I am a Manchester United fan ... but ...

[Assasin]

Sorry if you misunderstand me, I don't think Manu need anymore central defenders, just take Smalling and Blinds out or just in emergency case. The new defender, Rojo, Jones and Bailey is good enough.Good teams can be overated when winning, the fact is without about 5 players on Madrid the would look ordinary. What a good team needs are some role players and that Manu has. Trust me and you get two good players to open up space and see how things look different.

It pain me to see the build ups sometimes. Do me a favor and look how many balls are given away in the final third because someone didn't run, someone makes the bad run or just a bad pass. Manu has possession of the ball in most of their game and rarely lose it until the final third. Yet they haven't created as many chances as the others in the top 5.

When you talking about "park the bus" I believe in it sometimes and most good coach know when to do it so as far as I concern that is a none argument For me Manu attack is just not penetrative enough and Jose needs a creative player or to get creative as other teams know what is to expect.

[Jangle]

Ok now we sorta on the same page about the attacking. We need a runner going into the box from the midfield and that’s how he’s using Lingard now. That’s coaching to players strengths. The problem however with Lingard is that he’s not a provider while being the runner when he starts in the midfield. He doesn’t have the consistent creativity when he has the ball and his finishing, although we’ve seen some improvements in the past few weeks, is still poor. Rashford is still immature and he needs to work on his finishing.

[Assasin]

I agree with everything you just said. Now imagine a real creative player beside Lingard in the midfield? That allow Lingard to make the runs and can take on two players. Lingard is still in development phase but can stretch the midfield but I think the greatest weakness is the attack is Mata and Myatarian. Mata while a little creative is a little bit slow and I don't know what is wrong with Myatarian but they haven't establish themselves in the games. Lukaka is playing too far from the midfield and need a little support.

Rashford is stll learning but I think Martial should have been a little better by now. Ashley Young and show that the Wingbacks have a way to go, as most can't cross the ball link him and don't use their brain to cover. Case and point is Shaw giving away the ball about 5 times in the second half yesterday. The offense don't have a leader and if Ibra was healthy things would have been different. Jose has been lucky or had good offensive leaders in the past with Drogba, Ibra and Ronaldo. Let us see what he will do.

[Paul Marin]

Agreed about the keeper. The only way Pep would do better is due to his miserable antics on the touchline.

I am convinced the players are at fault. Look at the Burnley game. They went down 0-2 with 2 CDs on the field. Halftime Jose pulled Rojo and replaced him with an attacker. We played the entire 2nd half with 1 CD who was seen attacking as well. Yet, we were able to score 2 goals and not concede .... so where was that dedication in the first half?

Woodward need fi free up the funds and get the players needed.

Really? Who would you get rid of and who would you buy? Y'all spend a boat load on Lukaku and have the league's most expensive midfield. I think that y'all are missing a field marshal in your ranks which is something Jose always had in his sides at Chelsea, Inter and Real Madrid. That's one. Second, he is more defensive than the Manu** recent culture calls for, so there is a tension there. When Inter beat Barca in the champions league, he had 10 men behind the ball *happily*. The bredda to me is the problem...and I do believe Pep, Klopp, or Conte could take your current squad and do better than him. Jes fi mi tuppance.

[Sir X]

Paul's epiphany: It's not all about the money

Happy New year Sir,welcome home prodigal son?


https://youtu.be/mABIhea3lTw

[Paul Marin]

Nice try eedy boo with the crowd brain. I know it is hard for you to understand, but, the money has to be there. Give Pep West Brom and see how well he does.

[Sir X]

Who says it doesn't ? 😏Claffy!

[Paul Marin]

Who says it doesn't ? 😏Claffy!

Are you frigging kidding me? What happened to more with less? LOL!!!!. Dude, you are a frickin joka. Dyam klown.

[Sir X]

Idiot: The foundation of the thesis more with less is money.

Yuh caan get more outta less with nothing,as RAFA,Klopp and I have explained it,we will never have the big boys money,so we have to be astute in our scouting,purchases and development with little room for error.Cc: Salah!

Claffy 😏

[Paul Marin]

Hahahahaha...woooooiiiiiiieeeee.......you are funny....this is the same jackass that bring bare tripe when me tell him dat to consistently challenge for the title you need money. Hahahaha...late as usual ...but hey, you finally making a likkle progress. Hahahaha....

[Sir X]

Consistency comes from building from more with less,there was a time LFC was the richest club in England and Man U was not.

They got more with less,while LFC got less with more.

[Paul Marin]

Consistency comes from building from more with less,there was a time LFC was the richest club in England and Man U was not.

They got more with less,while LFC got less with more.

Keep spinning GIGS'Y. LOL!!!! Just for the record, and to correct your fake news, Manu** got "more" when they had "more", not when they had "less". Look it up. And remember when you're looking it up, make sure you compare the two teams' WAGE BILLs and SQUAD VALUEs, not NET SPEND. As you (may) remember from previous lessons, NET SPEND is only relevant as it pertains to gaining parity, e.g. (note it is "e.g." and not "cc") a POSITIVE NET SPEND is required for a team that is below a rival to bring it up to PAR. A NEGATIVE NET SPEND is acceptable as long as the negative does not cause the team to drop its SQUAD VALUE and WAGE BILL too far below that of its rivals. Comprende?

[Sir X]

We went over this already liad, when LFC was the richest club in England,Man U got more with less consistently,when they got richer than us it was a mixed as per spending,they continued to get more,we continue yes to get less,with bouts of rejuvanation,The Holluier and Rafa years is proof of this and hopefully Klopp's

liad!

[Assasin]

Lukaku also need to play better, he lost a good amount of balls and his runs are not always good. However the midfield needs to play closer to him.

[Paul Marin]

We went over this already liad, when LFC was the richest club in England,Man U got more with less consistently,when they got richer than us it was a mixed as per spending,they continued to get more,we continue yes to get less,with bouts of rejuvanation,The Holluier and Rafa years is proof of this and hopefully Klopp's

liad!

Ha ha...keep on spinning GIGS'y. Keep it up. First of all, you are the liad, it is well documented. Second, in the Premier League era, we have never been "richer" than Manu**. Their success almost 100% coincided with:

1. the renovation of their stadium from a 40K capacity to a 75K capacity over a number of years in the mid-nineties (ours was still a 45K capacity until recently and we're not even close to 75K all now)
2. them winning the first premier league title in 1992-93 (and consequently getting a major cash infusion to kick-start their ascendancy )
3. their flotation in 1991 which served at the time as a very innovative cash generating device and
4. their incredible ability to market their brand in a MUCH MORE effective way than any of their rivals - most particularly - with Asian markets when most Premier league managers didn't even know where Asia was.
5. massive spending in 1989 after years of a negative acquisition policy - this saw Pallister, Ince and a number of players shipped in with the heaviest spending in the club's history.

I will not go into Liverpool's side of it because it is requires more time than I have, but suffice to say, one cannot underestimate the impact that Heysel and Hillsborough had on the club and it's misfortunes in the years following those disasters, not to mention poor leadership in the Premier League era that is probably most punctuated by Moores and Parry BOTCHING the sale to DIC and going with Hicks & Gillette instead.

Anyway, in my ongoing quest to help make you into an educated man (I know - it's gonna be tough), I challenge you to find *facts* to support your (erroneous) argument that Manu** did more with less in the Premier League era. Simply put - that is a BULLSH!T argument devoid of any tie to reality. If you have proof, then bring it, remember now REEK'y, facts are facts, blowing fawt out your arse does not count as fact. Good luck! You are stupid, but I have faith you can do it.