Manchester United's Chief Scout and Head of Global Scouting have left the club

[glasgow 21]

Hi new to the forum. Lets take a breath and put faith in the new manager. We made huge mistakes in the market like the 10 scout reports over a long period on Davies who went to Bayern from Vancouver. Mentioning Van Dyke,konate etc is self abuse, might as well stab yourself in the eye for similar results. Lets pray the removal of senior scouts is a result of our previous actions and on ETH's first demands whilst negotiation were concluding. Onwards and upwards I's say.

 

[JohnnyKills]

That's not too bad as long as it is the afternoon and not 2 weeks later.

Yeah nothing story that. Only five hours' time difference. Transfers, renewals etc take weeks.

 

[captaincantona]

Hi new to the forum. Lets take a breath and put faith in the new manager. We made huge mistakes in the market like the 10 scout reports over a long period on Davies who went to Bayern from Vancouver. Mentioning Van Dyke,konate etc is self abuse, might as well stab yourself in the eye for similar results. Lets pray the removal of senior scouts is a result of our previous actions and on ETH's first demands whilst negotiation were concluding. Onwards and upwards I's say.

Don’t swan in here as a newbie, talking sense with coherent arguments and being calm...I demand you be unreasonably pessimistic immediately.

 

[DevilRed]

Get younger and hungrier scouts in. Too many old boys still hanging around.

We need guys who are more in tune with the young stars of tommorrow across all continents.

It shocking how shit we are in bringing along south american talent. We seem to routinely sign the WORST players that come out of that continent.

 

[Adnan]

Get younger and hungrier scouts in. Too many old boys still hanging around.

We need guys who are more in tune with the young stars of tommorrow across all continents.

It shocking how shit we are in bringing along south american talent. We seem to routinely sign the WORST players that come out of that continent.

The head of recruitment at Brentford is a person called Lee Dykes and he's still very young at 36 for someone in his role. I've followed his work for several years now, and he's very in-tune with the modern recruitment processes, both in the scouting and data analytics areas. He would potentially be a good capture for us as the head of recruitment. Dykes was also wanted by Leipzig in 2020, to replace Paul Mitchell, and he was only 34 at the time.

 

[NewGlory]

Best news since the Ten Hag appointment one. I hope we replace them with people who have some clue. Our scouting sucked

 

[DevilRed]

The head of recruitment at Brentford is a person called Lee Dykes and he's still very young at 36 for someone in his role. I've followed his work for several years now, and he's very in-tune with the modern recruitment processes, both in the scouting and data analytics areas. He would potentially be a good capture for us as the head of recruitment. Dykes was also wanted by Leipzig in 2020, to replace Paul Mitchell, and he was only 34, at the time.

Adnan. I’m tired mate. Plenty of good footballing people out there but we only seem to want to appoint ex players with little experience.

 

[Foxbatt]

Now we know why they had to leave. Ralf and the Board wanted to sign a striker in an emergency because of the Greenwood issue and they told the board no one was available. They were sleeping on the job and they should have been sacked instead of letting them resign.

 

[Blood Mage]

Now we know why they had to leave. Ralf and the Board wanted to sign a striker in an emergency because of the Greenwood issue and they told the board no one was available. They were sleeping on the job and they should have been sacked instead of letting them resign.

The board didn't want to spend money in January. It's pure propaganda to suggest that we didn't sign anyone based on the recommendation of our scouts.

 

[Revaulx]

Now we know why they had to leave. Ralf and the Board wanted to sign a striker in an emergency because of the Greenwood issue and they told the board no one was available. They were sleeping on the job and they should have been sacked instead of letting them resign.

Source?

 

[Revaulx]

The board didn't want to spend money in January. It's pure propaganda to suggest that we didn't sign anyone based on the recommendation of our scouts.

Source?

 

[the_cliff]

Source?

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/61354478

Probably warrants it's own thread to be fair.

 

[Foxbatt]

The board didn't want to spend money in January. It's pure propaganda to suggest that we didn't sign anyone based on the recommendation of our scouts.

It's there on BBC.

 

[Ali Dia]

Hi new to the forum. Lets take a breath and put faith in the new manager. We made huge mistakes in the market like the 10 scout reports over a long period on Davies who went to Bayern from Vancouver. Mentioning Van Dyke,konate etc is self abuse, might as well stab yourself in the eye for similar results. Lets pray the removal of senior scouts is a result of our previous actions and on ETH's first demands whilst negotiation were concluding. Onwards and upwards I's say.

We are the new Arsenal. Nearly got Haaland and Bellingham and Davies and De Ligt and so on. It’s garbage.

 

[Lost bear]

Don’t swan in here as a newbie, talking sense with coherent arguments and being calm...I demand you be unreasonably pessimistic immediately.

Give him time…

 

[Becks00]

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/61354478

Probably warrants it's own thread to be fair.

I don't like the common theme in this and several articles I keep reading. It's like the board and football director still haven't decided what type of football they envision for the club and how that should drive recruitment. The manager still seem to have too much say on what type of player to recruit.

I thought the whole point of the restructuring was for the football director to be more responsible for the kind of football we see on the pitch, i.e hiring head coaches and players for a particular kind of football. I expected this to mean a player should be identified has fitting a particular role in the playing style of the club and bought regardless of who the manager is to be.

