There’s no genius to parking the bus for Jose Mourinho

Manchester United parked the bus to get a point against Liverpool at Anfield. But playing not to lose doesn’t make Jose Mourinho a genius.

Manchester United parked the bus to hold Liverpool to a 0-0 draw at Anfield in the Premier League on Saturday. It was the second season in a row United played for and earned a point at Anfield.

But neither result makes United manager Jose Mourinho a tactical genius.

While both games were snoozing non-events, the debate surrounding the tactics used by Mourinho has proved far more interesting.

Some railed against United’s negative approach. The Daily Mail‘s Oliver Holt has been among the strongest critics:

"Some had persuaded themselves that Mourinho had emerged this season as a man who wanted to let his players’ attacking instincts run free but this was a reminder of the pragmatism and conservatism that has long made him such a divisive figure in the game. Welcome back, the old Jose. Welcome back the Enemy of Football."

Meanwhile others, including James Robson of the Manchester Evening News, defended Mourinho’s pragmatism:

"As a spectacle, it may have stank – but it was another example of Mourinho getting his tactics spot on.He wanted to get at least a point against one of United’s title rivals – and he did just that."

Robson referred to Mourinho as the “ultimate big game manager.” It’s a reputation cultivated by the Portuguese after over a decade setting teams up to negate rather than create. Destroying something is easy, creating something takes time, intuition and guts.

Sadly, it’s become common practice in modern football to applaud defensive-minded managers as tactically astute. Meanwhile, those coaches who like their teams to attack are too often dismissed as naive.

Mourinho’s rather cynical “poets and pragmatists” speech after United beat Ajax in last season’s Europa League final summed up the dichotomy.

Attack or defence has become modern football’s version of the left versus right debate in politics.

But choosing one or the other misses the point. The better question to ask is if parking the bus is the only way for the big clubs to approach crunch matches?

Next: Liverpool 0-0 Manchester United: Highlights and recap

The answer is no and United only need look at their closest title rival to prove it. While the Red Devils were happy simply to protect the point they started with, City went to Chelsea and won in matchweek 7.

The Citizens left Stamford Bridge with all three points because they expertly established a balance between defence and attack. City were compact and disciplined at the back, but progressive and daring enough to still carry a significant attacking threat in enemy territory.

Manager Pep Guardiola, one of football’s most ardent practitioners of playing on the front foot, didn’t let City go gung-ho at Chelsea. But Guardiola also didn’t rein his attacking players in the way Mourinho did at Anfield.

United wingers Anthony Martial and Ashley Young played deep enough to be extra full-backs. They created a flat back six while holding midfielders Nemanja Matic and Ander Herrera as good as stood on the toes of centre-backs Chris Smalling and Phil Jones.

It’s not surprising neither Martial and Young, nor substitutes Jesse Lingard and Marcus Rashford, offered little going forward. They were hardly allowed to venture in that direction.

Lingard came on for Henrikh Mkhitaryan after United’s artful playmaker had also been missing in action. Mkhitaryan’s creative instincts were wasted in a dour approach demanding he got behind the ball rather than on it.

Having supporting players sit so deep starved previously prolific striker Romelu Lukaku of any service. Lukaku’s lack of involvement was best summed up by this graphic from BBC 5 live Sport:

Contrast the absence of output from United’s main attacking talents with how City performed at the Bridge. Kevin De Bruyne netted the match-winner, a consequence of the regular runs he made beyond center-forward Gabriel Jesus.

Fellow midfield playmaker David Silva also got forward regularly, without City losing their defensive shape. City never lost their defensive shape against the Blues because of the way they won the numbers battle in midfield.

Guardiola’s use of full-backs Fabian Delph and Kyle Walker proved key. Both tucked in to supplement holding midfielder Fernandinho, while also affording De Bruyne and Silva the freedom to get forward.

City achieved a tactical double whammy of staying solid defensively, while also maintaining the initiative in attack. Striking a balance this tough so effectively should be applauded, but parking the bus ought to be lamented.

United didn’t even need to be this cautious on Saturday. After all, Liverpool entered the match in middling form, so all the pressure was on the home side.

Mourinho’s men had even been scoring goals for fun before the trip to Merseyside. The Red Devils had scored four in a game six times across all competitions.

Such a number is what a club expects when signing a striker like Lukaku in a deal worth up to £90 million. Mourinho also spent up to £94 million on attacking midfielder Paul Pogba and £26.3 on Mkhitaryan in 2016.

Lukaku, Mkhitaryan, Martial, Rashford, Lingard and Juan Mata were all in the squad to face Liverpool. With this much forward-thinking talent it’s too much to believe United couldn’t muster more than this pitiful attacking output, per Squawka Football:

Sticking nine men behind the ball and refusing to test a suspect Liverpool defense was alarmingly and unnecessarily cautious for a team chasing the title. It was especially dubious when Mourinho’s charges are trying to keep pace with free-scoring City.

Martin Samuel of the Daily Mail told Sky Sports Sunday Supplement why City’s form demanded United tried to win the game at Anfield, rather than just avoiding losing it:

"Man Utd are behind the count. They are two points behind Man City now, the goal difference is going to slip away and they are going to have to be ahead of Man City on points at the end of the season because they are never going to win the title on goal difference or on goals scored. City are changing what is a good result."

Samuel is right, but City are only in front because of their willingness to be progressive in big matches. They thrashed 10-man Liverpool 5-0 at the Etihad Stadium and played to win at Chelsea.

City didn’t go all-out attack in either game. But they also didn’t go defence or bust either.

Instead, the league leaders struck the right balance between keeping things tight and also being brave enough to go in search of goals in big matches.

Of course, a title race is a marathon, not a sprint. Yet those who praise the Mourinho model as a winning one should consider his and United’s less-than-impressive recent record on their travels against the top six:

More of the same won’t win the title for United this season. Nor will it improve the credibility of the idea parking the bus is a sign of tactical genius.