Manchester United boss Ruben Amorim is standing firm in the face of mounting criticism from club legends and frustrated supporters. After a string of poor results and an early cup exit, the Portuguese coach has been accused of forcing a tactical approach that doesn’t suit his players. But according to Amorim, the formation is not the issue—it’s the execution.
The start of United’s season has been rough. Four losses in seven matches have left the Red Devils lingering near the bottom half of the Premier League and already out of the Carabao Cup. Those setbacks have reignited questions about Amorim’s trademark positional 5-2-3 system, asking players to stick to rigid zones system, a setup that earned him acclaim in Portugal but has failed to produce consistency in Manchester.
Some of the loudest critics have been United icons themselves. Wayne Rooney bluntly admitted he has “no faith” that Amorim can steer the team back to glory. Gary Neville described himself as “concerned,” while Paul Scholes and Nicky Butt openly called for a tactical rethink, suggesting that persisting with the system risks further chaos.
Yet, Amorim refuses to budge. Speaking to reporters, he insisted that blaming the scheme is too simplistic. “We cannot run away from the results,” he said. “But when we lost to Arsenal or City, was the first thing that came to your mind the system? No. The goals we concede and the chances we waste, those come down to details, not the formation.”
For him, the bigger issue lies in how faithfully the players carry out the plan from match to match. “One weekend we do it well, the next weekend we don’t,” he explained. “That inconsistency is on us.”
While Amorim remains defiant, others have pointed to a disconnect between his vision and the squad’s ability to carry it out. Eleven months into his reign, the question persists: do United’s players fully understand how to operate in this system?
The manager acknowledged that execution has been disjointed at times, particularly in the frustrating draw against Brentford. But he pushed back against the idea that the players are lost. “It worked one day, then the next it didn’t. That’s not because the system suddenly stopped making sense—it’s because we didn’t repeat the same actions in the same way.”
For critics, that explanation may not be convincing enough. Fans see a team struggling to create chances, vulnerable in defense, and seemingly unsure of their roles. For Amorim, though, the tactical framework isn’t up for debate. The real task is getting his players to perform it consistently with confidence.
Behind the scenes, some insiders suggest that the dressing room’s faith is wavering. Results have not matched the investment United made this summer, and a section of the squad is said to be frustrated by a lack of clarity in transition play. Whether Amorim can restore belief internally may prove just as important as silencing outside critics.
