Is Jose Mourinho the right man for Man United? The arguments for and against

After a miserable Manchester derby for the red half of Manchester, Wayne Farry and Si Lloyd debate whether Jose Mourinho is the right man to lead Manchester United.

Wayne Farry

From the moment Jose Mourinho took over at Manchester United, there was a host of people who called it a bad decision.

Many fans and pundits considered it a 2+2=5 move from a club which had grown weary of being accused of losing their ability to make big decisions after Sir Alex Ferguson’s departure. I was not one of these people. I, like all Manchester United fans, had watched the tenures of David Moyes and Louis van Gaal with horror, shocked at the club’s ever-increasing capacity for short-termism. As such, I welcomed the appointment of a man who seemed destined to manage at Old Trafford, and who appeared revitalised at the prospect of rehabilitating his once blemish-free reputation with a long spell at the club. Unfortunately, almost every one of Mourinho’s decisions at United have proven the doubters right, and have validated those who questioned the credentials of a man who seems to have been left behind by the modern game. The reason for this? Each of Jose’s actions appear to be driven by damage-limitation, whether they be reactive or pre-emptive. Compare his United side to Pep Guardiola’s City team. Both of these men took over at essentially the same time, yet one has developed his players into a cohesive and frightening unit, while the other remains unsure of what he wants from his squad. Guardiola’s players give off the vibe of a group who know exactly what they are supposed to do, and are talented enough to do so. Jose’s players? They perpetually appear one defeat away from a meltdown and are fragile to the point of absurdity. This is evidenced by how United play in the absence of major players, such as Paul Pogba. Jose’s team resemble a lost dog when without their French playmaker and, while any team would struggle without his quality, you must question management and recruitment when one of the most expensively-assembled teams in history goes to pieces without one player. There have been some improvements in the likes of Martial, Rashford and Lingard, but these are the sort of developments that you’d expect from most talented young players. Some will say that these comparisons are unfair and that any manager and team would struggle against Guardiola’s City, but that is too ignore that this City team is not some fluke. Yes, they are freakishly good, but is that supposed to be considered as some sort of coincidence? If anything, Mourinho should be judged more harshly when compared to Pep, not given the benefit of the doubt. More than anything, Guardiola’s side show exactly what United are missing. They put pay to any suggestion by Mourinho that you must sacrifice cosmetic appeal for winning football, and they show what is actually possible when you give financial backing to a manager with an eye for talent, a creative approach and an ability to nurture not only the players he recruited, but the ones who were there all along. And if you believe that it is unfair to put Mourinho and Pep side-by-side and judge them by the same criteria, is that in itself not an indication of how United’s coach is simply not on the same level as the man he hopes to succeed against? https://twitter.com/SportsJOE_UK/status/940254635897638912 Should the managers of Manchester’s two biggest clubs not be held to the same measures of success? I may be wrong with regards to Mourinho, and I actually hope I am. But having watched his team play almost every single weekend since he took over, I have seen nothing to suggest that he won’t leave Manchester United in the blaze of horror akin to his exits at Real Madrid and Chelsea. Will he leave the team a better unit than when he arrived? Possibly (though that is not saying much). Will he leave the team as good as it should be? Absolutely not.

Si Lloyd

Look - can everyone *pleeaase* stop getting their Fred the Red Y-fronts into such a twist?

The derby was lost, United were shit, and - according to lots of angry people on Twitter, at least - Jose Mourinho is now nothing more than a bus-parking footballing Antichrist who deserves to be sacked, imprisoned or put to death for his crimes against free-flowing, beautiful, attacking football. But fear not, Jose. I've got your back, pal. Or at least I'm going to pretend that's the case for the purpose of this article. Just call me Duncan... The thing is, what happened at Old Trafford on Sunday wasn't really *that much* of a surprise, was it? City turned up, kept the ball longer than the old lady on Titanic keeps hold of expensive pieces of jewellery, and took their chances. They're a wonderful team; it's just what they do. Whether they're brave enough to admit it or not, most people attending the game knew damn well that United didn't have enough about them to go toe-to-toe with City, even if it was in their own back yard. Mourinho knew this as well as anyone, explaining why he opted for his trusted sit-deep-and-hit-them-on-the-break tactics (again, no great surprise). Naturally, the mere thought of playing like an away side at Old Trafford, especially against your city rivals, doesn't sit well with plenty of United fans. It was, however, a logical approach from Mourinho. Such tactics have served him well in the past and as a means of trying to get the result, it made sense for him to deploy them. And who knows? Had it not been for some uncharacteristically shoddy defending from United, Mourinho's plan might well have worked. For all City's dominance, especially in the first half, their opportunities were limited. But anyway, there's a bigger picture to be looked at here. The important point to keep in mind is the really, really obvious one: Manchester City are very good. They're better than United (Mourinho's tactics were an admission of this) and they're quite possibly better than any other team on the face of the planet at the moment in time. The thing is, City are so freakishly good, that United's undeniable improvements are being masked. First, some cold, hard facts... United conceded six fewer goals in Mourinho's first season than they did under Louis van Gaal in 2015/16. Despite it being well documented that they struggled to put the ball in the net at the other end of the field, they also improved their goals scored tally by five, too. Having only leaked 11 goals so far this campaign, United have already scored 36 league goals and are well on track to improve on last year's total yet again. Although much is made of Mourinho's need to play more adventurous football against the other big six clubs, people are also quick to forget how eye-bleedingly bad they were at times under Van Gaal. Entire 90 minutes would pass by without United registering more than 3 shots at Old Trafford, against opposition which posed far less threat than the current City side do. Their attacking 'philosophy' appeared to consist of passing it sideways on the halfway line for long periods of time before Chris Smalling eventually took a heavy touch, was put under pressure and twatted the ball over everyone's heads and out for a goal kick. That was it. And yeah, Mourinho's spent money -  a shit load of money. But really, what was the alternative? He inherited a squad of Moyes and Van Gaal deadwood and has crafted it into something resembling a decent team. Adding players was necessary and the deterioration of the team in the three years prior to his arrival meant that United literally had to pay the price for this by way of inflated transfer fees. Were it not for the brilliance of City, there's a good chance this United team and Jose Mourinho would be being spoken about in a very different way. Let's not forget that even after their defeat, they remain City's nearest challengers (if you can even call anyone 'challengers' any more) and this is the best start to a season they've made since Sir Alex Ferguson's final campaign. They are, undeniably, heading in the right direction under Mourinho, despite what all the social media hysteria might suggest whenever they don't win a game. They simply have the misfortune of being compared to arguably the greatest Premier League side ever. If Mourinho sticks around long enough, they may well be able to close the gap in the years ahead. If he's to do so, however, he'll need to be able to trust his players enough to outplay their opponents, not just rely on hitting them on the break.