Why Michael Carrick should NOT get the Man Utd job | OneFootball

The clamour is real but Manchester United fans are not united in wanting Michael Carrick to get the permanent gig.

There’s also lots on cornerball and more in a really quite good Mailbox. Send your views to theeditor@footbal365.com

Should Michael Carrick get the Man Utd job?

You asked, should Carrick get the United job? If we’re setting aside the discussion of who the alternative might be and judging Carrick purely in isolation then my answer right now is ‘probably not’, though I hope to be convinced otherwise.

It seems a bit crazy even to me that the former player, club legend, and all round nice guy isn’t an automatic shoo-in for the job given the near perfect winning record he’s achieved so far. What’s making me think he shouldn’t get the job? That he might possess the same tactical stubbornness that eventually made Amorim’s position untenable.

When Carrick was appointed as interim at United there were many articles written about his time at Middlesborough and two things really stand out. Firstly his tactical style which in simple terms equated to ‘hold possession and attack through the middle’. Secondly was the frustration felt by the Boro fans, and eventually by the club’s hierarchy, that he would not change this style even when it clearly wasn’t working.

The thing about attacking through the middle is that it’s really difficult because that’s where most of the defending players are and so there is very little space. To do this successfully and consistently you need your attackers to be significantly better than the opposition, you need extremely well drilled passing sequences, and you need some method of creating more central space or a numeric advantage. Even if you manage all of this it’s still really hard to do.

What happened at Boro is that teams learned if they sat in a tight block and packed the middle of the pitch they could easily stifle Carrick’s attacking style, win the ball back in the middle, then counter attack. The frustration grew when this was clearly apparent but Carrick kept deploying the same methods even after opposition managers pointed out how predictable they were.

It’s a small sample but already at United we see a heavy focus on attacking through the middle. The return of rondos and quick passing triangles are apparent on the pitch, and they look great, but aside from the goals at Arsenal they’ve not been particularly effective in creating scoring chances. In terms of actual goal threat most our opportunities have come from playing the ball out wide, around the block, then cutting back to a central runner who has found space due to the stretched defence.

City, Arsenal, and Tottenham were good games for Carrick’s style where they would be more space through the middle due to the oppositions own set up. Fulham, West Ham, and Everton were games more suited to playing around a block, where Sesko would be the most effective. Yet Carrick played the same way, with the same starting attackers in every game. Only when the result was in danger was Sesko introduced. So early signs of the same stubbornness, the same inflexibility that was an issue at Boro.

It might just be that he’s sticking with this set up because results are still going his way. He might have a more complex style planned for the future and is just laying the groundwork for that now. I don’t know but until we see some evidence to the contrary it has to be assumed this is how United will play under Carrick and that we’ll eventually suffer the same issues.

Having said all that, in the context of ‘if its not Carrick then it has to be someone else’, I’d still choose him over all but 2 or 3 of the possible alternatives. Dave, Manchester

…Gaptoothfreak here. Man United fan. New York-based. Emotionally exhausted since 2013.

I come not to bury Michael Carrick, but to politely – lovingly – beg Manchester United to resist doing the most Manchester United thing imaginable at the end of this season: giving the permanent manager’s job to the nice interim bloke who made everyone feel calm for a few months.

Look, Carrick is lovely. Proper club man. Rolls his sleeves up, says sensible things, doesn’t throw players under buses or start tactical beefs with referees’ fourth cousins. He’s basically football’s equivalent of the substitute teacher who lets you watch a documentary when the class has been chaotic all term.

But appointing him permanently would feel like Netflix cancelling a show after finally fixing the lighting and then rebooting it with the same writers who caused the problem in Season 1.

We’ve done this before. Ole was vibes. Rangnick was PowerPoint. Ten Hag was Structure™. Now Carrick is Comfort Food Football — warm, familiar, and probably not what you build a long-term elite project around. Manchester United cannot keep hiring managers the way people rebound-date after a breakup: “He’s nice, he listens, and he already knows my trauma.”

Temporary competence is not the same as elite leadership. A good run as caretaker should not automatically trigger a lifetime appointment clause like some sort of managerial Pokémon evolution.

And here’s the real fear: success under Carrick right now feels a bit like when Ross and Rachel briefly get along — everyone forgets the underlying chaos and suddenly wants permanence. We all know how that ends. Someone’s shouting “WE WERE ON A BREAK,” and the club needs another five-year rebuild.

United need a manager appointed because he is unquestionably the best strategic choice for the next era — not because the dressing room smiles more and Bruno looks slightly less like he’s arguing with invisible spirits.

