Ruben Amorim's stubborn insistence that his style is not to change only as a huge gift for the weakest Manchester United players.
It is an excuse and the weak mind players always love an excuse: it is the system, not them.
Amorim is not the first manager in United's recent history to try to change three in the back. Louis Van Gaal did the same when he took over and looked how he developed. He changed after being confronted by Wayne Rooney and Michael Carrick, who told him that the costumes was not happy.
Walking through the door and imposing your style of play without evaluating staff in front of you is very brave or very naive. He goes against everything they taught me as a player under all the great managers I worked with.
If you take care of a job in the middle of a season, it is usually due to the fact that the club is confusion, the roof is dripping and in United literally.
Upon arriving at that new club as manager, you see which players you have to work and then adopt a style that suits them. How you train, your preparation for games, schedules, trips, hotels, you have a little push, round trip before devising a plan that removes each possible complaint so that when you reduce to play and any criticism begins, There are no excuses for those players.
Ruben Amorim has insisted that his approach will not change Man United despite the bad results
The best Man United players are fighting in the system and aggravating their problems.
When Liverpool signed Mark Lawrenson from Brighton in 1981, a year later, taking into account that we were a club that had won three European glasses, we tried to change three in the back with Alan Hansen and Phil Thompson.
We were trying it in the preseason in the launch of team A in Melwood, the first team against reservations. After approximately half an hour, the reserves were 3-0 above and I started moans, saying: 'Are we playing only to accommodate someone? We are a 4-4-2 team and we have always been.
We tried more in the shield of charity against Tottenham and, although we won 1-0, we had an argument later and returned to how we did things better, playing 4-4-2. We won the league that year.
The point is that even the best players have found it difficult to make such changes work and this United team certainly does not have the quality of the players we had.
Some are not suitable for using Manchester United's strip, but love of loveim for imposing their system is giving them that excuse not to perform.
What aggravates the problem is that it is making unnecessary commitments.
When injuries, such as those suffered last week, enforce the changes, must keep your really good players in their best positions. Commit them simply weakens your team.
Bruno Fernandes is his most creative and special player. There are things that do not like when it shows too much frustration in the field, but it is extremely talented. If you are the opposition, you want it as far as possible from your goal and there is more or less where Amorim ended up playing against Tottenham, too deep as Casemiro's partner.
Bruno Fernandes is the most creative player of Man United, but was deeply forced against Tottenham
Fernandes lack of defensive instincts exposed to Casemiro, whose athletics has decreased
The problem is that Casemiro is a constant player from Eddie, nothing more, whose athletics has decreased. He is the Holding midfielder and his priority is not to make cute and intelligent passes or score goals, but to maintain his position, protecting the defenders behind you, so that they do not have to leave and lose their shape.
Playing in this position, the two should never have more than 20 yards on each other. However, Fernandes does not have a defensive head on his shoulders. His natural instinct is to gravitate towards the ball and get involved so that that gap between him and Casemiro only grew more and more while sinking another defeat in Tottenham last weekend.
Committing the role of Fernandes committed United's creativity. Amorim made them too easy to play and they already have too many excuses.
Why football needs to lose the term 'winning fouls'
I was watching television last week as I ran on the tape to run and I almost stopped when a graphic showed that players had 'won' as many faults.
Bruno Guimaraes of Newcastle United was the best, and his teammate Anthony Gordon was second.
How the hell people who frame these statistics think that they should be seen as positive? It can only be negative.
Is that a competition now, with some kind of prize? That is the last table I would like to be superior.
As a player, Liverpool's staff would say they get dirty because you take too many touches and that you don't see the image fast enough.
Bruno Guimaraes headed a graphic of the players to have won most of the fouls this season
Anthony Gordon ranked second, but the faults of “win” are terms, the game should lose
Slow but sure, this has infiltrated our game, encouraging players to get off near the box, perpetuated by poor referees whose lack of understanding of the game means that they constantly fall in lack of this simulation. Yes, simulation. Look that. The definition is 'pretend' or 'deceive'. In short, trap.
In a previous life on television, I remember challenging Micah Richards when he talked about how Jack Grealish “bought” Faults for Manchester City. 'I bought fouls', isn't that trap?
Ask ten of his teammates what they hate the game today, apart from the fact that his team receives a blow and his simulation.
Being a table for the 'win' offenses, is it really something we should celebrate and much less be proud?
In this case, 'winning' is a term that we must lose.
Leeds is a special club, but it can't be so arrogant
I enjoyed watching a football game on Monday night, Leeds against Sunderland.
Two parts that will see themselves as possible teams of the Premier League and with good reasons.
Shend Road has always been a difficult place to go. When I was 19 years old in Middlesbrough, I just caught the end of its great side of the 1970s and in more than one sense. They hit me with a challenge by Terry Yorath in Ayresome Park, ruled out for three months and gave me a well -learned lesson, since they never caught me so badly.
The clash of the Leeds and Sunderland championship on Monday night was an adequate match
Both parties see themselves as potential teams of the Premier League and with a good reason
Leeds has always been a passionate football club, which is what I like, and that is what made playing there a great experience and very special.
Seeing more than 36,000 roaring on his team on Monday, it was an adequate game.
The warning is that if they enter the Premier League, they will have to have a more pragmatic and less arrogant approach to survive with the greats.