- Pedro headed in from just yards out in the final moments of game on south coast
- Ten Hag described the winning goal as 'unnecessary' as his side tasted defeat
- LISTEN NOW: It's All Kicking Off!, available wherever you get your podcasts. New episodes every Monday and Thursday
Erik ten Hag criticised his players for the 'soft' goals that condemned Manchester United to a painful defeat at Brighton on Saturday.
Joao Pedro was left totally unmarked in the 95th-minute to snatch a 2-1 win even though United had a total of 10 players defending in their own penalty box.
'We have to learn,' said Ten Hag. 'It is so unnecessary if you protect the goal like we do and then drop points.
'There were so many things in that moment. We have to talk and be aligned in such moments about what to do. Everyone knows their job and as a team we protect our goal.
'We didn't stop the cross (from Simon Adingra). There were three players, right-footed players, who should have sent him down the line and not allowed the cross.

Erik ten Hag has slammed Manchester United's 'soft' defending that saw them lose to Brighton

Joao Pedro headed in the winner as Brighton took a 2-1 victory through the late headed effort

The goal triggered ecstatic scenes and condemned United to defeat in their second game of the season
-
LISTEN: On today's EUROS DAILY - Should England drop Bellingham?
-
EUROS DAILY: Why Gary Lineker is WRONG about journalists
-
Are Harry Kane and Declan Rice right to bite back at Gary Lineker?
-
LISTEN: Do Portugal need Cristiano Ronaldo or are they scared of him?
-
LISTEN: On today's EUROS DAILY, what's happening with Harry Kane?
'We have to talk about how we act in that situation as a team. There was more than one mistake on that occasion and that had a big impact on the score.'
United's defending was also poor for Brighton's first goal by Danny Welbeck. 'We conceded two soft goals where we should act better as a team,' added Ten Hag. 'We got two unnecessary goals, very avoidable.'
'In the end you have no points, and that is disappointing because it could have been very different.'
