Thread:
Are Man Utd recent wins as a result of Individual brilliance from Paul Pogba or coached & tactics?
Fulham 1 vs. 2 Man Utd — Tactics #MUFC
United usually buildup in 2 different shapes/patterns:
1. 244(424) or
424 shape come from #mufc transitioning quick as mentioned in my threads prev. when #mufc are out of possession their defensive shape 442.
This is not the best ex.👇Sorry
The positioning of the players was great all game.
These are clear tactical and coaching instructions. #MUFC
The spacing between the players where great and they all maintained position. This pushed Fulham deeper and deeper. #MUFC
1. Dictate.
2. Progress.
3. Create.
4. Push up &shoot if possible.
5. Help AWB progress by providing him right angles for passing. #MUFC
1. Left or right of a pivot as DLP.
2. Double pivot Left CAM
3. False Winger.
4. Left of a diamond.
#MUFC
You don't win games just by "Individual Brilliance" unless you have a player that can go through 4-5 players alone.
We need to create more as our forwards are not clinical at this moment. This will remove the need for a special goal.
#MUFC
https://t.co/81r3Nl2dA6
I do think I was unclear here:
— UtdArena (@utdarena) January 22, 2021
I am not saying we aren't creating sustainable chances. However, teams often miss sustainable chances \u2014 it's just how football is. Based on that we need to be creating more that caters for the misses in that regard. We're just below that level.
More from Sport
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
