Ruben Amorim’s 3-4-2-1 formation is not the root cause of Manchester United’s struggles, according to a tactical analysis. The club is recovering from decades of mismanagement, and the squad remains unbalanced, with strengths in some areas and glaring weaknesses in others. However, structural issues within the system—particularly numerical disadvantages in midfield and wide areas—must be addressed to improve results.
Amorim recently stated, “The problem is not the system, the problem is the results,” but critics argue that opponents have consistently exploited the same vulnerabilities for nearly a year. The system itself is described as inherently flawed, with midfield underloads leaving the team exposed. Comparisons are drawn to Antonio Conte at Chelsea and Oliver Glasner at Crystal Palace, who adapted their principles to mitigate similar issues.
One proposed solution is to shift from a 3-1-6 or 3-2-5 pressing structure to a more compact 4-4-2. This would allow centre-backs to hold their positions rather than being forced to jump into midfield challenges, while providing better balance in possession and chance creation. The current chaotic, direct style relies heavily on long balls and penalties, leading to a high expected goals (xG) but few sustained attacks or clear-cut chances.
Amorim’s refusal to adapt his tactics is compared to Erik ten Hag’s failure to adjust from Eredivisie to Premier League demands. Despite having supportive owners focused on winning, Amorim appears unwilling to relax his dogma, risking his tenure. The analysis suggests that rather than persisting with a system full of holes, he must be brave and implement tactical tweaks to turn the team around.
