Spread the word
Manchester United’s 4-1 defeat to Como in the UEFA Champions League has deepened the crisis surrounding Michael Carrick’s team, raising fresh questions about their tactical identity, defensive organisation, mentality and the manager’s ability to arrest a damaging decline in form.
The defeat in Italy on Wednesday, October 21, was not an isolated setback. It followed a 2-0 loss to Atlético Madrid in the Champions League, a 1-1 draw away to Leeds United in the Premier League and consecutive draws against Tottenham Hotspur and Fulham. United have now gone seven matches without a victory in all competitions, turning what began as a season of considerable expectation into an increasingly uncomfortable period for the club.
The situation is particularly striking because Carrick appeared to have restored confidence and direction after taking charge during the second half of last season. He guided United to third place in the Premier League, winning 12 of his 17 league matches in charge, a run that strengthened the case for his permanent appointment. Blueprint reports
That early success suggested the club had found a manager capable of rebuilding its identity without another prolonged transition. Yet the opening weeks of the new campaign have exposed familiar weaknesses, and the heavy defeat to Como has intensified scrutiny of both the coaching staff and the players.
The central question is no longer whether United can produce an impressive performance. They have demonstrated that they can. It is whether Carrick can make such performances consistent enough to restore the club’s competitiveness at home and in Europe.
A promising start gives way to a worrying decline
United’s Premier League campaign began with a 2-0 defeat away to Hull City, before they responded with a convincing 5-2 victory over Ipswich Town.
That win appeared to offer the kind of attacking momentum Carrick needed. However, United subsequently drew 2-2 with Everton, lost 1-0 to Manchester City, and recorded 1-1 draws against Fulham, Tottenham and Leeds.
After seven league matches, United have seven points from one victory, four draws and two defeats, leaving them 13th in the table. They have scored 10 goals and conceded 10, numbers that reveal a team capable of finding the net but struggling to turn its attacking play into victories.
The problem is not simply the number of points dropped. United have repeatedly failed to manage decisive moments in matches. They have allowed opponents back into contests, struggled to protect leads or respond effectively after conceding, and have not shown the consistency expected of a club seeking to challenge near the top of the table.
Their 1-1 draw with Tottenham was especially frustrating because United conceded a stoppage-time equaliser against a side reduced to 10 men. Against Leeds, they again failed to secure a victory despite having opportunities to influence the contest.
Such results have become a pattern rather than isolated disappointments. A team aspiring to return to the top cannot continually surrender points in matches where it has opportunities to win.
Champions League: From a 4-0 victory to consecutive defeats
United’s European campaign has followed a similarly troubling trajectory.
They began with a 4-0 victory over Sabah, raising hopes that their return to the Champions League after a two-year absence would be marked by renewed confidence and attacking authority.
However, the team failed to sustain that momentum. A 2-0 defeat away to Atlético Madrid exposed defensive vulnerabilities, while the subsequent 4-1 loss to Como represented a more serious setback.
United conceded inside the opening minute against Atlético, with Pablo Barrios finding the net after the English side failed to deal with a simple ball played behind their defence. Ademola Lookman added the second late in the match after Leny Yoro was sent off.
The defeat in Madrid was damaging, but there were moments when United threatened to recover. Against Como, however, the response to adversity was considerably weaker.
Nico Paz opened the scoring in the second minute, and United struggled to regain control. Como doubled their advantage through Anastasios Douvikas in the 49th minute before Paz scored again eight minutes later. Jacobo Ramon added the fourth in the 76th minute, with Joshua Zirkzee scoring a late consolation.
The scoreline reflected more than an unfortunate start. United were repeatedly exposed by Como’s movement, intensity and ability to exploit spaces between the midfield and defence.
After three Champions League league-phase matches, United have one victory and two defeats, leaving them with three points. Their return to Europe’s elite competition has therefore brought an immediate test of their ability to compete against opponents capable of punishing tactical and individual mistakes.
Carrick started well. Why has the momentum disappeared?
Carrick’s record from last season provides an important context for assessing the current situation.
