Manchester United’s Champions League trip to Italy has become a test of squad depth, tactical flexibility and managerial judgement. With several senior defenders unavailable, Michael Carrick must find a competitive starting eleven without sacrificing the organisation his team desperately needs.
The Como vs Man United fixture takes place on Wednesday, 21 October 2026, at the Giuseppe Sinigaglia Stadium, where Cesc Fabregas’s ambitious Como side will attempt to exploit the difficulties facing the visitors.
Manchester United arrive under pressure after a six-match winless run across all competitions. Their 1–1 draw against Leeds United on Sunday extended a frustrating period in which the team have struggled to turn promising passages of football into victories. Before that, a 2–0 defeat away to Atletico Madrid in the Champions League exposed further problems with defensive organisation and the conversion of scoring opportunities. ([Opta Analyst](https://theanalyst.com/articles/como-vs-man-utd-prediction-champions-league-preview-10-2026))
The injury situation makes Carrick’s task considerably harder.
Leny Yoro is suspended following his dismissal against Atletico Madrid. Luke Shaw, Lisandro Martinez, Ayden Heaven, Patrick Dorgu, Kobbie Mainoo, Manuel Ugarte, Marcus Rashford and Benjamin Sesko are among the players reported unavailable through injury or illness. Manchester United’s official team update confirms several of those absences, while UEFA’s predicted line-up also identifies significant defensive and attacking gaps. ([Manchester United](https://www.manutd.com/en/news/press-conference-team-news-for-como-v-united), [UEFA](https://www.uefa.com/uefachampionsleague/news/02aa-21dd60778d8f-1ea14fd92256-1000–champions-league-starting-and-predicted-line-ups-matchday-3-/))
That list affects almost every part of the team, from the left side of the defence to the midfield and centre-forward position.
Como, meanwhile, have reasons for confidence. They defeated RB Leipzig 4–1 in their opening home Champions League match and returned to winning ways domestically with a 3–1 victory away to Fiorentina. They have also shown that they can create chances through quick passing and movement around the penalty area. ([Como official preview](https://comofootball.com/en/match-preview-como-1907-manchester-united/))
For Carrick, the challenge is not simply to replace missing players. It is to preserve a coherent tactical structure with the players available.
Five selection decisions could determine whether Manchester United finally regain momentum or suffer another damaging European setback.
Como vs Man United: Problem 1 — Rebuilding the Defence Without Yoro and Martinez
The first and most pressing dilemma concerns the centre-back positions.
Yoro’s suspension removes one established option, while Martinez is unavailable after experiencing a thigh problem. Heaven is also out through illness, leaving Carrick with substantially fewer defensive combinations than he would normally expect.
The situation is particularly difficult because United need to improve their organisation without compromising their ability to build attacks from the back.
Harry Maguire and Matthijs de Ligt are potential central defensive options, with Noussair Mazraoui and Diogo Dalot providing further versatility across the defensive line. However, De Ligt’s match readiness has been a question following his prolonged absence with a back problem, making his physical condition an important consideration. ([The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/oct/20/erik-ten-hag-accuses-cristiano-ronaldo-of-letting-down-manchester-united))
Carrick must decide whether to use the most experienced available partnership or prioritise combinations that provide greater mobility against Como’s forward movement.
Maguire offers experience and strength in aerial situations, but United must ensure the defensive line does not become too deep or too slow when Como move the ball quickly into the channels.
De Ligt could provide an alternative, provided he is ready to handle the physical demands of a competitive European match. Starting a player who is not fully match-fit would introduce another risk into an already unsettled defence.
The manager also needs to decide how aggressively his centre-backs should step forward when Como’s midfielders receive the ball.
If United’s defenders retreat too far, Nico Paz and Martin Baturina could receive possession between the lines and create opportunities close to the penalty area. If they advance too aggressively, Como could exploit the space behind them through forward runs.
The priority is to create a clear defensive structure in which each player understands when to challenge, when to cover and when to hold the line.
Carrick’s first task is to select a defence that can remain compact under pressure, not simply assemble the most experienced names available.
