Manchester United manager Eva Olid was appointed with a reputation for high-possession, attacking football, a style she effectively showcased during her tenure at Hearts. However, her initial weeks in charge of the Women’s Super League side have presented challenges in implementing this dominant approach, despite a encouraging 10-1 victory over Sheffield United in the League Cup on Wednesday.
Olid’s start to the WSL campaign has been turbulent, beginning with a 2-1 defeat to London City Lionesses and followed by a heavy 5-0 loss to Chelsea. The team then adopted a more pragmatic stance in a 1-1 draw against Arsenal, marking a shift from the expansive play fans anticipated.
Analysis of Olid’s tactics reveals significant differences from those of her predecessor, Marc Skinner. United now prioritize building out from the back using short passes to minimize the unpredictability associated with long balls. Their build-up typically originates from either a 4-2 or 3-2 formation, characterized by central midfielders forming a narrow pair.
In this structure, the winger on the side of the ball maintains a high and wide position, while the far-side winger drops deeper to link with the number 10, creating a box shape in the middle of the park. This contrasts with Skinner’s era, which favored a more stretched and symmetrical 3-2-2-3 formation. Under Skinner, number 10s were instructed to stay higher up the pitch in specific pockets to either receive the ball in dangerous areas or pull defenders out of position.
Olid has granted her central players greater freedom to drift toward the ball, aiming to create numerical overloads in tight spaces. For instance, when Jess Park inverts from the right flank into central midfield, it forces a decision on the opposing full-back: if they follow her, United gain a numbers advantage; if they do not, space opens up for other attackers.
This central focus is designed to draw opposition defenses inward when they defend zonally, thereby creating width on the flanks for unmarked players. Skinner’s approach, by comparison, funnelled possession toward the wings, relying on triangles formed by full-backs, midfielders, and wingers.
The trade-off between these systems is evident. Skinner’s fixed structure allowed opponents to match players man-for-man, whereas Olid’s fluid system can adapt by moving additional players toward the ball to break overloads. The shift represents a strategic evolution aimed at controlling games through midfield density rather than wide channels.
That 10-1 win against Sheffield United feels like an outlier. The early WSL results suggest the transition hasn’t been as smooth as expected.
Interesting shift from Skinner’s rigid structure. But does Olid have enough quality in the final third to punish teams when they overload the wings?
Wow, that 5-0 loss to Chelsea really highlights the growing pains. Building from the back is risky when defenders aren’t comfortable on the ball yet.
The Guardiola influence is obvious. United are trying to control games through midfield density rather than relying on wide triangles now.