Manchester Utd v Aston Villa Post-Match Thread

[mallo]

A point. A point would have done it

[Rico]

Emi goes full Emi, and you never want to go full Emi

That really made me laugh. Someone should get it printed on a T-Shirt and sell them outside the ground.

[rougegorge]

A point. A point would have done it

Or goal difference. 8 of our 10 league defeats were by 2 goals or more.

[paul_e]

I'd have gone with Mings yesterday personally.

Because we lost all the players that didn’t play would’ve been better options

I think the Mings v Torres debate has been going for some time and the stats tend to support the idea that we concede less and lose less with Mings in the team.

We qualified for the champions league with Torres there, some really short memories on here.

[VillaTim]

I'd have gone with Mings yesterday personally.

Because we lost all the players that didn’t play would’ve been better options

I think the Mings v Torres debate has been going for some time and the stats tend to support the idea that we concede less and lose less with Mings in the team.

We qualified for the champions league with Torres there, some really short memories on here.

Whilst conceding lots of goals but having the ability to outscore teams .

[john e]

I'd have gone with Mings yesterday personally.

Because we lost all the players that didn’t play would’ve been better options

I think the Mings v Torres debate has been going for some time and the stats tend to support the idea that we concede less and lose less with Mings in the team.

We qualified for the champions league with Torres there, some really short memories on here.

Whilst conceding lots of goals but having the ability to outscore teams .

Your agenda is obsessive
But you’re an idiot (imo) so it doesn’t matter

[Tony Daleys Shorts]

If it’s a mentality thing and we always crumble in the big games. Then how does PSG, Bayern, Newcastle, Man City at home happen. Why didn’t we crumble and lose 5 when 2 down at Arsenal. I don’t get it, were they not big games?

I might be wrong but for me, it’s more we got the tactics wrong yesterday and at Wembley, then struggle to change things when it doesn’t work, more so than we collapse mentally.

[Steve67]

Dermot Gallagher agrees, the goal should have stood.  It really is a very poor decision. 

[Somniloquism]

The thing I don't get is, what's the point in having VAR you can't look the referee's decision even if he's blown his whistle?

exactly , they blow the whistle for a goal and then the goal gets chalked off with VAR overturning it , its ridiculous .

We of all fans should know goals can't be looked at if the whistle has been blown before the ball hits the net, or do people have such short memories?

I'm also not sure why people are comparing to goals scored and then the whistle is blown as the goal is scored before the whistle, not after.

[Somniloquism]

Emi goes full Emi, and you never want to go full Emi

That really made me laugh. Someone should get it printed on a T-Shirt and sell them outside the ground.

Villa Park or the place he ends up at?

[ChicagoLion]

I'd have gone with Mings yesterday personally.

Because we lost all the players that didn’t play would’ve been better options

I think the Mings v Torres debate has been going for some time and the stats tend to support the idea that we concede less and lose less with Mings in the team.

We qualified for the champions league with Torres there, some really short memories on here.

No one is saying we don’t win games with Torres playing, it’s just that we win more with Mings and concede less.

[SamTheMouse]

If it’s a mentality thing and we always crumble in the big games. Then how does PSG, Bayern, Newcastle, Man City at home happen. Why didn’t we crumble and lose 5 when 2 down at Arsenal. I don’t get it, were they not big games?

I might be wrong but for me, it’s more we got the tactics wrong yesterday and at Wembley, then struggle to change things when it doesn’t work, more so than we collapse mentally.

Yes, I think this is absolutely the case.

All managers have their own preferred formation and way of playing, and Emery is obviously no exception.

I'm not convinced they ever change much, save for a few minor tweaks. The clearest tactical adjustment I've seen Emery make recently has entailed instructing Emi to go longer and bypass the opposition's press, as against the Saudis.

But for the most part, every game is approached the same way. Assuming opponents do likewise, it means that certain match-ups are just more likely to go against us. Emery's tactics work well against most sides, but clearly something needs to change when we're up against 3-4-3, as we forfeit all control of proceedings.

The best managers have the flexibility to adapt, and clearly we have an elite manager, so hopefully this  will be addressed next season.

[brontebilly]

I’m not saying we shouldn’t of started with Mings, he might of made the difference although he’s crumbled a few times against Man United in the past like everybody else

It was a capitulation yesterday but I wouldn’t have picked out Torres as the chief culprit I think there are others that can take that accolade.
Obviously those who have the agenda against him every time we lose it’s always on him is not gonna change

Sure, Mings isn't prime John Terry or anything like it. But he's a leader and we had none yesterday. That's on Emery. He punted on Torres distribution skills being key against a half hearted United press but it was badly misplaced. His distribution skills seem to be fading. Not helped by the ball bouncing off Watkins every time he got it, granted. Not helped by Rogers in the wrong position either but still nowhere near good enough.

Torres wasn't the chief culprit for sure (Id hone in on our midfield two, Onana particularly there, who never showed up) but he was dreadful. I'm not sure that's up for debate either. That mistake he made after half time should have finished us.

[Crown Hill]

Just had a slow-mo look at our disallowed goal.The ref only starts to whistle as the ball leaves Morgan's boot. The United defenders were not affected by the whistle to affect the ball going into the net.
And the stream i was watching had the var screen then come up but was then obviously quickly cancelled .
I'm more fuming about this now than in real time.

I think VAR just checked when the whistle was blown. But it is ridiculous given the purpose of VAR that they can’t use common sense and say it didn’t affect anything. Bureaucracy and Napoleonic law!

[Russ aka Big Nose]

Posting the link below from another thread. An example of VAR intervening after the whistle was blown … at Old Trafford, in favour of the home team!


https://x.com/jimivillan/status/1926725852374421917?s=48&t=LVxR0Bw9iameEdYaLirmDw

As I said last night, if VAR sends the ref to the monitor to award a goal, there is nowhere near the same reaction. There’s more chance that VAR is credited with getting to the right outcome.

If anyone wants to suggest this is some sort of Karma for the ‘ghost goal’, respectfully, give your head a wobble. UTV