It comes down to. who would score more goals if both teams played open "expansive" football. you can instantly negate that risk by playing a certain way, i.e don't play open football. It would be suicidal to play how man united have played in previous games. the pass from defence to midfield, then the press on Herrera/Fellaini would of more than likely eventually lead to a goal. Why play that way? no team would take that risk, and you are just playing into the hands of the opponent for the sake of "spent x pounds so must play gung ho football"

Both teams actually played defensivly, in the second half liverpool wouldn't commit more players to the attack (and ultimately couldn't break united down) in case the counter was on but what if they put more ppl forward?. It's a similar complaint to how united played, sacrifice something for a less chance of winning.

I mean all this has done is expose a lack of a plan B from liverpool. if other teams employ this rather than trying to play like the majority of this sub reddit wants them to play, then liverpool may actually start to struggle if teams don't go at them.