Man Utd are winning just enough games to keep Erik ten Hag in a job, which might be just about perfect for everybody else.
Send your mails on all subjects to theeditor@football365.com
Man Utd are in the perfect place
A while ago, someone wrote into the Mailbox gleefully looking forward to Ten Hag entering the ‘Ole Zone’ – that period where results were neither good enough to point to any real meaningful long-term progress but also nowhere near bad enough to encourage whoever is running Man Utd these days to pull the trigger.
Well, anyway, lovely to read Matt Stead’s article on the back of another unconvincing victory to really confirm that we’ve entered the Ole Zone and long may it continue.
Simon, London
Man Utd to finish above Villa but Spurs fourth?
Following the 2-1 victory for United yesterday against Villa away, it was a huge sign of encouragement and the first time United had beaten a Top 9 team away from home in the league under Ten Hag (Not a stat you exactly want against your name after 18 months in charge) and if it weren’t for United’s home form last year, United would have finished outside the Top 4.
Now the question is and credit to the players that this is still possible, can United clinch a Top 4 spot again this season? With Rashford, Hoijlund and Garnacho starting to form some kind of chemistry and teamwork amongst them (Just leave Antony on the bench, should only be coming on if someone is literally dying on the pitch), there looks to actually be some capability of scoring 3 goals a game.
I don’t think I have seen Maguire play as well as he has done in a United shirt than yesterday, he was actually solid and played to his strengths very well, and United have a new hero in the new Fellaini known as Scott McTominay. But on a serious note, he has been bloody effective as a second striker, and doesn’t moan about being benched because he knows what his pros and cons are and Ten Hag has coached that part very well.
There are obviously some United fans getting a bit too giddy saying ‘We’re back to our best’ but really what is United’s best? Is it what we are seeing currently, or what we saw under Ten Hag last year between November – February last season? Point being, United are still 6th in the table with a GD of zero.
It has still been a very bad season from a standards point of view, the only trophy United can win this year is the FA Cup, so if the team can manage to get to the final again but this time win it, then fair enough its not a total disaster of a season (You can argue Top 4 is more important, but I like trophies more, if United do what they did this season in the UCL, is there a point of even pushing so hard for Top 4?)
With INEOS now getting somewhat involved and Ratcliffe probably informing Ten Hag to get his sh*t together with the players, its a sign a potential new start for United and perhaps a change in environment, but lets be real half of the players are only playing well all of a sudden perhaps because they may be informed to f*** off in the summer with new owners in the building.
The one thing I will say Ten Hag has done well at United if the use of youngsters and teenagers as well as the home talent. I think he has implemented that belief and given a chance to the likes of Garnacho, McTominay and Mainoo very very well, and now you look at Hoijland and with that added extra layer of confidence, you all of a sudden look like having a 20-25 goal a season striker. If Rashford can get going again back to what we saw last year and defenders stay fit, I would expect United to be in Top 4 race by May time (This sounds like Arsenal under Wenger during the last few years, but it could be worse right?)
I personally think Spurs will nick Top 4 and they probably deserve it, but I feel like they have a more reliable defence than United, plus they have Son and tbf Richarlson is looking like the player he as at Everton 3-4 years ago. Hopefully Spurs do get Spursy, but I think they will be so focussed to prove a point they are just as good a team without Kane in it.
Rami, Manchester
READ: Man Utd’s next permanent managerial appointment confirmed as ‘character’ shines through again
An ode to Martin
I’m no big NBA fan but like everyone, I enjoyed The Last Dance. The bit I found most fascinating was the 1984 draft pick (and apologies to any NBA fans here for everything I am going to get wrong). Michael Jordan was third pick. This stuck with me, and I immediately went to Wikipedia to see how much the Houston Rockets – who had first pick – regretted missing out on the greatest player of all time. And the answer was, not much, because their first pick – Hakeem Olajuwon – was also one of the greatest of all time.
Anyway, this is a roundabout way of getting to Martin Odegaard. Because he might not have reached the Messi/Michael Jordan ‘greatest of all time’ heights that were being mentioned at the age of 15, he may well still become a legend – a Hakeem Olajawon, if you like. If he stays at Arsenal the rest of his career, and continues the way he’s going, he has the potential to have a statue outside the ground.
I can’t express how much I love Martin Odegaard. He’s (good) Mesut Ozil and Aaron Ramsey wrapped up in one. He has all the flicks and tricks, yet only uses them when necessary. His work rate is phenomenal, and he has work rate to match. He’s such a clean striker of the ball. And the way he manipulates his body to twist and turn and find space – it’s like he has the low centre of gravity of a someone Santi Cazorla sized.
