Manchester United appointed Michael Carrick mainly to stabilize the team after Ruben Amorim was let go. Carrick is a familiar face who knows Old Trafford well and doesn’t need time to adjust to the role.
However, he is making the “interim” label seem inappropriate.
With four straight league wins, including significant victories over Pep Guardiola’s City and Mikel Arteta’s Arsenal, as well as wins against Fulham and Tottenham, the atmosphere around the team has improved, and conversations have shifted.
The main concern now is Carrick’s experience.
This argument often serves as a reasonable viewpoint, but it can also be a way to avoid addressing what’s evident.
The case for Michael Carrick
Carrick has already shown his ability to handle high-pressure situations.
During a brief stint as caretaker in 2021, he managed victories against Villarreal and Arsenal and secured a draw against Chelsea. Those matches required clear tactics and strong leadership—skills he has displayed in his current role.
Critics point to his lack of managerial experience as a significant downside.
However, football history shows that success doesn’t always depend on experience. Coaches like Pep Guardiola, Zinedine Zidane, and Hansi Flick succeeded early in their careers, demonstrating that clarity of vision and the ability to lead are more important than length of experience.
Importantly, United’s players seem to be responding well.
The team appears organized and decisive, with clearer roles and fewer tactical issues. For example, Diogo Dalot has returned to a right-back position, enhancing his performance compared to his previous role under Erik ten Hag.
Given the club’s long search for identity, this alone is a notable success.
The case against appointing Carrick
However, there are valid concerns to consider.
Carrick’s time at Middlesbrough ended with his dismissal, highlighting that strong ideas do not always lead to consistent results.
The full-time Manchester United job presents a different level of pressure and scrutiny compared to an interim role.
There is also a risk of viewing short-term success as a guarantee for the long run.
New-manager boosts are common, as seen with Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, so United needs to ensure Carrick can adapt if results decline.
Choosing a permanent head coach should be a strategic decision, not one based solely on current form.
What United should do next
INEOS must decide whether to trust what they see from Carrick or look for alternatives.
Carrick shouldn’t be appointed out of sentiment but rather based on his performance and tactical effectiveness through the season’s end.
If successful, the Red Devils may discover the stability they have long sought.
Sometimes, making the boldest choice means supporting the right candidate rather than opting for the most famous name.