Benjamin Sesko started against Brighton on Saturday after Ruben Amorim decided to play with a striker-less formation at Anfield.
It was one in and one out for Manchester United’s striker department this summer.
Benjamin Sesko’s arrival meant it was inevitable Rasmus Hojlund would be on his way out of the club, and so it proved as the Dane signed for Napoli on loan. Hojlund’s switch to Naples included an obligation to buy, meaning we won’t be seeing him back at Old Trafford in the red of United.
The signing of Sesko and the departure of Hojlund meant is was very much as you were for United’s only other senior striker, Joshua Zirkzee. And yet he’s still dropped a place in the pecking order.
Despite not being a conventional centre forward, Zirkzee was expected to provide competition and support for Sesko, as he had done the previous season with Hojlund.
At this stage of last season, Zirkzee had made 13 appearances in all competitions, playing a total of 592 minutes. A year on and he has made just five appearances, with his outings amounting to a combined total of just 90 minutes worth of football. Granted last season there were a few more games due to United’s Europa League involvement and them spending longer in the Carabao Cup, but clearly the Dutchman isn’t being given the chances he was last season.
And it’s not because Sesko is flying. The Slovenia international has started to find his feet of late but he still has just two goals in ten games. The reason for the dramatic reduction in Zirkzee’s playing time is Ruben Amorim’s use of a striker-less formation.
Bryan Mbeumo, Matheus Cunha and Mason Mount led the line for United in their opening three league games of the season, with Amorim moving back to the same three-pronged attack against Liverpool.
The Anfield outing was comfortably United’s finest performance of the season and proved to Amorim that the striker-less formation can be a genuine option moving forward.
Amorim either doesn’t play with a striker or he goes with Sesko. So where does that leave Zirkzee? Surplus to requirements is the answer.
Leave a Reply