Seven Manchester United players made the case against keeping Erik ten Hag last night

It was a performance so bad that Erik ten Hag didn't even attempt to clutch at the two obvious excuses for Manchester United's defeat to Crystal Palace.

There was a brief mention of the atrocious injury crisis that continues to ravage a depleted squad but none of the controversially disallowed goal that saw Casemiro's looping header ruled out for a foul on Dean Henderson. It was a night in which there was nowhere to hide.

United's injury situation is a compelling, but also far too convenient excuse. It has become the default answer for their failings on the pitch when deeper reflection is required. There is certainly an understanding that performances level will drop because of it, but it is not enough of an excuse for the utter humiliation they received on Monday night.

What is also so damning is that many of the players United are missing the most were not actually signed by the current manager, with only two of the 10 currently sidelined senior stars signed by the Dutchman.

It is no surprise Ten Hag's team were so vulnerable without a recognised centre-back pairing at Selhurst Park, but when they were hit with that blow it was down to the manager to adapt his approach to combat it. Instead, United tried to play in the exact same way they have been doing for much of the season, though without the personnel required to make it work. That is an issue that is hard to have sympathy with when it was so obvious that the defence needed extra protection.

Kobbie Mainoo was thrown under the bus amid the lack of leaders, with an unfair expectation on him to make something happen, Christian Eriksen was never going to suit such a match and Mason Mount was largely anonymous on what was supposed to be his big night. Options might have been limited, but surely it would have made more sense to deploy one as an extra defensive midfielder or even to even bring Sofyan Amrabat in from the start, for the protection he would have given.

The team that started for United against Palace cost £404.5million to build, despite the fact four of them didn't cost the club anything. Seven of them were signed by Ten Hag, two of them were youth talents he had given a chance to. Only the two full-backs were recognised figures at the club before he arrived. Though it was not the starting line up Ten Hag envisaged during his time at Old Trafford, it was still one that was distinctly in his image, consisting of individual talent he identified.

Yet if these players, who Ten Hag signed to fit his tactical approach, still look so calamitous and clueless on the pitch, then it is hard to blame anyone else other than the manager for the failings. There has been plenty of discourse that Ten Hag could still be a huge success under Ineos rule as part of a better football structure with a functioning medical department, but the performance against Palace was a clear argument against him being given any further time in charge of the club.

In the closing matches of the season, the Dutchman will look to make the case for why he should remain and while results will grab the headlines it is the manner of the performances that will provide the context. They have not been good enough, whatever the availability.

United's squad has been ravaged by injuries yet many of Ten Hag's players are still left standing.