His 12 victories in 17 Premier League matches helped United finish third, and the improvement under his leadership was a major factor in the decision to appoint him permanently. His familiarity with the club, experience as a former midfielder and understanding of its expectations offered the prospect of continuity after previous managerial changes.
The current downturn does not automatically erase that achievement. It does, however, raise questions about whether the progress was sustainable and whether the team has adapted sufficiently to the demands of a full season.
One possibility is that opponents have become better prepared for Carrick’s approach. During his initial spell, the element of surprise and a renewed sense of confidence may have helped United perform beyond expectations. A full campaign requires more than an initial tactical improvement; it demands alternative approaches when opponents close passing lanes, press aggressively or exploit weaknesses in transition.
The Como defeat highlighted the risks of a passive defensive approach. United allowed their opponents too much time on the ball and failed to disrupt their rhythm. Once they fell behind, they struggled to impose themselves on the match.
Carrick has also had to contend with injuries and absences. United’s official match report identified several players missing against Como, including Lisandro Martínez, Kobbie Mainoo, Luke Shaw and Ayden Heaven, while Leny Yoro was suspended. Matthijs de Ligt returned after an extended spell out following back surgery.
Those absences help explain some of the disruption to team selection, particularly in defence and midfield. But injuries cannot fully account for the repeated slow starts, poor pressing and loss of control that have characterised recent performances.
The manager must find a way to make the team more resilient even when key players are unavailable. That means establishing clear defensive responsibilities, improving coordination between the midfield and back line, and ensuring that tactical adjustments do not leave the side vulnerable elsewhere.
Fernandes questions United’s tactics after Como defeat
The most revealing comments after the Como match came from captain Bruno Fernandes, who openly questioned the team’s approach without the ball.
Fernandes said United had failed to apply sufficient pressure and had allowed Como too much possession and time to build attacks. He suggested that the team’s passive approach had given the Italian side confidence.
Explaining the impact of the early goal, the Portuguese midfielder said: “Conceding early makes us go into the game with a mood of defeat.”
He added that United struggled to recover, remain brave in possession and create meaningful opportunities after falling behind.
When asked whether his comments amounted to criticism of Carrick and the coaching staff, Fernandes said decisions about the team’s pressing approach were for the manager and staff to assess. He nevertheless argued that United sometimes needed to take greater risks, press higher and make opponents uncomfortable.
The remarks are significant because they point to a possible disconnect between the team’s tactical instructions and what its captain believes is required on the pitch.
Fernandes was not simply lamenting missed chances. His comments concerned how United defended, how they tried to win the ball back and how they responded psychologically after conceding.
Carrick, for his part, described the performance as unacceptable and accepted responsibility for the team’s shortcomings. He also questioned the intensity and effort shown by his players.
The public exchange does not necessarily mean the dressing room has broken down. It does, however, underline the urgency of establishing a coherent approach that players understand and execute consistently.
If the coaching staff want United to press aggressively, the entire team must move together. If the plan is to defend in a compact shape and attack on the counter, the players must maintain their discipline and exploit transitions effectively. A mixture of approaches without clear coordination can leave the team exposed.
The Bruno Fernandes captaincy debate
Fernandes has also faced renewed scrutiny over his leadership as United’s poor form continues.
A claim circulating in football discussions suggests that he is the first Manchester United captain to record more defeats than victories in the Champions League while wearing the armband. The precise historical comparison and figures have not been independently established, so the claim should not be treated as a confirmed club record.
Nevertheless, the debate reflects the pressure surrounding Fernandes’ role as captain during another difficult period.
The Portugal international remains one of United’s most influential players, offering creativity, passing range, goal contributions and a willingness to demand the ball in difficult situations. His performances have often been among the few consistent positives during turbulent periods.
However, captaincy carries responsibilities beyond individual output. A captain is expected to help the team remain composed when adversity strikes, maintain standards and encourage collective responsibility.
Fernandes’ comments after the Como defeat raise an important question: how can a captain help change the team’s response when an early setback appears to undermine its confidence?
