The much-waited news finally broke on Monday as Manchester United announced the sacking of Erik ten Hag following a series of poor performances and results. The recent 2-1 defeat to West Ham, albeit controversial due to a late penalty decision against the Red Devils, prompted the club hierarchy to act sooner rather than later. The decision, termed “difficult and finely balanced,” was made after a unanimous vote by the club’s leadership. Despite winning the FA Cup and Carabao Cup, the team’s inconsistent on-field results ultimately led to Ten Hag’s departure. Ruud van Nistelrooy has been appointed as interim head coach while the search for a permanent replacement begins.
We take a look at key areas Ten Hag should have improved to avoid sacking.
Strengthening the defense
Defensive vulnerabilities were the most significant factor that plagued Erik ten Hag’s tenure. Here are some key statistics highlighting the severity of the problem.
Goals conceded: Manchester United conceded a total of 165 goals during ten Hag’s tenure, averaging 1.29 goals per game.
Defensive record: In the 2023-24 season, United conceded 58 goals, resulting in their first negative goal difference (-3) in the Premier League era.
Clean sheets: Despite playing 38 league games, the team secured only 13 clean sheets in the 2023-24 season.
Heavy defeats to arch rivals: Under Ten Hag, Manchester United conceded four or more goals in several games, including heavy defeats like 6-3 to Manchester City and 7-0 to Liverpool.
Defensive rankings: United finished the 2023-24 season with their lowest goal-scoring tally after nine games, scoring only eight goals while conceding 11.
By focusing on solidifying the defense through strategic signings and improved organization, ten Hag could have built a more resilient backline, capable of withstanding pressure and reducing the number of goals conceded.
Consistent tactical approach
Erik ten Hag’s tactical approach faced several challenges. He aimed to implement a high-pressing game but often lacked consistency. The team struggled to maintain the intensity required for effective pressing, leading to disjointed performances and vulnerability to counter-attacks. Some of the glaring issues in the tactical approach included
Defensive Disorganization: Despite signing four of his first-choice back five, the defense remained fragile and disorganized. The lack of pace and poor coordination left United exposed against faster opponents.
Overreliance on Build-Up Play: His preference for build-up play from the back often led to slow transitions and difficulty in breaking down well-organized defenses. This approach made it easier for opponents to intercept passes and launch counter-attacks.
Midfield Vulnerabilities: The midfield often struggled to cover wide-open spaces, leaving the defense exposed. The lack of a solid defensive shield in midfield contributed to the team’s defensive issues.
Tactical Rigidity: At times, ten Hag’s tactics appeared rigid, with limited flexibility to adapt to different game situations. This dogmatism made it difficult for the team to respond effectively to the dynamic nature of Premier League football.
Player Management: Managing player expectations and maintaining morale was another challenge. The team’s inconsistent performances and tactical struggles led to growing discontent among players and fans alike.
Consistency in tactics and team selection would have been vital. Developing a clear and effective game plan and sticking to it would have helped the team gel better and produce more consistent performances.
Youth Development
The tenure of Erik ten Hag saw a mixed approach to youth development. While he did give opportunities to young talents like Anthony Elanga and Alejandro Garnacho, the overall impact on youth development was not as significant as expected. His focus on immediate results sometimes led to prioritizing experienced players over youth prospects.
Had Erik ten Hag focused on these areas, he might have had a better chance of avoiding the sack and achieving greater success with Manchester United.
Do you agree, or do you think there are other factors he could have addressed?
