I attended Saturday's match and, from the opening minutes, it was evident that Manchester United were not competing on equal terms with Hull City. The performance was underwhelming, and it would be easy for pundits to launch a barrage of criticism at Michael Carrick’s side ahead of their next home fixture against Ipswich Town on Sunday.
Common talking points are likely to include a perceived deficit in intensity, aggression and overall intent. However, after leaving the stadium I felt the situation was more nuanced than a simple lack of effort.
First, let us acknowledge that United’s display was undeniably poor. Carrick’s squad failed to produce the quality expected, and only the manager can fully explain the underlying reasons. One clear factor was the disparity in match sharpness among several key players.
Six members of the first‑team group had completed a full pre‑season programme, but other crucial figures were still finding their rhythm. The newly‑formed midfield partnership of Youri Tielemans and Andrey Santos, for example, had limited time playing together, which inevitably affected cohesion. The bench also featured several individuals who were far from peak fitness. Benjamin Šeško, who had not featured at all during the pre‑season, was called upon, as were Kobbie Mainoo and Marcus Rashford, both of whom had only a handful of minutes after returning from England duty over the summer.
Their lack of recent competitive minutes contributed to the overall sluggishness on the pitch. Hull City, on the other hand, deserve significant credit. This was their first Premier League appearance in nine years, yet they arrived well‑drilled and with a squad that had enjoyed a complete pre‑season schedule. Their preparation allowed them to execute a game plan that exposed United’s frailties, particularly in the physical department.
The contrast in preparation levels was stark and played a major role in the result. A myth circulating on social media deserves to be addressed: the claim that "four of Carrick’s five defeats have come against teams employing a back five" is simply inaccurate.
Two of those matches were pre‑season friendlies – United’s season‑opening game against Wrexham and a later fixture versus AC Milan under Ruben Amorim. Using those exhibitions as evidence of a tactical weakness is misleading, as they do not reflect the intensity or stakes of Premier League competition. When I compare the Hull defeat with United’s poor showing against Leeds United at Old Trafford last season, a common thread emerges. Both games were characterised by a noticeable lack of physical presence, suggesting that Carrick’s most pressing concern is restoring the team’s stamina and robustness.
This is not a criticism of the manager’s tactics so much as an observation about the current fitness levels of the squad. Given these circumstances, I am inclined to grant Carrick a degree of leniency for the Hull result. I would be surprised if United do not show marked improvement against Ipswich Town on Sunday, especially if the players have had an extra week to recover and sharpen up.
Midfield has been United’s primary focus heading into the new season. The club has already invested over £150 million in reinforcements, with the most recent signing being Carlos Baleba.
Yet, as often happens after a major spending spree, plugging one hole reveals the next most pressing gap. Looking back to the 2025 summer window, United bolstered their attack by adding Benjamin Šeško, Matheus Cunha and Bryan Mbeumo, which subsequently highlighted the lingering need for midfield depth. United opted to wait rather than rush into a stop‑gap signing, hoping that the following summer’s market would present better options.
A similar pattern is now evident in the left‑back position. After securing three midfielders, the club’s next priority appears to be finding a quality left‑back, especially with Luke Shaw’s contract set to expire next summer.
Two young prospects, Myles Lewis‑Skelly and Lewis Hall, have long been on United’s radar for that role. Both are currently deemed unattainable, as their respective clubs have publicly dismissed any transfer speculation.
The recent injury to Bruno Guimarães further complicates matters, as it likely reduces the chance of a move for Lewis‑Skelly. Given United’s recent emphasis on attacking and midfield signings, it seems plausible they will defer a defensive overhaul until the next window. Nevertheless, market dynamics can shift quickly, and a late‑window creative solution—perhaps a loan or a short‑term deal—cannot be entirely ruled out. Barcelona’s Alejandro Balde has been linked with United, but reports suggest the club is not actively pursuing him at this stage.
In the short term, the burden falls heavily on Luke Shaw to remain fit throughout the season. The club may also rely on Patrick Dorgu, who is viewed as a long‑term left‑back prospect, while seasoned options such as Noussair Mazraoui and Diogo Dalot can provide cover when needed. Regarding potential departures, it appears unlikely that any first‑team regulars will leave United before the transfer deadline. One name that has surfaced is Dutch forward Joshua Zirkzee, but interest from Italian clubs has not materialised into a concrete offer, and he is expected to stay.
In summary, while United’s flat performance against Hull was disappointing, a combination of fitness issues, limited pre‑season preparation for several key players, and a well‑prepared opponent contributed to the outcome. The club’s strategic focus on midfield and attack has left defensive depth as a lingering concern, but with the transfer window still open, United have the opportunity to address these needs. Fans should temper their criticism of Carrick for now and allow the team the chance to regroup and improve in the upcoming fixtures, especially the crucial home game against Ipswich Town.