use their valuable energy to bring the ball from out from the defenders to the attackers.

To fully maximize their ability, the likes of Martial and Lingard should be played closer to the goal than the likes of Herrera and Rooney – why make Martial run 50 yards from left of midfield to the opponent’s box when he can instead be positioned near the defenders from the start and use that energy to work the opposition’s defense and get the ball into the net?

Probably because Van Gaal does not wish to change the system to suit the players. He would rather change the players to fit the system, thus explaining the reason why Di Maria never really shone and quickly left.

If this continues, Martial and Memphis could very well join Di Maria in leaving for a team that uses their abilities in the right places, instead of forcibly fitting them into an ill-advised system.

Most United fans are not fans of Fellaini, but the Belgian’s presence on the field forces the team to play a more direct game and get the ball into the box quicker. It’s no wonder that United create more chances whenever Fellaini is on the pitch – it’s the perfect example of the right player being given the right kind of service to maximize his abilities.

In a similar vein, the likes of Martial and Lingard need to be used just as wisely so as to maximize their abilities.

Of course, this all depends on if and where Rooney plays. Perhaps it’s time for Louis van Gaal to drop his trousers again!