Manchester United Must Ensure They Avoid Repeating Liverpool's Mistakes

Last week, it was a case of one step forward and two steps back for David Moyes and Manchester United. Following the Manchester derby humiliation, great effort was put in to the Capital One Cup match versus Liverpool to restore calm. This was completely undone by a lacklustre performance against West Bromwich Albion on Saturday.

A European away game was probably just what was required for the team to dust themselves down and escape the mounting pressure at home. However, a tricky UEFA Champions League tie against Shakhtar Donetsk would not have been the preferred choice for a restorative retreat.

Once again, familiar problems resurfaced for United in Europe—a failure to keep hold of the ball, a lack of meaningful shots on goal and too many occasions where the midfield parted, leaving Nemanja Vidic having to dive in with last-gasp tackles.

However, leading 1-0 with 15 minutes to go, three points seemed to be in the bag until Taison Barcellos Freda pounced on a defensive scramble, equalising in emphatic fashion. Gaining a point away from home in Europe is a good result, particularly in a ground where no English team has won.

The performance will do nothing to ease the blood pressure of supporters that have become used to success, though. United's dominance of English football occurred in cycles over the last twenty years, each team being reinvented as players came and went, with a small transitional period in between each. Is this the season that transition lurches in to crisis?

In the past, it may have been sensible to take the view that there is not a crisis at Manchester United—after all, we are only a few games in to the season. However, modern football necessitates instant success. The balance sheets are as important as the team sheets. For a club the size of United, lean years are not an option.

Ex-Liverpool defender and Match of the Day pundit Alan Hansen warned recently that United could not afford to make the same mistakes that Liverpool made when their period of dominance in English football came to an end.

Hansen was a member of the Liverpool title-winning side in 1990 and in an interview with the BBC he says that he can see similarities between the Merseysiders back then and their Mancunian rivals now. He believes that the main issue is that of ageing players and failing to replace good players with better ones.

Liverpool’s philosophy was borne out of the “Boot Room,” with a preference for promoting ex-players or coaches to the bench. Using this system, the club hoped to continue the work of legendary managers such as Bill Shankly and Bob Paisley, their successors would be familiar with and steeped in the tradition of the club.

The appointment of David Moyes, apparently following the recommendation of Sir Alex Ferguson, appears to fit in to a similar philosophy as the Anfield “Boot Room.”

Football in the 1990s moved on considerably from that which Liverpool dominated. Sky TV money began to roll in and United took advantage away from the pitch much quicker than any other club, giving them the financial clout to attract better players. They also began to play an incisive, swashbuckling style of football that many struggled to cope with.

Liverpool, meanwhile, were unable to replace their ageing players with better ones. Rather than making a clean break and embracing a change in philosophy, they continued to promote either inexperienced managers from their coaching staff or ex-players who knew the club. They floundered.

The arrival of Arsene Wenger at Arsenal in the mid-90s ushered in a new style of football management in England which Sir Alex managed to hold at arm’s length for the most part. The tactical demands of the modern game now mean that most clubs have sporting directors, leaving the coaches to coach players rather than manage the club.

Recent stories in the press suggest that the rumours of Jose Mourinho coveting the role at Old Trafford were not unfounded. However, following 27 years with one man at the helm, United decided that stability was key. Mourinho would have demanded wholesale changes and he has a history of steering towards choppy waters.

Without an option ready from within the club, United (and Sir Alex himself) appear to have chosen the man that they thought likely to have caused the least disruption to the way that the club is run. David Moyes’ six-year contract hints that he will be given time to get things right and that the owners of the club want another period of stability.

However, the need for constant success will not go away. The current squad is ageing and seems starved of real quality in some areas. Time may be afforded to David Moyes, but to avoid copying the mistakes of the past he also needs to be backed financially by the owners of the club.

Echoes of Liverpool in 1990 can clearly be heard, but United have been here before themselves, of course. Their own precedent was set in 1969 with the appointment of Wilf McGuinness following Sir Matt Busby’s retirement. Again, an ageing squad was inherited by the new man.

Dynasties end, but football moves on.

In choosing a route that should provide stability, could Manchester United’s owners actually have destabilised the club?