Carrick may well become a top manager one day. Just… maybe not via the emotional shortcut of nostalgia and relief.

We’ve pressed the sentimental button too many times already. This club needs ruthless clarity, not another “ah go on then” decision made after a decent spring run and a few post-match hugs.

Respectfully yours,and nervously watching history try to repeat itself. Gaptoothfreak, Man. Utd., New York (or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Chaos)

Why are Man Utd allowed so much debt?

1.3 billion. No, not the number of foreigners Ratcliffe is pretending to think will come and take our jobs (Top Hat Twat Rat Jam Nitty Gritty is way ahead of you anyway, immigrants! He’s got rid of all the jobs) – it’s the number of pounds Man U are in debt.

I could enquire again why the sport’s financial rules are drawn up in such a specific way that this doesn’t matter; curved just so much that Aston Villa have to behave like they’re in a novel written by Charles Dickens, HP Lovecraft and Doug Ellis; but stopping short of doing anything that might curb the Sinister 6 cosplaying Brewster’s Millions via Groundhog Day.

A stroke of luck that isn’t it? Some flat regulation about avoiding nation-sized debt may have caused awkwardness for the clubs PSR isn’t touching at the moment. So it’s a jolly good thing the blazers left that sort of thing out.

But soon whoever is on snark duty for F365 will be along to say, Wellactually, being in debt to the tune of £1.3 billion – £1.3 BILLION – is *exactly* what acting profitably and sustainably looks like; this is the very soul of Fair Play, peasant. So let’s not mention it.

Aside from that, Berrada claiming their ‘off-pitch transformation’ – ie closing the canteen and sacking 500 low wage staff – heralds the new dawn, is a bit much. Considering any money saved from that has already been spent 3-4 times over by hiring and then firing ETH, Ashworth and Amorim, never mind Antony and all the goalkeepers they’ve signed.

Easy to slap everyone on the back for solving a problem if they’re allowed to spend enormous amounts of time, effort and above all, money on it, and just writing everything off and starting again when it doesn’t work.

A proper FFP would force Michael Carrick to get a tune out of Onana, Zirkzee, Garnacho, Malacia, Hojlund, etc. As it is – does it truly make a difference who their manager is? Does their scouting and recruitment really affect anything? Just keep spending whatever you want, and the typewriter monkey will give you Troilus and Cressida sooner or later. Neil Raines

Why football is becoming risk-averse

Ace mailbox on Everton v Man U corners farce/general drop in entertainment of the PL, ably led by Mikel’s automatons. Three things wrecking the league/English football IMO:

1) Money. Huge money. Ruins everything in the end, in this case a lot because of 2.

2) American owners. Not content with their own interminably shite “football”, and in large part because Liverpool v City league fixture this season got 6+ times the viewing figures of their Superbowl (yaaaaaawn), they bring their shite take on sports here (Relegation? No thanks ya limey bastards), which leads to 3

3) Risk aversion first, sport second

Nothing will/can be done because the wolves are already through the door.

So get ready for a lot more smarmy identikit preppy ivy league arseholes talking about our game like it’s a new Chevy franchise off the pitch, and eye bleed on it. RHT/TS x

(Turki Alalshikh and Dana White pulling Frank Warren and Nepo Baby Hearn’s pants down with a large side of pillow fists Benn jumping ship because he wasn’t under contract *chortle* is possibly the funniest thing since Ickle Mikel believed Luis Enrique. And bragged about it).

…Very interesting stuff in this morning’s mailbox, which kinda echoes my thoughts this season – top-end football is bloody rubbish to watch. It’s got faster, certainly, but there is no skill involved at all as a bunch of top athletes (no wheezy or fat lads here anymore) run and pass in strictly regimented patterns, endless shuttle runs, before 5 subs come on to make sure that the fitness or running levels never drop for a single second. All games are decided either by set pieces or some ridiculous VAR decision that eats up most of the time and totally sucks the joy out of football.

Meanwhile the fans in the stadium are now tourists that have come to be entertained (and spend ££ on merch and food and drink) and so feel entitled to boo if their team is not winning at half time, no matter what. I would rather watch Scottish football or EFL because things happen, people make mistakes people score worldies people bundle one in off their bum. You can vaguely recognise the level of football as ‘I could have done that if (insert excuse here). You get to know players. But paying £60 to watch Gabriel or Tarko wrestling at a corner, or Brighton endlessly recycling the ball? No thanks.

The end result of all of this is that people will stop subscribing to Sky or TNT or whatever and the money will go out of the game and maybe we can have our football back? Dan, London

The past: Not always better

While I would broadly agree that it feels like things are getting worse, people have been complaining that things (and young people) are worse than they were in their day since the dawn of time.

