Mourinho could predict the future in his prime, but at Manchester United his passivity is a problem

The EFL Cup win over Manchester City on Wednesday has brought respite for Jose Mourinho, but nobody thinks that all of Manchester United’s issues are solved.

Perhaps at some point in the future people will look back on that game and see it as a time when Pep Guardiola had the chance to land a devastating blow on his nemesis and, by picking a weakened team and making it clear that the competition was the least of his priorities, neglected to do so. Perhaps Juan Mata’s goal will in time become as central to the history of United as the Mark Robins winner against Nottingham Forest in 1990, the goal that supposedly kept Alex Ferguson in a job, and will be highlighted as the moment when the pendulum began to swing. But there is a long, long way to go.

The problems at United are many. There is an expensive squad constructed with apparently little thought to the overall unit. There is a drift, the sense of the lack of a defining philosophy in the post-Ferguson era. The aura of invincibility of the Ferguson era and the sense of confidence that imbued has gone. There is a city rival that for 40 years was essentially a joke making great strides and increasing the sense of urgency.

And then there is Mourinho who is going through perhaps the toughest spell of his managerial career. There are mitigating factors but he has won just eight of his last 25 league games. To point out this is a crisis is not to suggest he may not come through it. He clearly is an exceptional manager, one of the greatest of all time, with league title successes in four different countries and two Champions Leagues.

He is entirely capable of dragging himself out of the slough. But at the same time there are reasons for concern.

There has been a steady drip of stories of players unhappy about his manner or his methods. Such reports are never easy to disentangle and are common enough when a manager is under pressure and certain players feel marginalised, but what was striking was the suggestion earlier this week that Mourinho has become “distant”. Given one of his key attributes at Porto, Chelsea (first time round) and Internazionale was his capacity to build a bond with core players so strong that at times it felt as though they were part of a cult, it was would represent an intriguing change if he really has taken a hands-off approach, suggesting, perhaps, just how hurt he has been by the fall-out at Real Madrid and the “rats” at Chelsea.

Then there were his complaints about living in a hotel and the strange way in which he blurted them out to Sky’s Andy Burton suggested a man ill-at-ease with his life. Is he lonely? Cocooned in his luxury suite, without his family around him, unable to leave the Lowry without being badgered by photographers, is he finding it hard to switch off?

Finally, there are the questions about his tactical approach, which cannot be separated from the psychological dimension. Mourinho at his best was always remarkably clear-sighted. He was ruthless on the touchline.

The goalkeeper Vitor Baia, who won the Uefa Cup and Champions League under Mourinho at Porto, has spoken of how Mourinho was so well-prepared that “sometimes it was like he could see the future. I remember a specific situation against Benfica, when throughout the week he prepared us for after we scored a goal, which actually happened, he told us that [the Benfica coach Jose] Camacho would make a specific substitution and change tactics, which also happened. So we already knew what to do, we were completely prepared for it.

"In the same match, we also prepared to play with ten players, because Jose knew the referee would not resist the pressure and would show a red card along the way. This also happened, but we had already seen that movie during the week, so we knew what to do, and got the narrow win.”

At his peak, there was nobody so adept as him at diverting the course of a game.

Contrast that with two of the three biggest games United have played this season. In the league game against City, United went 2-0 down in 36 minutes and were being outplayed. Mourinho did nothing. That United dragged their way back into the game had far more to do with a Claudio Bravo error and the unease that spread than him.

Mourinho seemed to have rediscovered some of his spark at Anfield, his risk-free approach producing a stalemate and earning a point. But the attempt to do similar at Chelsea was undermined by the catalogue of defensive errors that presented Pedro with a goal after 30 seconds.

With that, Mourinho seemed to suggest, his game plan was gone. What could he do? But this is the manager so astute it once seemed he could predict the future. Surely the possibility of conceding an early goal must have occurred to him? As against City, though, his response was to wait. This time there was no opposing goalkeeping error to offer a lifeline. This time Chelsea ruthlessly punished a strangely passive side, 4-0.

Passivity has been the defining feature of Mourinho’s United. Again and again they seem to fall into the trap of sideways passing. Perhaps that is all part of the process of deprogramming the players from Louis van Gaal’s philosophy. But United have run less than the other top sides this season. They look slow. They always play a 4-2-3-1 looking to get the ball into the box for Zlatan Ibrahimovic who, for all his many qualities, is 35 and was never especially mobile even at his peak.

Theirs is a reactive football. There is a place for that, even for a team that has spent as much as United have. Just because the trend is to hard pressing, a high line and constant percussive energy doesn’t mean everybody should play like that. But the worry for United is that, early as it is, they have frequently looked stale, sluggish and one-dimensional this season and, more pertinently, that Mourinho so far has shown few signs of the tactical decisiveness that was once his hallmark.