01 May 2026 07:39:01
{Ed's Note - Ed001 has posted a new article entitled, Matchday 34 - Quick Round Up
1.) 01 May 2026
01 May 2026 19:04:07
Fantastic review Ed001, thank you. And what a statement in saying that our game against the bees was the best in this season. You had Diouf (of Ham) as a starman and i would want your opinion in him. Everytime i see him is decent with a very good cross in him but i thin he is a little bit lightweight
{Ed001's Note - his defending is weak, he is lightweight, he has the odd good game but he is not great.}
2.) 02 May 2026
01 May 2026 23:34:19
Great review Tris, and your comments, as a non-United fan, show RA's stubbornness around not picking Mainoo and playing Bruno as a CM instead of a 10.
{Ed001's Note - for me, those two decisions cost him his job. They were clearly stupid. Bruno in particular, probably the best attacking mid in the game right now and yet he refused to play him in that role.}
3.) 02 May 2026
02 May 2026 10:50:18
Should be in prison for that alone ed ?
{Ed001's Note - it is astonishing that Amorim still has support from some. It was clear he wasn't using the players correctly.}
4.) 02 May 2026
02 May 2026 11:46:00
You lads keep beating that drum. It wasn't clear Ed. Not at all.
{Ed001's Note - if you think that then I really don't know what you were watching as it was clear as bloody day. You will never admit to being wrong though, that I am sure of.}
5.) 02 May 2026
02 May 2026 12:17:31
Don, I am not understanding your thinking. Bruno is one of the best 10s around, but he was played as a CM. Mainoo had been a breakout star, but was basically ignored, even in favour of Ugarte.
That they have both done so well under Carrick suggests RA got this wrong.
Please don't quote XG at me, just help me understand why you think this isn't clear.
6.) 02 May 2026
02 May 2026 13:31:42
We hamstrung Bruno and Amad by playing them out of position, benched Mainoo, and took an attacking piece off the board to add another centre back.
I'm not a football snob, I believe there are plenty of ways to win a football match. Winning games is always the be all and end all of football. Rebuen couldnt even get a semi-decent run going to show a glimmer of hope in his methods.
Dan Ashworth fell on his sword when he said this appointment made no sense, and he was ultimately vindicated.
Amorim should have adapted, bought himself time, and slowly drilled his methods home. Instead he was stubborn, pig headed, and putting himself above the team.
I didnt mind the man, he seems like a decent guy, but stating from the get go that you are inflexible is not the smartest way about a job like United.
Carrick will get the job full time, and for better or worse, the merry go round starts again.
7.) 02 May 2026
02 May 2026 14:59:24
I'd agree with a lot of that, Mumbles.
In the end, you've got to call a spade a spade. He should have looked at different options he had, and his ego wouldn't let him admit that.
He did so much good stuff and put us on a good trajectory, and started a change in habits and culture. He failed because he was inflexible, and that will stand him in good stead for the future. He will have learnt plenty.
Carrick has done very well, results-wise, and deserves to be considered for the full-time position.
Has he done enough? And has he got enough to improve us?
I think the answer in terms of results is he has done enough, the answer to the 2nd question is only known to those in charge.
When they talk to other candidates, it's the 2nd question they will be considering, I hope, and not the 1st. Has Carrick done enough in his everyday work to convince them that he can lead the team to where they want to be? Or will someone else come into the equation and blow their socks off with a clear vision?
Who knows. All I hope is that whoever gets the job, that he gets the squad strengthened with 4 or 5 very good strategic signings and gets rid of players who don't contribute enough. 55 plus games next season, so we do need serious reinforcements for any prospective manager.
8.) 02 May 2026
02 May 2026 18:32:04
Ken. ?
9.) 02 May 2026
02 May 2026 19:47:46
I was an RA advocate, but even I can admit Bruno was played incorrectly.