Personally, I don’t think he gets enough love from Arsenal fans, let alone outside the club. But he is a joy to watch, and an immense captain too.
Finally, if Norway don’t qualify for the World Cup, it will be a bit of a tragedy. Not only Odegaard and Haaland, but they have Nusa and Bobb coming through too. Surely they can scrape together another seven players who can kick a ball?
Jaimie (Freddy Adu is the Sam Bowie in this scenario) Kaffash, AFC, north London
Will Arsenal crowing backfire?
Interesting to see the Arsenal fans out in force today after following up the deserved win against Liverpool with a deserved win against what was, let’s be honest, a truly, gut wrenchingly, hideously, awful, awful, awful West Ham.
James, Kent tells us “Stewie must be gutted”. I doubt it mate, he’s just biding his time for the next, inevitable slip up…oh and you’re still in third place.
Chris, Croydon asks “are we bottlers?” Not in the last two weeks Chrissy, but hold your horses, it’s early Feb, and you’re still third buddy!
This idea of “we’ve had our blip!” worries me a bit too. It’s not written that teams can only have one blip each year and then it’s all plain sailing. City, Spurs and Man U away would, or should, temper your optimism just a little bit perhaps?
“Bathing in a waterfall of your tears” Vish? Very poetic, but we still have 14 games to go big fella, you are still in third place and City are looking ominously good, and Liverpool are still top, having played most of the top teams away already.
I don’t dislike Arsenal too much, but you guys really need to reel it in a tad. Might be an idea to save the cockiness, kneejerkery and dare I say it, celebrations, for when you have actually delivered something other than a couple of consecutively decent performances.
Enjoy it by all means, but this nonsense might well come back to haunt you.
Just a thought.
ANON
On John Nicholson’s blue balls
I’ve enjoyed John Nicholson’s columns throughout the many years I’ve been reading this site. I don’t always agree with what he says, but I admire his passion, his principles and his general attitude. While I don’t want to take him to task over his piece about the introduction of blue cards, it’s an emotive issue and I wanted to weigh in with a critique and an opinion.
READ: Blue cards have left John Nicholson swearing more than we thought possible
It reads to me like John is writing from a place of sound and fury. It’s an instinctive, emotional response to a potentially significant piece of news. Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to have taken the time to properly marshal his arguments, and as a result the column is an illogical mess whose main virtue is the sound and fury. Most of the arguments can be simply crossed through without even engaging them on the level of debate. This is a shame, because the introduction of blue cards is worth arguing about, and it’s worth taking time to develop those arguments properly so people can get a full picture of what is at stake.
I’m not going to pull the whole piece apart, but I will pick a few bits out that particularly stood out.
Is it ten minutes with the ball in play? That could be 20 minutes. If it isn’t it might be only with the ball in play for five minutes. Is that what you want?
I presume it will be ten minutes. Blue carded in the 15th minute – you can return to action in the 25th. Ten minutes of match time, ball in play or not. I don’t see why this would be a point of contention.
Then there are fans to bear in mind paying big money to see a worse product.
The reason for the blue card/sin-bin introduction is to bring harsher punishments to bear for verbal abuse of referees and cynical counter-attack-halting fouls. Football’s administrators clearly feel that those aspects of the game, common as they are, are making the product worse, and I find it hard to disagree. Yelling and screaming at referees is pathetic and looks pathetic. Cynical halfway-line fouls to stop promising counters are a blight on the game. The idea of the blue card is to mitigate both these occurrences, which should, the theory runs, improve the product, not make it worse. But I think JN knows this; that he ignores it is disingenuous.
What’s the point in spoiling the game to address them [some offences that aren’t sufficiently punished]? They shouldn’t trouble you at the expense of the integrity of the game.
What is ‘the integrity of the game’? This concept is plopped here like it’s the self-evident answer to all things, but I genuinely don’t know what it means. Did the introduction of yellow and red cards cost us the integrity of the game? Why not? What about crossbars? Offsides? The back-pass rule? Or a more recent rule, such as defenders being allowed in the box at goal kicks? Why do some fundamental changes protect the integrity of the game while others threaten it? Who decides which is which, and do we agree on what it is we’re trying to preserve? The volume of rhetorical questions in this paragraph should be a good clue that these are abstract ideas without definitive answers.
