Manchester United’s 4–1 defeat to Como was not simply a bad night in Europe. It was a performance that exposed serious weaknesses in their defensive organisation, midfield discipline, pressing strategy and ability to respond under pressure.
Nico Paz scored twice and assisted another goal, while Anastasios Douvikas and Jacobo Ramón completed Como’s emphatic victory. Joshua Zirkzee scored a late consolation, but it did little to disguise the scale of United’s problems.
The defeat on Wednesday, 21 October 2026, extended Manchester United’s winless run to seven matches across all competitions. Carrick apologised to supporters and accepted responsibility, describing the performance as unacceptable. Captain Bruno Fernandes, meanwhile, questioned the coaching staff’s decision not to press Como more aggressively.The most worrying detail was how predictable United became once Como established control. They struggled to win the ball, failed to track runners consistently and repeatedly allowed the Italian side to attack dangerous spaces.
Carrick now faces five urgent problems. If he cannot solve them, Manchester United risk turning one disastrous European evening into a defining crisis for their season.
1.Como 4–1 Man United: Why Carrick’s Pressing System Failed
The first major problem was United’s approach without the ball.
Instead of consistently disrupting Como’s build-up, United often allowed the hosts to circulate possession and establish control. Como completed 594 passes, their highest total against Manchester United in a Champions League match since Barcelona recorded 725 in April 2019.
That figure tells an important story. It does not automatically mean United defended badly throughout every possession, but it illustrates how much time Como had to organise their attacks.
Fernandes publicly questioned the strategy after the match, arguing that the team had given Como too much time and space on the ball.
His criticism was tactical rather than merely emotional. When a technically capable side can receive possession without immediate pressure, its midfielders have more time to identify passing lanes, move opponents out of position and release runners behind the defence.
Como took advantage of those opportunities.
Why Carrick must find the right pressing balance
There are two broad ways to defend against a possession-oriented team.
A side can press high and aggressively, attempting to force mistakes near the opponent’s goal. Alternatively, it can retreat into a compact defensive structure, deny central spaces and wait for opportunities to counterattack.
Both approaches can work. The problem comes when a team executes neither consistently.
United’s pressure often appeared disconnected. One player would approach the ball, but nearby teammates did not always close the passing options. Como could therefore bypass the first challenge and move forward into space.
Carrick must establish clearer pressing triggers. For example:
- Press aggressively when Como play a difficult pass towards the touchline.
- Close central passing lanes before committing additional players forward.
- Ensure the midfield follows the press rather than leaving large spaces behind.
- Drop into a compact shape when the first pressing line is bypassed.
The objective is not to run more simply for the sake of running. It is to make every pressing action part of a coordinated team movement.
United’s next opponents will continue to exploit disorganised pressure if Carrick does not address this issue.
2.Como 4–1 Man United: Nico Paz Exposed United’s Midfield and Defensive Gaps
Nico Paz was the outstanding player on the pitch, but United’s defensive structure helped him flourish.
The Argentine midfielder scored in the second minute, doubled his tally in the 57th minute and supplied the pass for Douvikas’ goal shortly after half-time. His performance demonstrated the damage a creative player can cause when given time between the opposition’s midfield and defensive lines.
The opening goal was particularly revealing. Paz found space outside the penalty area and curled an excellent finish into the corner. United had barely settled into the match, yet their defensive structure had already allowed a dangerous player to receive and shoot.
The problem was not simply the quality of Paz’s finishing. United needed to make those opportunities harder to create.
The danger of defending without midfield protection
When the midfield fails to close spaces, centre-backs face a difficult decision.
They can step forward to challenge an attacking midfielder, potentially opening space behind them, or remain in position and allow the opponent to turn towards goal.
Paz repeatedly benefited from the uncertainty around those decisions.
For United, this points to a broader issue: the distance between the midfield and defensive lines was not consistently controlled. When those units become disconnected, opponents can receive the ball in valuable areas and attack before defenders have time to reorganise.
Carrick must improve communication between his central midfielders and defenders. One player needs to apply pressure, another must cover the passing lane, and the defensive line must adjust together.
That coordination becomes even more important against teams with intelligent players who move between the lines.
Why United cannot rely on individual defending
United’s defenders were also exposed by movement around them. Douvikas’ goal in the 49th minute followed a pass from Paz, with the striker finding space to run beyond Matthijs de Ligt before finishing.
De Ligt was making his first appearance in 325 days following back problems, so his lack of recent match fitness was an important consideration. United were also missing several players through injury or illness, including Lisandro Martínez, Luke Shaw and Kobbie Mainoo.
Those absences help explain some of the selection difficulties, but they do not remove the need for a more reliable collective defensive structure.
United must defend space as a unit, rather than repeatedly asking individual players to recover from dangerous situations.
3. Manchester United’s Defensive Concentration Collapsed at Crucial Moments
Conceding in the second minute immediately placed United under pressure. However, the response after half-time was even more concerning.
Como scored their second goal in the 49th minute and added another through Paz eight minutes later. Ramón then headed in the fourth goal in the 76th minute.
These goals highlighted different defensive failures, but they shared one feature: Como were able to attack before United had adequately protected the most dangerous spaces.
The goal conceded shortly after the restart was especially damaging. Teams often use half-time to reset their shape, correct mistakes and regain composure. United instead conceded almost immediately.
The problem with losing second balls
After the initial challenge for possession, the next phase can determine whether a defence remains organised.
If a midfielder loses the ball while teammates are positioned ahead of it, the opposition can attack directly towards the back line. That is what made Paz’s second goal so damaging: United lost possession in a dangerous area and failed to stop the resulting attack.
