There was no fairytale for Darren Fletcher at Manchester United, as his tenure is likely to end with no wins, and an issue of him trying too hard to fix a problem he didn’t create.
Manchester United’s 2-1 loss at the hands of Brighton means Darren Fletcher will end his tenure with a draw against Burnley and elimination from the FA Cup.
On the surface, it’s more of the same as it was under Ruben Amorim, but United could count themselves highly unlucky not to win either game because they attacked well.
Man Utd’s manager for the derby vs City next weekend should be ___________
Who do you want to see in charge next week? Is it time for Fletcher to step aside?
Darren Fletcher claps fans
Photo by Richard Sellers/Sportsphoto/Allstar via Getty Images
👇 Join the debate; share your insight. Use the comment button on the bottom left to have your say
However, it also brought into focus the theme that encapsulates Fletcher’s tenure, which was his trying too hard to fix a problem he didn’t create.
Ruben Amorim at Old Trafford during draw with Bournemouth
Photo by PETER POWELL / AFP via Getty Images
Darren Fletcher inherited a problematic narrative from Ruben Amorim
It’s easy to say that nothing has changed after sacking Ruben Amorim, so United made a mistake in doing so, but the eye test says otherwise.
Amorim’s refusal to adapt even the slightest bit saw United drop points to ten-man Everton at home, and laboured to frustrating draws against the likes of West Ham and Nottingham Forest, to name a few.
In contrast, Fletcher’s United attacked with fearlessness and purpose in both games, and deserved to win at least one, if not both.
More United News
More than anything else, this is the problematic narrative Fletcher inherited from Amorim, in that the Portuguese had stripped away the soul of the club.
There was no trust in the academy, there were no attacking subs to turn a game, no in-game adaptability to make a difference, and the mentality was always about damage limitation.
All those traits were the antithesis of what United should be, and Fletcher knew the narrative he was inheriting.
However, it’s clear after two games under him that he felt too pressured to get rid of it, and hence, went too far down the other extreme.
Fletcher overcompensated for Amorim’s faults
If Amorim was too cautious, then Fletcher’s United almost attacked with complete abandon in the absence of an out-of-possession structure.
Fletcher knew he needed to return United to its attacking ways, but did it at the cost of defensive solidity for a squad that couldn’t keep clean sheets anyway.
DOES Amad start for Manchester United with his wing-back role gone? If so, where?🤔
What will Amad be thinking as he returns to an Amorim-less United?
Amad AFCON
Photo by FRANCK FIFE / AFP via Getty Images
👇 Join the debate; share your insight. Use the comment button on the bottom left to have your say
The team almost attacked in a 2-1-7 shape at times, throwing forward players at will, which made for some thrilling football at times.
This led to an uptick in the attacking metrics, but the defensive setup was all over the place.
There was an ocean of space between the lines, the defenders didn’t know who they were supposed to mark, and a simple pass or two scrambled the whole setup.
Basically, in trying to fix the narrative of Amorim being too cautious, Fletcher overcompensated towards the other extreme and left United’s already soft underbelly completely exposed.
The next manager needs to strike a balance between Amorim’s risk-averse system and Fletcher’s attacking with abandon.
Join Our Newsletter
Receive a digest of our best United content each week direct to your mailbox