If you lose your rag at a ref because he’s useless and get sin-binned for telling them they are a hapless wanker, who is in the wrong really?
This is laughable. The player is in the wrong. Obviously. Again, I think JN knows this.
Easy to imagine VAR overturning a sin-bin decision after three minutes of deliberation. Sounds great, doesn’t it?
Why would VAR rule on sin-bin decisions? I don’t see any reason for this to happen. John has conflated two things he doesn’t like into one maelstrom of awfulness here. No indication anywhere that sin-bins will be subject to VAR reviews, just as yellow cards aren’t.
Once upon a time, you could tackle someone around the neck – and boy was it fun – without penalty
I don’t even have to criticise this. The ignorance speaks for itself. JN is not ignorant about the rules of football, so he’s being disingenuous again.
We couldn’t be more contemptuous. Such people don’t realise how trivial and stupid they appear to the rest of us and are unaware their attitude is leading to ideas like blue cards
I think it should be possible to have this debate without dividing everyone into right/wrong, smart/idiot, truthful/dishonest camps. Some people who love football, who play and watch it religiously and have done for decades, will be in favour of blue cards – because diversity of thought and opinion is a fundamental quality of any group of people. The view as expressed above is partisan in the extreme, and as John should know, this is the same tactic favoured by the kind of selfish, corrupt politicians and Big Money mouthpieces I’m sure you all despise as much as I do. John – don’t fall into the same trap; do better. Write better. Don’t call people who disagree with you dribbling saps and fucking stupid twats, because they’re not.
Blue cards will just make games more interrupted, more defensive and more open to allegations of cheating or at least poor officiating.
It’s a shame that only at the end of a several-hundred-word rant are we given anything approaching a coherent argument. If JN wants to present a convincing case against the use of blue cards, why not start with the actual points of contention, listed here neatly and precisely, and then proceed to explain how each of these points in turn will a) likely come to pass, and b) make the sport worse? That way you might, you know, persuade some of the fence-sitters over to your side, rather than put everyone off joining you there…
There are mitigating circumstances for the tone of the column: blue cards are a f**king weird, unnecessary idea; the last major introduction of this sort (VAR) has made football a lot less fun to watch, to the point of ruining top-end competition for some; John is recovering from a major brain spazz, and probably doesn’t yet have the intellectual or physical resources to fight this fight in a reasoned, effective way. But none of that excuses a professional writer from publishing the kind of thoughtless, witless, incoherent noise that JN has offered up here. Or F365 for not, apparently, exercising any editorial restraint other than inserting a few asterisks.
Thank you for publishing so much thoughtful, humourous and entertaining content over the years. I look forward to more reasoned analysis in future columns.
Scriv O’Scoob, Reading
…A response to JN’s long rant article about blue cards and whether they will/won’t won’t work.
John and likeminded sceptics: Temporary dismissals (“sin bins”) + similar rules have been in place in amateur football and youth football for many years. It generally works. It’s generally a good idea. It’s generally better than the alternative of not having them.
This isn’t done as some clandestine operation against the rules of football. IFAB literally explicitly states that this is allowed in the introduction section of The Laws Of The Game (Section: General Modifications; Sub-Section: For youth, veterans, disability and grassroots football). This is not new. This was already the case when I qualified as a referee in 2018. The reason it is being implemented in professional football is that it has been seen as a success in amateur and youth football.
If people want to make an argument that professional football should be exempt from players being given 10 minute suspensions because you believe it will have a negative impact on the spectacle/entertainment, fine. But, as-is, John’s article is archetypical PFM nonsense, and once upon a time, John would be the one calling this out.
Oliver Dziggel, Geneva Switzerland
…So Johnny’s back then!
Wow – I hope that has fuelled him to get strong and well again.
And what’s more.. I agree, I agree with it all..
I usually a) don’t.. or b) do but only partially, very partially… lol
This time I think he is 100% spot on with this nonsense
We dont need a 3rd colour card… worst case it still a yellow (for dissent or tactical fouling) but that comes with a 10min sin bin if the ref insists.. if you really have to..
But its more subjectivity and arguments about consistency.. or you simply change the yellow card to mean a yellow is an automatic 10min sideline
That would stop keepers taking 30seconds to kick a ball by the way!
So let’s stop change for the sake of change.. as John says
Glad to read you are fighting the good cause again John – Hope this raging doesnt cause a relapse.
Good luck
Al – LFC
…I just read John Nicholson’s article for a third time. I can’t stop laughing. Blue cards, the silly buggers.
Zdravko
