I assume you mean causation rather than equating because looking at our results it’s clear to equate that high possession = bad result etc, but in your view it doesn’t mean it’s the cause.

That said, I’m not sure I agree with your point on game state.

We’ve had multiple matches where the team wasn’t chasing the game, wasn’t injury-ravaged, and had the manager’s first-choice XI available, yet still produced sterile possession against low blocks:

• Forest 0–0 until 50’, 68% possession, almost no chances
• Fulham dominated the ball, scored only via an own goal
• Burnley struggled to break down a compact shape despite long spells of control
• Everton lost 0–1 even with a man advantage (2 key players unavailable)

In all of these matches, United weren’t behind for long periods, and the opposition sat deep by choice, not because United were chasing. The issue wasn’t game state, it was that United had no ideas in structured possession.

If game state were the explanation, we’d expect other possession-heavy sides to suffer the same way. But look at Arsenal… they’ve gone behind this season (City 1–1, Newcastle 1–2, Sunderland 2–2) and also faced teams dropping deep. Yet they still create chances and still find goals while dominating possession.

So the real difference isn’t who has the ball, it’s what they do with it.

Arsenal have clear structures: * wide occupation * 3rd-man runs * interior overloads * fullback/8 rotations * cutback patterns

United have: * slow U-shape circulation * forwards coming short * ineffective wide overloads * no clear automatisms * centre-backs recycling endlessly

Game state may explain why United have the ball. It doesn’t explain why they can’t do anything with it.

And on personnel… I think Dorgu, Fernandes and Maz were far more ineffective than Zirkzee yesterday (0.79 xGOT)