His criticism of the team’s passive pressing may be justified, but it also places him within the wider responsibility to improve the team’s execution on the pitch. Leadership is most valuable when it translates into better organisation, greater determination and a stronger response during difficult periods.
At the same time, it would be simplistic to blame United’s results on Fernandes or to suggest that changing the captain alone would solve the club’s problems. The team’s difficulties involve tactical decisions, defensive errors, inconsistent performances and the collective response to pressure.
Defensive fragility and the failure to control matches
One of the clearest concerns is United’s inability to protect themselves against early goals.
They conceded within the opening minute against Atlético Madrid and inside two minutes against Como. Such starts immediately force a team to alter its approach, chase the game and take greater risks.
Against Como, United did not recover their composure after the opening goal. The midfield struggled to disrupt the hosts’ passing, while defensive players were left dealing with runners and combinations that repeatedly created dangerous situations.
The problem extends beyond the back four. Defensive stability depends on the entire team pressing, covering spaces and preventing opponents from progressing through midfield. When the first line of pressure is ineffective, defenders are left exposed.
United must also improve their management of matches. Possession alone is not evidence of control. A team can have the ball for long periods without creating clear chances or preventing its opponents from threatening on the counterattack.
The club’s recent league results suggest that United have struggled to convert their attacking involvement into decisive outcomes. Their 10 goals in seven matches show that scoring is not their only problem, but the absence of clean sheets is a warning sign.
The immediate task is to establish a more dependable defensive structure, reduce individual errors and ensure the team can respond constructively when it concedes.
Recruitment, injuries and the wider club structure
United’s problems have also reopened debate about recruitment and the support available to the manager.
Following the defeat to Atlético Madrid, defender Lisandro Martínez publicly expressed frustration with the club’s leadership and the level of investment in new signings. His comments suggested that the squad required further strengthening to compete at the highest level.
Recruitment alone, however, cannot explain the current results. A squad with established international players should be capable of producing more organised performances than United have shown in recent weeks.
The club must assess whether its available players are suited to Carrick’s preferred system, whether the midfield has the balance needed to protect the defence and whether the squad has enough depth to cope with injuries and suspensions.
The return of De Ligt against Como offered a small positive, while the availability of players such as Carlos Baleba could help address the midfield’s physical and defensive demands. But individual returns will have limited impact unless United also improve their collective organisation.
Frequent managerial changes would carry their own risks. Replacing Carrick without addressing structural weaknesses could simply restart the same cycle of short-term improvement followed by renewed decline.
The club’s leadership must therefore distinguish between problems that can be corrected through coaching and those that require longer-term changes to recruitment, squad construction and decision-making.
What must change before the crisis deepens?
United’s next fixtures provide Carrick with an immediate opportunity to stop the slide. Bournemouth visit Old Trafford on October 25, followed by a Premier League meeting with Chelsea on October 31. Roma are scheduled to visit in the Champions League on November 3.
Those matches will test whether the team can respond to criticism with a more disciplined and determined performance.
United need to start games with greater concentration, apply pressure more coherently and avoid allowing opponents to dictate the tempo. They must also become more clinical in attack and more composed when matches turn against them.
Carrick must demonstrate that he can adapt his tactics rather than persist with an approach that opponents have repeatedly exploited. Fernandes and the senior players, meanwhile, must translate their concerns into leadership on the pitch.
The club’s supporters have seen managerial changes, rebuilding projects and promises of renewed direction before. What they need now is evidence of progress through results and performances.
Carrick’s early success showed that improvement was possible. The current run demonstrates how quickly confidence can disappear when a team fails to establish consistency.
The Como defeat may prove to be a turning point, but only if United learn from it. Otherwise, the loss will be remembered as another painful chapter in a familiar cycle: a promising beginning, a collapse in standards and a growing debate about who is responsible.
For now, the challenge is shared. Carrick must find answers, Fernandes must help restore belief, and the players must demonstrate the intensity and organisation that have been missing. Manchester United do not need another explanation for their decline as much as they need a convincing response on the pitch.
Spread the word