10.) 02 May 2026
02 May 2026 20:46:26
I think he knew about Bruno, but I think he wanted his two number tens to be ball carriers, something Bruno is not. Amorim wanted to do things his way, set a clear style, and then buy players to fit in, rather than think short term and play to players' strength. We were good at attacking (based on stats at least) without Bruno carrying us.
Bruno's 2 best spells are with Ole and Carrick, with counter-attacking football and him feeding runners in a free role.
I don't think that's sustainable, and after a period of time opponents will find a way to stop us. Amorim tried to build a team with a system that doesn't count on a specific player. Amorim was not my favourite, not even close. But day by day he won me because I saw a clear identity, and (I know some disagree) moving in the right direction.
11.) 03 May 2026
02 May 2026 22:24:23
We have been lucky this year, with Liverpool, Chelsea, Newcastle and Spurs all hugely under performing.
Looking back at the moment, whole season, or even the time Carrick has been in charge, I can't recall one game where we really thrashed a team and scored a hatful of goals.
Who we sign now, more than who is theamaget, will determine how we do next year.
12.) 03 May 2026
02 May 2026 23:21:14
Agree with all that, Heaven. If he could have just found a way to accommodate Bruno in a more favourable position, he would have had it cracked.
13.) 03 May 2026
03 May 2026 01:05:41
Thanks Jimpo. Bruno, in a lot of matches, was good under Amorim in a different way (without the assist), and he had some good all rounded performances.
Then, I don't know what's the obsession with Bruno. I mean, he wasn't a number ten under Amorim and didn't provide goals and assists, but the team were better offensively.
That's the point, isn't it? And we must also have in mind that, at the time, we had a whole new attack and (especially) Sesko needed time. Still, we were better and created much more than under Carrick.
14.) 03 May 2026
03 May 2026 03:21:09
Having watched both styles etc, undoubtedly under Carrick, on paper we are more offensive and better defensively.
However, we are also reasonably one dimensional at the same time.
There was an air of unpredictability about the RA approach; it was a process, and that process did not get completed, so we will never know if the end result was to be a better all round one.
Under RA we had 12 different goal scorers and 11 different assisters.
Under Carrick we have 9 scorers and 7 assisters.
Interestingly, for both Bruno was the premium assister.
The front 3 was certainly more productive and creative earlier in the season.
15.) 03 May 2026
03 May 2026 03:22:57
And, for further context, Bruno to Casemiro is the number one combination, yielding 6 goals, most coming from the Carrick reign.
16.) 03 May 2026
02 May 2026 22:58:54
Ed, thank you. But it's like banging your head against the wall.
The name calling on here too by those that think they know it all.
17.) 03 May 2026
03 May 2026 09:21:15
The irony!
18.) 03 May 2026
03 May 2026 11:39:34
If he could have just found a way to accommodate Bruno in a more favourable position, you say. Hmm, let me think. There was an answer staring him in the face, but for whatever reason, he had a major downer on Kobe.
Water under the bridge now, we will be in the Champions League next year, but despite the better points per game we have seen, we are generally unconvincing.
As for the men making the decisions, I worry they are not the best we could have appointed. Wilcox's post playing career has not been stellar, and I'm also not convinced by Berrada, who was a marketing man at Barca, and initially at City. I have no knowledge here, just my perception from a distance. The latest transfers have been solid, so maybe I am being harsh.
19.) 03 May 2026
03 May 2026 10:11:34
Laughably ironic. I said it wasn't clear i.e. it is your point Ed and others that there was no need for 20/20 vision on the decisions, that ahead of time it was obvious the outcome, that there was no rationale in what was being done, and that there was no improvement shown.
You are pushing a narrative that simply is not true. I've no issues accepting mistakes. Maybe look at yourselves and show some introspection. I'm not expecting it though
{Ed001's Note - ok. If you say so. Very good attempt though.}
20.) 03 May 2026
03 May 2026 13:19:56
Ok Ed
You do you
{Ed001's Note - I will.}