A defensive midfielder needs to recognise when a teammate is vulnerable and provide cover. If possession is lost, the nearest players must delay the counterattack while the rest of the team recovers.
This requires anticipation, discipline and communication.
United cannot afford to have several players chasing the ball while leaving the centre of the pitch exposed.
Why the fourth goal matters
Ramón’s header in the 76th minute illustrated another weakness: protecting the penalty area against runners arriving from wide positions.
When a cross comes into the box, defenders must track opponents, protect the central zones and communicate about who is responsible for each attacking player.
If one defender follows the ball and another loses track of a runner, the opposition can create a free header even when there are enough defenders in the area.
Carrick must review these moments individually and collectively. The answer is not necessarily to change every defender, but to establish clearer responsibilities and improve the team’s reaction when Como-style attacks develop.
The key lesson is that a defensive system must survive mistakes. United’s structure repeatedly broke down after the first error, allowing Como to create further opportunities.
4. Bruno Fernandes and Carrick Need Tactical Clarity, Not a Public Blame Game
The defeat also created an uncomfortable disagreement between the captain and the coaching staff.
Fernandes argued that United needed to be braver in their pressing approach, suggesting that allowing Como too much possession had made the Italian side increasingly confident.
Carrick, meanwhile, defended the coaching staff’s approach and stressed that players still had a responsibility to work hard, track opponents and recover possession.
Both perspectives contain an important point.
A manager is responsible for selecting the tactical plan, but players must execute it correctly. A passive press can be a deliberate strategy; it becomes a problem when the team fails to maintain its shape or apply pressure at the appropriate moments.
Equally, asking players to press more aggressively is not enough if the team has no coordinated plan for what happens after the first opponent escapes the press.
The manager must define the team’s identity
United need a clear answer to three questions:
1. Where should the first pressing action begin?
2. Which passing options must be blocked?
3. What should the team do when the opponent bypasses the initial pressure?
Those decisions must be understood by every player, including substitutes who enter during the match.
The disagreement between Fernandes and Carrick should therefore be treated as a warning that the team needs greater tactical clarity. It should not automatically be interpreted as proof that the dressing room has fractured.
The immediate task is to translate criticism into a coherent plan.
Carrick should review the match with his players, explain the intended pressing structure and identify where individual decisions undermined the collective approach.
Fernandes, as captain, also has a responsibility to help the team implement that plan on the pitch.
United cannot afford a situation in which the coaching staff and senior players appear to be working from different interpretations of how the team should defend.
5.Como 4–1 Man United: Carrick Must Turn United’s Response Into Results Before Bournemouth
The fifth problem is psychological, but it should not be separated from the tactical issues.
United have now gone seven matches without a victory across all competitions. A run like that increases pressure on the manager and makes every mistake feel more significant.
After the Como defeat, Carrick apologised to supporters and accepted responsibility for the team’s performance. He also questioned whether the players had brought enough intensity, aggression and discipline to the match.
The next test arrives quickly, with Bournemouth scheduled to visit Old Trafford on Sunday, 25 October.
United need a response, but it must involve more than emotional speeches or a change in formation.
Three practical fixes for the Bournemouth match
First, protect the centre of the pitch. United must reduce the space available between their midfield and defensive lines. A more compact structure would make it harder for Bournemouth to find attacking players in dangerous positions.
Second, press with a clear plan. The team should identify specific moments to press aggressively while remaining organised when the first challenge is bypassed. Uncoordinated pressing risks creating more opportunities for opponents.
Third, improve the response after losing possession. United must recover quickly, protect the central channels and prevent counterattacks from developing into clear chances.
SEE ALSO: Manchester United Transfers: Martínez’s Explosive Criticism Raises 3 Questions
Carrick should also consider the physical condition of players returning from injury. De Ligt’s return was a positive development, but his long absence demonstrates why United must manage defensive selection carefully.
The manager needs to balance the urgency of ending the winless run with the need to avoid exposing players who are not yet fully match-fit.
Why the Bournemouth match matters
A strong performance would not erase the Como defeat, but it could provide evidence that United have begun to correct their weaknesses.
Another disjointed display would raise further questions about whether the coaching staff can establish a reliable identity.
The important measure will not simply be the final score. United need to demonstrate better defensive spacing, coordinated pressing and greater discipline when possession changes hands.
Those improvements would provide a more meaningful response than a narrow victory achieved without correcting the underlying problems.
Final Verdict: Five Problems, One Urgent Challenge for Carrick
Manchester United’s 4–1 defeat to Como exposed a team struggling to defend collectively and respond when opponents gain momentum.
The five problems are clear:
- Passive pressing: Como were allowed too much time to control possession.
- Midfield gaps: Nico Paz repeatedly exploited dangerous spaces.
- Poor defensive concentration: United failed to protect key areas at crucial moments.
- Tactical uncertainty: Public disagreement highlighted the need for clearer instructions.
- A damaging winless run: Carrick must turn criticism into measurable improvement.
There are mitigating circumstances, including injuries, illness and De Ligt’s long-awaited return. But those factors cannot fully explain the lack of organisation that allowed Como to score four times.
The next match against Bournemouth is therefore an opportunity for Carrick to demonstrate that the defeat has produced meaningful lessons.
Manchester United do not necessarily need an entirely new tactical identity overnight. They need a coherent plan, consistent execution and the discipline to maintain their structure when a match becomes difficult.
The real test is whether Carrick can make United harder to play against before their problems become even more difficult to reverse.
Do you believe Michael Carrick can fix Manchester United’s tactical problems, or does the 4–1 defeat to Como suggest that deeper changes are required? Share your thoughts in the comments and follow The Football Xtra for more Champions League analysis and Premier League coverage.