Problem 2 — Who Should Start at Left-Back: Harry Amass or Diogo Dalot?
The left-back position presents another major challenge.
Shaw is unavailable, Dorgu remains sidelined with a hamstring injury, and Heaven cannot feature because of illness. That leaves Carrick with fewer natural options on the left side of defence. ([Manchester United](https://www.manutd.com/en/news/press-conference-team-news-for-como-v-united))
One possibility is to use Dalot on the left and Mazraoui on the right, as indicated by UEFA’s predicted line-up. This would preserve experience in both full-back positions, although playing a right-footed defender on the opposite side can affect passing angles and the ability to overlap naturally.
The alternative is to consider Harry Amass, the young academy left-back who has been included in United’s senior matchday squads.
Carrick confirmed that Amass is genuinely in contention to start and explained that young players sometimes earn opportunities because of injuries, while others receive them because their performances in training demand selection. ([Manchester United official update](https://www.manutd.com/en/news/michael-carrick-on-harry-amass-before-como-v-united))
The manager must weigh the risks carefully.
The argument for experience
Dalot’s experience could provide greater reliability in defensive positioning, communication and decision-making. In an away match where the opposition is likely to target gaps in United’s back line, familiarity with the demands of senior football is valuable.
A more experienced player may also be better equipped to recognise when to remain deep rather than advance into the attacking third.
However, the tactical cost is that using Dalot on the left could disrupt United’s preferred distribution patterns and reduce the natural width available on one side.
The argument for Amass
Amass would give United a specialist left-back whose natural positioning could make the build-up more comfortable on that side.
His inclusion would also represent an opportunity to introduce a young player who has been working towards greater first-team involvement.
The risk is the level of opposition. Como’s wide players can create one-on-one situations, forcing a young defender to make difficult decisions without much protection.
Carrick does not need to avoid using youth players simply because the match is important. He needs to assess whether the structure around them is strong enough to support their introduction.
If Amass starts, the midfield must be ready to provide cover when he advances. If Dalot shifts left, the manager must ensure that the right flank retains enough attacking width and defensive balance.
This is not merely a choice between youth and experience. It is a decision about which arrangement gives United the best balance across both flanks.
Problem 3 — Rebuilding the Midfield Without Mainoo and Ugarte
Manchester United’s midfield has also been weakened by the absence of Kobbie Mainoo and Manuel Ugarte.
Both players are unavailable according to club team-news reporting, reducing Carrick’s options in the central areas. Mainoo’s absence is particularly relevant because United need reliable ball progression and the ability to receive possession under pressure. ([Manchester United](https://www.manutd.com/en/news/press-conference-team-news-for-como-v-united))
SEE ALSO: Manchester United and Calvert-Lewin: Why January Links Don’t Add Up
The likely alternatives include Andrey Santos and Carlos Baleba, with Youri Tielemans available to operate in different midfield roles according to the tactical requirements.
That creates an important selection question: should Carrick retain his familiar double pivot or make the midfield more conservative to protect an unfamiliar defence?
Como under Fabregas generally try to create passing angles through the central areas and use movement between the lines to pull opponents out of position. Their ability to rotate midfield roles means United cannot rely entirely on marking one player closely.
If United’s midfield becomes stretched, Como could find spaces around the defensive line and force Maguire or De Ligt to step forward.
A double pivot would give the defence protection and provide two passing options during the initial build-up. But if both midfielders focus too heavily on defensive duties, United could struggle to connect Bruno Fernandes with the forwards.
The balance is delicate.
Carrick needs at least one midfielder capable of progressing possession under pressure, while another must recognise when to remain behind the ball and prevent Como from launching counterattacks.
The two players must also communicate effectively when Como’s midfielders rotate positions.
A poorly coordinated press could create gaps between United’s midfield and defence, giving Nico Paz the opportunity to turn and play forward.
Should Bruno Fernandes drop deeper?
One alternative would be to use Bruno Fernandes in a more advanced position while relying on two deeper midfielders to control the centre.
