Distance covered so far in the league

[Hansern]

Leicester? When the "individual mistake" gave them a goal, we got the collective jitters and they hit the bar and had another excellent chance that Mignolet saved.

But yeah, we look in control and collectively strong defensively, and the only reason we have conceded 8 goals in 5 Premiership games and failed to keep a single clean sheet, is a series of unfortunate individual mistakes and nothing to worry about.

Ah sorry, we looked like conceding for a 10 minute period during the first half and they had 1 chance in the second half. But that was obviously the whole game. Always.
Like no other team out there before us we can only be labelled as defensively sound when the opposition have zero chances created and zero shots on target against us. In every game.

We conceded 3 goals in the first game, 2 goals in the second game and then 1 goal away to Spurs and Chelsea and 1 goal at home to Leicester.
You'd think that could be looked at like some kind of defensive control progress given we won 2 games and drew the other against some very good opponents. I know its fucking shocking but I dont expect us to keep a clean sheet against Arsenal, Spurs and Chelsea away. Leicester had 3 shots on target, while Chelsea and Spurs had 4. Does that resemblance a team that always look like conceding.

There is quite a difference in how we defend when you compare the latest games towards the Arsenal game.

 

[Dirty Sanchez]

The difference between us and Manure is 55 km - over 5 games.
So, on average, as a team, we run 11 km more than they do per game. That's 1 km per player per 90 minutes.
Or 11 metres more per player per minute.

Not sure what this means, but it's endlessly fascinating.

I suppose we can take this a little further and assume that we should divide the 11 km per game by the 10 outfield players instead of 11, since our goalkeeper probably doesn't run further than any other PL goalie.

So now, the additional distance per player minute vaults from 11.1 m to 12.2 m. Clearly there is a tactical reason for this - one that Burnley and West Brom are still trying to figure out too.

 

[kingjulian]

Clearly there's a tactical reason for this - Klopp sets his side up to fucking run more than Mourinho, obv. - but you only have to look at United's 11 most weeks to note that there just aren't a lot of fucking dihard runners in that side, especially when they don't have the ball.

Rooney, Ibrahimovic, Mkhitaryan, Fellaini, Pogba, Martial, etc - Great as they all are, they don't have a history of covering ground for the team.

Mourinho's got a problem as far as I can see. He's got an unbalanced, bloated squad, and they're struggling to establish any form of rhythm. Even in the games they have won - they haven't convinced me. A few moments of individual quality (Rooney setting up the winner away to Hull for example), but no collective view that they look like they know what they're doing.

He's got a lot of work to do there, and it's fucking brilliant to see.

So there is no tactical reason then? It's just that they dont have the kind of players who run hard?

 

[Insignificance]

So there is no tactical reason then? It's just that they dont have the kind of players who run hard?

Well, a long ball towards Fellaini and Zlatan doesnt require a lot of running but those guys would not run a lot anyway....