Who doesn’t want things to be like they were 20 years ago? We were young – of course things felt better.

There were plenty of absolutely dreadful games even in 2006, with terrible decisions and performances that upset us all, with people claiming that football was better before the Premier League came around. The thing is, we don’t remember Watford’s goalless draw with Reading when Matt Taylor scored against Everton. We don’t even remember the game itself, just a shot from range.

I’m sure in 20 years we’ll all be complaining about whatever top flight football looks like then. Don’t compare today to your memories; the past will always win. Tom, Andover

Arsenal fans defend the corner jostling

Reading the recent Mailbox, my first thought was, “I’m not sure Arsenal invented jostling at corners”. Now, don’t get me wrong, Arsenal absolutely do jostle at corners and are very good at it, but I’m not sure being good at corners (thanks to jostling) deserves all the pearl-clutching that seems to have arisen.

One mailer said that attacking teams should be limited as to how many players they are allowed in the box when they are awarded a corner, on the basis that (paraphrasing) all but one of those players is not going to be playing the ball. Well durr, that’s just called “taking a corner” isn’t it? Pretty much every corner that’s ever been taken in the history of football is many attacking players in the box but only one getting his head on it. There’s nothing illegal about that.

Another mailer said that players standing in front of the goalkeeper is obstruction. It’s not obstruction, it’s just called “trying to get to the ball first”. If Kobbie Mainoo has the ball and he’s looking to make a pass to Bruno Fernandes, then Claude Makelele getting as close as he can to Bruno in order to give himself the best chance of winning the ball is not obstruction. Why aren’t attacking players allowed to position themselves as best as they can in order to beat the goalie – who can use his hands – to the ball? There is literally no rule against that.

(With the caveat that yes, if the ball is not by the attacker and the goalie still wants to attempt to claim it, then continuing that close attention is absolutely obstruction).

Most teams that have ever taken the field have had the good ol’ fashioned “set piece routine”. I’m not necessarily talking about corners, but direct free kicks, counter attacks, throws, and of course corners.

Brian Mbuemo scored an absolutely wonderful goal from a set piece routine that was from a corner. That corner involved Kobbie Mainoo making a back post to front post run that caught Tottenham offguard, getting a flick on the ball that saw it roll to Mbuemo, who scored beautifully. That’s a corner routine using the feet.

What Arsenal do is, pretty much, the same thing, only using heads. Set piece routines are part of the fabric of football, and these too are, generally, not illegal.

What we’re witnessing now with Arsenal are a team who have been able to create corner routines that are very tough to defend. To do what Arsenal do you need the best delivery. Arsenal have Rice, Saka and Eze who are amongst the best set piece takers in the world. You also need players who are very good in the air. Arsenal have Saliba, Merino and Gabriel who are amongst the best in the world at winning headers in either box. Arsenal also have the likes of White, Timber, Calafiori and Jesus who are little ratbag disrupters in the box.

Do they bend the rules, do they push the boundaries? Absolutely. Are they penalised for it? Frequently. Crucially, do they stay within the laws of the game at corner time? Yes they usually do. The result is that when Rice delivers the perfect corner, and Merino makes that back-to-front run, and Saliba flicks it on, and Gabriel heads it in, all whilst Ben White causes a bit of chaos… all whilst playing within the rules…. Arsenal tend to score.

Arsenal at corners, currently, is like Robben cutting in from the right; is like Henry cutting in from the left; is like Ronaldo doing a step-over when one-on-one with the goalie; is like Totti looking where the goalie is when he’s 30 yards out. You know what’s coming, there’s just nothing you can do about it. And, true to form, if Arsenal have almost perfected something, then others will copy – to varying forms of success (see: Everton). Dale May, Swindon Wengerite

…I understand that many fans don’t like Arsenal and/or think the club is somehow responsible for the set piece tactics that were perfectly fine when other clubs did the same, but I’d encourage them to find the time to rewatch Arsenal’s set piece goals.

Simply, Arsenal isn’t guilty of the allegations. You probably saw something you didn’t like 2 or 3 seasons ago and haven’t updated your opinions since. It helps if you already dislike Arsenal too.

Of all of the set pieces Arsenal have scored this season, there’s maybe one corner scored that involved interference with the goalkeeper. Two at most. Seriously. Go check.

Now the Everton stuff? Take that up with Mr. Moyes, not Senor Arteta or Monsieur Jover.

All that said, I know the folks that have decided Arsenal is responsible for this new “scourge on the sport” will ignore my suggestion and keep whining about a trend that isn’t a problem when it favors their clubs. As you were… Deen (Arsenal – of course!)