This could preserve United’s main creative threat near the final third, allowing him to supply passes for Bryan Mbeumo, Matheus Cunha and Amad Diallo.
The danger is that, without Mainoo and Ugarte, the remaining midfielders might be asked to cover too much ground.
If Bruno drops deeper to help build attacks, United could lose some of their threat near the opposition penalty area. If he stays high, the midfield may struggle to progress the ball under Como’s pressure.
The correct balance depends on how confidently the available midfielders can perform their assigned roles.
United must rebuild their midfield around complementary responsibilities rather than expecting one player to solve every problem.
Problem 4 — Who Leads the Attack Without Benjamin Sesko?
Sesko’s absence removes another significant option from Carrick’s selection plans.
United must decide whether to use a more mobile forward as a false nine or select a conventional striker if another suitable option is available. Rashford is also reported to be unavailable, further reducing the choices for the attacking line. ([Manchester United](https://www.manutd.com/en/news/press-conference-team-news-for-como-v-united))
One potential solution is to use Mbeumo centrally, with Cunha and Diallo operating around him. Bruno could then play behind the front line in a familiar creative role.
The attraction of that arrangement is mobility.
A false nine can move into deeper positions, draw centre-backs away from their usual zones and create room for wide players to attack the spaces behind the defence. Mbeumo’s movement could also help United press from the front and make it more difficult for Como to build attacks comfortably.
However, a false nine changes the way a team attacks.
Without a conventional centre-forward occupying the penalty area, United may struggle to give crosses and cutbacks a consistent target. Cunha, Diallo and Bruno would need to make coordinated forward runs to compensate.
The risk is that United dominate possession in the middle of the pitch but lack sufficient presence in the final third.
Sesko normally provides a more direct option, allowing his teammates to play forward into a central target. Without him, United must rely more heavily on combinations and movement rather than simply looking for a physical focal point.
The manager must also consider how the team will attack Como’s defensive line if the home side retreats into a compact formation.
Mbeumo operating centrally could work when there is space to exploit, but it may be less effective against opponents who protect the centre and force attacks towards the sidelines.
United’s success will depend on whether the chosen forward line can create chances through several different patterns rather than relying on individual moments.
Problem 5 — Should Carrick Keep the 4-2-3-1 or Change the System?
The final decision concerns the overall formation.
Como’s official preview expects Manchester United to continue using their familiar 4-2-3-1 structure, with two deeper midfielders supporting Bruno Fernandes and an attacking line built around Mbeumo. ([Como official preview](https://comofootball.com/en/match-preview-como-1907-manchester-united/))
There is a strong argument for retaining that system.
Players generally perform better when their responsibilities are familiar, particularly during a difficult period. Changing the formation in response to injuries can create further uncertainty if the squad has not practised the alternative extensively.
The 4-2-3-1 also provides a useful balance between attacking and defensive responsibilities. Two deeper midfielders can help protect the back four, while Bruno operates in advanced spaces and wide attackers provide options on the counterattack.
However, the formation’s effectiveness depends on the players available.
If United’s midfield cannot provide sufficient cover, the two deeper players may become isolated against Como’s rotating midfielders. If the full-backs advance without proper protection, the team could become vulnerable to transitions.
A more conservative approach could involve an additional central midfielder and fewer players committing forward at the same time.
That would potentially reduce the space available to Como in dangerous central areas, but it could also limit United’s ability to create opportunities.
Carrick must decide whether the priority is protecting an inexperienced defensive structure or attempting to exploit Como’s defensive vulnerabilities through direct attacks.
Given United’s recent results, tactical stability may be more useful than making several structural changes simultaneously.
The manager can retain the basic 4-2-3-1 while giving the midfield a clearer defensive responsibility and asking the full-backs to advance selectively.
The most important principle is to maintain balance. United do not need to dominate every phase of possession, but they must avoid allowing the match to become an open contest that exposes their weakened defensive line.
Como vs Man United: Why Carrick Cannot Underestimate Fabregas
Como’s position in this fixture makes them more than an interesting newcomer to European football.
