Manchester United find themselves in a familiar crossroads as the club deliberates whether to hand Michael Carrick the permanent head‑coach role. The situation feels eerily reminiscent of the path Ole Gunnar Solskjaer walked to secure his full‑time appointment a few years ago.
Both men stepped in as interim figures after a Portuguese manager’s departure and were tasked with steadying a ship that had been tossed by turbulence. Since Carrick took over from Rúben Amorim in mid‑January, United’s results have been striking, yet doubts about his long‑term suitability linger. Many of those doubts are rooted in direct comparisons with Solskjaer, who also managed to arrest a decline and later earned the permanent badge in 2019 after initially arriving as a caretaker from Molde.
Carrick has publicly brushed off the Solskjaer parallels as "irrelevant," but the narrative has already taken hold among fans and pundits. The question remains: is the comparison fair, or does it overlook crucial contextual differences?
Solskjaer’s interim spell covered 13 Premier League fixtures before he was awarded the permanent job. Carrick has now overseen the same number of league games, giving us a clean, side‑by‑side benchmark to assess their early performances. In pure points terms, Solskjaer holds a slight edge, having collected 32 points out of a possible 39 – three more than Carrick’s tally after 13 matches.
His United side also found the net 29 times, five more than the current squad under Carrick, while conceding three fewer goals. However, those numbers need to be weighted against the quality of opposition faced. Solskjaer’s run included fixtures against all three teams that eventually fell into the relegation zone, and only four of his 13 games were against clubs that finished in the top half of the table in the 2018/19 season. By contrast, Carrick’s opponents have been markedly tougher: seven of his 13 matches have been against sides that started the weekend in the top ten, and only one opponent has been a relegation‑battle team.
One of Solskjaer’s standout results was a 1‑0 away victory at Tottenham Hotspur, then managed by Mauricio Pochettino and ultimately finishing fourth that season. Marcus Rashford’s clinical finish, set up by a lofted pass from Paul Pogba, proved decisive, with David De Gea producing a series of crucial saves to preserve the win. Carrick, on the other hand, can already claim a superior record in high‑profile games.
In his first two matches he guided United to back‑to‑back triumphs over the league’s two biggest clubs – a 2‑1 win at Manchester City followed by a 2‑0 victory over Arsenal. Those results not only boosted United’s confidence but also propelled them into the race for a Champions League spot, with a subsequent win over Aston Villa – a team already on course for European qualification – cementing a third‑place push. When Carrick dismissed the Solskjaer comparisons, he argued that each manager operates within a unique set of circumstances, a point that holds considerable merit.
Solskjaer was juggling Premier League duties alongside deep runs in the Champions League and the FA Cup, often playing multiple mid‑week fixtures. Carrick, by contrast, has benefited from a relatively gentle schedule, enjoying extended breaks between league games – at one stage United went 24 days without a match. This disparity in fixture congestion inevitably influences squad rotation, player fatigue, and tactical preparation. If we broaden the lens to include cup competitions, Solskjaer does have marquee victories to his name: a memorable FA Cup win at Stamford Bridge against Chelsea and, perhaps most famously, a dramatic last‑16 Champions League comeback against Paris Saint‑Germain.
Across all competitions, Solskjaer oversaw 19 matches in 86 days, whereas Carrick’s 13 league games stretched across 101 days, underscoring the differing pressures each faced. Player availability is another critical factor. Solskjaer’s squad featured the likes of Eric Bailly, Chris Smalling, Romelu Lukaku, Alexis Sanchez, Juan Mata, Fred, and Scott McTominay – a blend of experience and physicality. Carrick’s pool has included Noussair Mazraoui, Patrick Dorgu, Mason Mount, Leny Yoro, Ayden Heaven, Manuel Ugarte, Benjamin Šeško and Joshua Zirkzee, offering a mix of technical skill and youthful vigor.
The differing personnel inevitably shape each manager’s tactical options and the style of play they can implement. From a purely statistical perspective, Solskjaer’s tenure ranks among United’s most successful post‑Sir Alex Ferguson appointments, yet his legacy is often critiqued for a lack of a distinct playing philosophy. United under Solskjaer frequently relied on moments of individual brilliance rather than a cohesive, proactive style, limiting their ability to challenge for major trophies. Carrick’s best performances have similarly emerged against possession‑dominated opponents, where United have exploited counter‑attacking opportunities – a pattern evident in the wins over City and Arsenal.
The narrative that Carrick is simply a repeat of Solskjaer gains traction because he served as Solskjaer’s assistant, absorbing many of the same ideas and approaches. A deeper dive into the data from their first 13 league games reveals convergences: Carrick’s side averages more fast‑breaks per match, perhaps a reflection of the tougher opposition schedule, while Solskjaer’s United recorded a higher proportion of headed goals, benefitting from set‑piece proficiency that remains a hallmark of Premier League football. Understanding the context each manager inherited is essential.
While both Rúben Amorim and José Mourinho share Portuguese nationality, their relationships with the United squad differed markedly. Mourinho’s tenure was marred by a toxic atmosphere, a high‑profile feud with Paul Pogba, and reports of internal divisions. Solskjaer arrived to mend that negativity, injecting optimism and rebuilding morale.
Amorim, on the other hand, left after a dramatic press conference in which he openly challenged director of football Jason Wilcox, signalling a breakdown in his relationship with the club’s hierarchy rather than with the dressing room. Statistically, United’s form under Amorim improved towards the end of his spell: they lost only one of his final eight games and won three, but his tactical decision‑making – notably a puzzling reversion to a back three after previously finding success with a back four – attracted criticism. Carrick’s immediate return to a four‑defender shape appears to have restored defensive solidity and sparked the attacking flair seen in recent big‑game victories.
Both interim managers were handed relatively straightforward tasks: Solskjaer needed to lift a squad demoralised by Mourinho’s negativity, while Carrick’s primary challenge was to stabilise the back line and re‑establish confidence after a period of inconsistency. Each succeeded in different ways, and each faced distinct pressures – Solskjaer with high‑profile European nights and Carrick with a demanding league schedule. In the end, deciding which interim audition was superior after 13 Premier League games depends on the criteria you prioritise. If raw points and goal difference are paramount, Solskjaer retains a slight advantage.
If quality of opposition, tactical adaptability, and the ability to win marquee league fixtures are weighted more heavily, Carrick’s résumé looks compelling. The debate continues, and United supporters are invited to cast their vote on which temporary tenure they believe best earned the permanent badge.