A solution to cornerball

Look, we all hate the weird 18 players orgy-ball inside the six-yard box where every player is fouling their marker. Even the Arsenal fans hate it. (I assume Dyche and Pulis don’t read the mailbox, if I’m wrong, I apologise and will correct to ‘most of us hate’.) And there’s a bunch of people suggesting fundamental rule changes to it.

I’m going to suggest something much simpler.

It’s impossible to ref that ruck of players. Who’s pulling whom? Who pulled first? Who is pulling enough to matter? Who shoved that guy? Why is the goalie bleeding? Oh wait, there’s also a few other players you have to pay attention to, including the ball.

For all we shit on the refs, I don’t see any way to correctly referee one of those katamari balls without eyes in the sky and five minutes to go over the details. Certainly not by two men in real time.

At the moment their response has been to shrug and just let them go. This only benefits the attacking team, any fouls they give away are incidental, while any the defending team are penalties. This has lead to more and more and more, and will continue to, until we look back on Everton United as a quaint when we still played football.

My suggestion is basically for them to not change what they’re doing at all. Referees, keep shrugging and giving up on working out what’s going in the rat-king. But instead of just letting whatever happens happen, blow the whistle as the corner is kicked, give the defence a free kick and move on with life.

It’s the attacking team creating that doom-scrum – the defenders are just where the attackers are, and will (zonal marking allowing) mostly just follow them around. And if the attacking team is creating a situation that’s impossible to referee, then the referee should end the situation.

They already do it when they think they fucked up awarding the corner – blowing extremely early for the softest nothing to avoid compounding a mistake. Now do it for the good of the game, and themselves. It won’t need a rule change, or an offseason directive from PGMOL, just an agreement and willingness to protect themselves (which they’re great at) and the game (ahem.)

Attacking teams will adjust, spreading out again. They’ll still be able to leave a man on the keeper. Still have a big bloke lurking at the near or far post, but it won’t be 16 guys playing twister. Goals will still be scored. Andrew M (on the edge of the 16 yard box) London

PS. Do it for long throws too.

Consistency and Man Utd

Taking a couple of things from the mailbox, for me the most important thing is consistency in refereeing. If one thing is a foul, it’s a foul no matter where or by whom; yes the penalty area is a higher value area to foul in, but then just don’t foul? Push is a push is a foul. Dive is a dive is a foul. Dragging a player back by their shirt is a yellow. 5cm margin of error on offsides is always applied for every team not just one. Delays beyond a reasonable margin to take free kicks and corners are punished by the ball being given to the other team.

(I saw a fascinating stat about the time wasted by delaying set pieces in the league. One team came “top of the table” with 117 minutes wasted in the league this year at an average of 44 seconds per instance. Like with the throw-in takers just walking 20 yards, how is this nonsense allowed?)

Second, to clear up a fallacy. Mainoo finished the game with 96% pass accuracy while Bruno and Casemiro gave the ball away around 14 times each IIRC. In fairness, most of those passes were simple ones, but that was because he was the one taking the pressure (and indeed was the most fouled player, while also delivering ) to lay the ball back to Casemiro or Bruno to (attempt to) pass. But it’s weird how some players get so misrepresented. By most accounts, he had a decent game. As did Casemiro who put in a lot of good defensive actions in spite of his poor passing game. Bruno not so much, although that was much down to Everton who deserve credit for a very impressive pressing game, even if there were elements that went a little over the top.

As far as the match itself, I didn’t know Cunha could pull off that pass, but what a pass (after a nice little bit of passing) it was and the run and finish by Sesko gave me flashes of CR7. Lammens is still the signing of the season for me, though; no longer worried about the keeper when crosses come in or shots are taken for the first time in over a decade; I’d forgotten what that felt like. Badwolf

F365 Investigates

I always enjoy The Office (UK) references on F365 and more are always welcome, although they must have to be looked up as to what they are by the younger generation.

I used to try and insert as many Brentisms and Keenan quotes into my office chat as I can get away with (some Partridge too) however they are met by the new and younger crowd with blank stares or even mild contempt (although the last part may just be for me in general)

So obviously happy to see the investigation line pop up in Mediawatch today, however shouldn’t it have read as ‘Invetigation in process?’ Get it right!

As a whole will also take this opportunity, without reading as someone desperate to see their mail published, to thank you all for the daily reads and laughs. I know some have been big critiques recently having read the mailbox daily, but I am thankful as the half hour of my lunch break spent on your site cheers me up no end, so thanks!