The Italian club finished fourth in Serie A last season and qualified for the Champions League, a remarkable achievement given that they were playing in Italy’s fourth tier during the 2018/19 campaign.
Under Fabregas, Como have developed an ambitious approach based on technical football, positional movement and confidence in possession.
Their opening Champions League results demonstrate both their potential and their imperfections. They defeated RB Leipzig 4–1 at home before losing 3–2 away to Feyenoord. They then returned to winning ways in Serie A with a 3–1 victory at Fiorentina. ([Como official preview](https://comofootball.com/en/match-preview-como-1907-manchester-united/), [Opta Analyst](https://theanalyst.com/articles/como-vs-man-utd-prediction-champions-league-preview-10-2026))
The home victory over Leipzig is especially important because it demonstrates Como’s capacity to create attacking momentum in front of their supporters.
Their midfield movement can force opponents to choose between pressing aggressively and maintaining a compact defensive structure. If United commit too many players forward, Como may exploit the spaces left behind. If United retreat excessively, the hosts could establish sustained pressure around the penalty area.
Fabregas has also emphasised that Como want to compete with ambition while continuing to develop younger players. That approach gives the club a distinctive identity and makes the fixture a test of United’s adaptability rather than merely their reputation.
Carrick must ensure his players recognise the threats posed by Como’s system.
The visitors cannot afford to treat the match as a straightforward opportunity to recover from poor results. Their opponents have already shown they can defeat strong teams when they execute their attacking approach effectively.
The Weather Warning: Could Heavy Rain Affect the Match?
Beyond selection and tactics, there is another issue that deserves attention.
Reports from talkSPORT indicate that an orange weather warning has been issued for severe thunderstorms and heavy rain in the Lombardy region, with forecasts suggesting as much as 64 millimetres of rain before kick-off. The weather has raised questions about whether the fixture could be delayed or postponed. ([talkSPORT weather report](https://talksport.com/football/4656309/como-man-utd-weather-warning-champions-league-postponed/))
At the time of writing, the match remains listed by Como and UEFA for 18:45 CEST. No postponement has been confirmed in the sources reviewed.
The conditions could nevertheless influence the contest if heavy rain affects the pitch.
Wet conditions can increase the speed of the ball, make first touches more difficult and change the timing required for short passing combinations. That could complicate United’s build-up, especially if their midfield partnerships are unfamiliar.
Como may also have to adjust their pressing intensity depending on the condition of the surface.
The most important consideration remains safety. Supporters travelling to the stadium should check the clubs’ and UEFA’s official updates before departure rather than relying on rumours of a postponement.
The Football Xtra Verdict: Carrick Needs Clarity More Than Experimentation
Manchester United’s selection problems are serious, but the situation does not automatically mean they must abandon their usual system.
Carrick faces difficult choices in defence, at left-back, in midfield and at centre-forward. The absences of Yoro, Shaw, Martinez, Heaven, Dorgu, Mainoo, Ugarte, Rashford and Sesko leave him with significantly fewer options, although final availability must always be checked against the official matchday squad.
The most important priority is defensive organisation.
United need a back four capable of maintaining its shape, midfielders who understand when to protect the defence, and attacking players who can turn possession into meaningful opportunities.
The left-back selection will be especially important, with Dalot providing experience and Amass offering a natural alternative. In midfield, Carrick must balance ball progression with protection, while Sesko’s absence raises questions about whether a false nine is the best way to attack Como.
Retaining the 4-2-3-1 may provide a useful foundation, but the players must apply it with greater discipline than they have shown during their recent winless run.
The verdict: Carrick’s best route to a positive result is not to find five individual replacements, but to create a coherent team structure around the players who are actually available.
Como possess enough quality to punish a disorganised opponent, especially at home. United must therefore approach the match with tactical discipline, intelligent pressing and greater composure in possession.
Will Carrick’s selection decisions help Manchester United end their winless run, or will Como exploit the gaps left by the injury crisis? Share your prediction in the comments and follow The Football Xtra for more Champions League previews, team news and tactical analysis.
