I attended Saturday's match in Hull, and from the opening minutes it was evident that Manchester United were out of their depth against the hosts. The team looked disjointed, lacking the sharpness and cohesion that fans expect from a club of United's stature. In the days ahead, critics will undoubtedly pounce on Michael Carrick’s side, accusing them of insufficient intensity, aggression and purpose.
Yet, after leaving the stadium, I felt the situation was more layered than a simple case of laziness. First, let’s acknowledge the obvious: United’s performance was poor. The players failed to execute the game plan, and only Carrick knows the precise reasons behind the breakdown. However, a closer look at the squad’s condition reveals a number of contributing factors.
Six of the first‑team regulars had a full pre‑season under their belts, but many others were still finding their feet. The new midfield partnership of Youri Tielemans and Andrey Santos, for instance, had never been tested together in a competitive setting before this fixture. Their lack of familiarity inevitably affected the team’s rhythm in the middle of the park. On the bench, United fielded players who were far from match‑fit.
Benjamin Šeško, who missed every pre‑season game, was called upon, as were Kobbie Mainoo and Marcus Rashford, both of whom had limited minutes after returning from England duty over the summer. When a manager is forced to rely on individuals who have not yet built up the necessary stamina or sharpness, the overall intensity of the side is bound to suffer.
Hull City, on the other hand, deserve massive credit for their preparation. This was their first Premier League appearance in nine years, and they entered the match with a fully completed pre‑season schedule. Their squad was well‑drilled, physically ready, and mentally focused on proving they belong at the top level. The contrast between a fully prepared opponent and a United side still stitching together its pieces was stark.
A common narrative circulating on social media claims that four of Carrick’s five defeats have come at the hands of teams employing a back‑five formation. That assertion simply does not hold up under scrutiny.
Two of those ‘defeats’ were actually pre‑season fixtures – United’s early‑summer game against Wrexham and the final friendly versus AC Milan under Ruben Amorim. Using friendly results as a barometer for tactical weakness is misleading; those matches are primarily about fitness and experimentation, not about proving a system’s superiority. If we compare the Hull loss with United’s previous poor showing against Leeds at Old Trafford last season, a pattern emerges. Both games were characterized by a noticeable lack of physical presence.
The players seemed out‑muscled, struggled to win second balls, and appeared fatigued well before the final whistle. This physical deficit is likely to be Carrick’s most pressing concern as he looks to fine‑tune his squad for the upcoming fixtures. Given these circumstances, I believe Carrick deserves a degree of leniency for the Hull result.
The team’s shortcomings are not solely tactical; they are also rooted in fitness, cohesion and the integration of new signings. I would be surprised if United do not show a marked improvement when they face Ipswich Town on Sunday, a side that, while respectable, does not possess the same level of preparation as Hull. Midfield has been United’s priority this summer, and the club has poured more than £150 million into reinforcing the area, with the latest addition being Carlos Baleba.
Yet, history shows that plugging one hole often exposes another. In the 2025 window, United finally solved their attacking inefficiencies by signing Benjamin Šeško, Matheus Cunha and Bryan Mbeumo.
Once the forward line was bolstered, the glaring need for a stronger midfield became impossible to ignore, prompting a year‑long wait for the right midfield recruits. The same logic now applies to the left‑back position. Having secured three midfielders, United’s next logical target is a quality left‑back, especially with Luke Shaw’s contract set to expire next summer.
The club has long admired Myles Lewis‑Skelly and Lewis Hall, both of whom are currently deemed unattainable as their respective managers have dismissed any transfer speculation. Additionally, Bruno Guimarães’ injury further diminishes the likelihood of a quick departure for Lewis‑Skelly, leaving United in a holding pattern. United’s strategy appears to be one of patience: focus on attack and midfield this summer, then address defensive gaps in the following window. While a last‑minute creative signing cannot be ruled out, the odds are slim.
Barcelona’s Alejandro Balde has been linked with the club, but United’s scouting reports suggest they are not actively pursuing him at this stage. In the meantime, the burden falls heavily on Shaw to stay healthy throughout the season.
The club will also need to rely on Patrick Dorgu, who is seen as a long‑term solution at left‑back, with seasoned options like Noussair Mazraoui and Diogo Dalot available to cover when necessary. Regarding departures, it looks unlikely that any first‑team regulars will leave before the transfer deadline. The only name that has surfaced is Dutch forward Joshua Zirkzee, but interest from Italian clubs remains unsubstantiated, and he is expected to remain at Old Trafford. In summary, the Hull defeat should be viewed through a nuanced lens.
United were missing match fitness, cohesion and the benefit of a fully prepared opponent. Carrick’s side has invested heavily in midfield and will likely see a rebound against a less physically imposing Ipswich side. The club’s longer‑term plans for the left‑back position remain on hold, with a focus on stability and patience.
As the season progresses, the true test will be whether United can translate their financial muscle into consistent performances on the pitch.