I've come a long way, I have. I'm a bit cynical now.
Every time I hear the same old lines, the ones about "super, super quality" or mentions of "spirit" or "character," I just shrug. When I think about the remarks that we can't bring in new players because they will impede the development of the players already on the books, I might simply groan a little and move on.
You can't find a player in January.
We will only bring in top players.
I did not see it.
Disappointed love.
What is the most deserving target of my ire on any given day? I don't know. Many times it's the blatant anti-American sentiment from the gaffer. You recall, he'd rather tour Vietnam (annual average per capita income $300 US) than the United States. The United States, home of MUFC's new shirt sponsor, Chevrolet. Home to the National Broadcasting Company, which will be the first American network to televise every single Premier League match live next season. Home to over 300,000,000 people. That means if 90% of Americans ignore English football, more than 30 million of them will be watching.
But no, please, why bother with that market when you can tour Malaysia and Vietnam?
Perhaps Ryo Miachi will sell more Arsenal shirts than Kagawa does for United. Of course. Why not? Kagawa has won 3 consecutive championship medals, whilst Ryo was last seen being carted off in some Cup match for another club. So by all means, focus on ANY market but the United States. Every other "big club" in England comes to the USA, especially those that have, and make, more money than ours. Just keep touring Myanmar and Bangladesh--you'll spin money out of monkeys, don't worry.
Ah but see, I'm not angry about that topic every day. Some days it's the flaccid transfer policy. I mean, if we're lucky, the club might spend upwards of 18 million quid this summer! On some French teenagers! Or maybe we'll find a club like Malaga on the verge of bankruptcy who want to sell us two Spanish internationals--2nd rate Spanish internationals, mind, but still, if they're Spanish, they must be good!
Yet it's not just anger about the amount being spent, it's also the unwillingness to buy players who might, in some egalitarian fantasy world, impede the development of players already on the books who've yet to do fuck all but might, just might, if no better players are brought in to compete with them! But somehow, even though the reasoning is "don't buy players who will stunt the growth of other players," those mythical "other players" never play first team football! Eisfeld, Aneke, Yennaris, Gnabry, Spanish teen, German teen, French teen, African teen, some other bloke, a kid on loan to some Spanish Tercera club--do they ever play first team football for us? No. They don't. So how, exactly, does buying a player with more experience and demonstrated ability hurt those players? Help me out here, I seem to be lost. Soy perdido, ayudame.
This is all nonsensical stuff that happens off the pitch. I don't really feel qualified to comment on the on-pitch stuff because I'm no tactician. I do think I know barely enough to say, "Hang on a minute--seems that high-line business isn't all that helpful" after we keep surrendering counter-attack upon counter-attack. Or maybe, when I see 90% possession = 1 goal (from a set piece), I can speculate on the effectiveness of the plan of "attack." Does the 4-3-3 even work anymore? What is it? Do we have the personnel to play it with anything resembling effectiveness?
And why does it take until late February to decide to build from a foundation of stability from the back? I hear some sort of circus calliope playing in the background and I see Tommy V attempting some sort of gymnastical trick to the amusement of the audience when I think of the defence. Every other club in the league (many from the lower divisions, if our Cup form is to be believed) saw us as soft and vulnerable. That's as embarrassing as anything else you can say about us.
I might have more unhappiness to impart. But for now, that's where I find myself. As for the two biggest matches of the post-NLD period, has anyone else noticed that the opponent in both was under little or no pressure at all to "go for it?" Bayern did fuck all in the second leg, and MUFC was only slightly better than that. Big matches against big clubs--with no real skin in the game for the opposition.
Go back and look at November and January for our beloved club. When it was clear they were wobbling, wouldn't the "new" pragmatic approach have saved us points? Wouldn't a more solid, organised, and less adventurous style already have us in the glorified 3rd place? The way those games were played now seems astonishingly naive. Pretty football is a grand idea. I'd sing "1-Nil to the..." even if the match were "boring, boring."