#2 He has not shown the requisite tactical diversity
Ever since taking over Manchester United, Solksjaer has overseen 19 matches from the bench, winning 14 at an astonishing ratio of 73.3%, while losing just three.
There have been impressive victories over PSG, Tottenham and Chelsea, while a credible point was gotten off Liverpool, despite being injury ravaged and having to make all three substitutions in the first half.
It seems a bit preposterous to suggest that a manager who performed these incredible feats lacks tactical astuteness. However, a closer look at the manner in which United have gotten their results tells a better story.
The truth of the matter is that Solskjaer has not actually overseen any radical change in United's tactical application.
While the club might be generally more attractive to watch, there is no clear cut playing pattern whenever United files out, and for all the talk of returning attacking football to United, there are still some elements of reactional play about The Red Devils.
We keep hearing vague generic words like 'more attractive', 'return of positive football', 'freedom of expression' among others without a clear understanding of how or what exactly makes United more attractive. Are they a counter attacking team? High pressing? Or possession based side?
These are questions still begging for answers, with most of their gameplan still reactionary, dependent upon how the other team lines up rather than imposing their style on them.
Coaches like Guardiola and Jurgen Klopp have fixed styles of playing, which they do not deviate from regardless of who they are playing against. Guardiola's superior tactical versatility also sees him constantly switching City's shape and style multiple times during matches.
Three months on from his appointment, and we are yet to get a true feel of exactly how Solskjaer sets his side up to play. Further down the line, this could prove problematic for him as United's manager.