For example, the guys at Man City definitely did prepare their club overtime for a particular style of play and there was no significant retooling needed even when Guardiola arrived at their club. He did have to replace some aging full backs and the keeper they had then was also not to his liking but still he was able to work with the majority of the squad he met there in playing his style and winning his first title. I also generally don't expect them to deviate even after Pep leaves as regards the kind of players they sign.

So if we've learnt our lesson from the failures over the past decade, should we not be looking past even the short to mid term ETH years and tailor our recruitment process towards acquiring players fitted to whatever style of football we have decided on ( could be any style really, whether possession based, pressing based, defensive or any other style as long as it helps us compete) and then specifically recruiting managers with views aligned to that of the chosen style of play even in the pre and post ETH years.

I guess the question I have is, if this process was apparently already in place after the sacking of Ole why does the manager to be recruited in the summer serve as an impediment to the kind of striker needed by the club at that point, that is, if the particular player profile fit the playing style we had mapped out at that point and now believe ETH to be the best coach to implement, why did we not just go ahead and get the player or is it that they had not decided on the style of play they wanted moving forward as of then?

 

[Roboc7]

I don't like the common theme in this and several articles I keep reading. It's like the board and football director still haven't decided what type of football they envision for the club and how that should drive recruitment. The manager still seem to have too much say on what type of player to recruit.

I thought the whole point of the restructuring was for the football director to be more responsible for the kind of football we see on the pitch, i.e hiring head coaches and players for a particular kind of football. I expected this to mean a player should be identified has fitting a particular role in the playing style of the club and bought regardless of who the manager is to be.

For example, the guys at Man City definitely did prepare their club overtime for a particular style of play and there was no significant retooling needed even when Guardiola arrived at their club. He did have to replace some aging full backs and the keeper they had then was also not to his liking but still he was able to work with the majority of the squad he met there in playing his style and winning his first title. I also generally don't expect them to deviate even after Pep leaves as regards the kind of players they sign.

So if we've learnt our lesson from the failures over the past decade, should we not be looking past even the short to mid term ETH years and tailor our recruitment process towards acquiring players fitted to whatever style of football we have decided on ( could be any style really, whether possession based, pressing based, defensive or any other style as long as it helps us compete) and then specifically recruiting managers with views aligned to that of the chosen style of play even in the pre and post ETH years.

I guess the question I have is, if this process was apparently already in place after the sacking of Ole why does the manager to be recruited in the summer serve as an impediment to the kind of striker needed by the club at that point, that is, if the particular player profile fit the playing style we had mapped out at that point and now believe ETH to be the best coach to implement, why did we not just go ahead and get the player or is it that they had not decided on the style of play they wanted moving forward as of then?

We haven’t employed anyone with the competence to do what you are expecting. We have a structure but it’s not got anyone qualified to implement a playing style, and then recruit players, managers, coaches for that style.

It didn’t make sense to spend big on a striker in January as didn’t know who manager would be or what type of player to look for. If Ten Hag didn’t want the job we’d have gone for next best available, whether or not they played a similar style to Ten Hag wouldn’t have made much difference.

 

[Foxbatt]

By the information out today it has got nothing to do with any particular style or a player. Ralf wanted a striker and by his words it seems that the board agreed to get a striker.
But the chief scout and head of recruitment said there is none available and advised the Board as such.
My guess is that Arnold and Murtough found out that these guys have not been ready for such an eventuality. That is why they were forced out. And rightly so too.

 

[Adnan]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Red the Bear]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Understanble , it was probably the right decision at the time.

 

[Foxbatt]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

So? Ralf said the Board agreed but the scout and recruitment department said there is none available.

 

[Becks00]

We haven’t employed anyone with the competence to do what you are expecting. We have a structure but it’s not got anyone qualified to implement a playing style, and then recruit players, managers, coaches for that style.

It didn’t make sense to spend big on a striker in January as didn’t know who manager would be or what type of player to look for. If Ten Hag didn’t want the job we’d have gone for next best available, whether or not they played a similar style to Ten Hag wouldn’t have made much difference.

On the first paragraph, I think that should be Murtourgh's job and his competency can only be judged overtime with the quality of decisions he makes.

On the last paragraph, that's basically my point. Should they not have known what type of player to look for if they decided on the play style before interviewing coaches. And if they had just gone for the next available candidate rather than the best fit for their vision, then we really have not changed anything. It would make more sense if ETH was not interested for them to target Potter or someone of that ilk as that would have consistent with the ETH choice in the first place. But thankfully that's an hypothetical scenario and ETH did chose to take the job.

 

[Jeffchin]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Adnan]

So? Ralf said the Board agreed but the scout and recruitment department said there is none available.

In what context did the scouts say none were available? We don't have that information and we're only hearing one side of the story.

But what we do know is Rangnick name dropped three players (Diaz, Vlahovic, Alvarez). And he refers to players that are inside forwards as strikers. And why on earth was he recommending a left sided forward (Diaz) when we are stacked with left sided forwards? The kid from River Plate likely would've taken at least 6 months to acclimatise in new surroundings especially in a dysfunctional team. And Vlahovic went to Juve for 80m.

For me the morale in the team is at a all-time low under Rangnick and the coach (Armas) he brought to assist him seems to have had as much impact as his CV/resume suggested.

It would be a new level of stupidity for the club to go ahead and back the place holder, when the permanent head coach implements a different game style.

 

[Becks00]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This doesn't make sense really, if they had decided on the kind of player they want, it shouldn't matter when said player becomes available on the market either January or summer.

I am sure Liverpool, Juve and Man City could have signed the players they did in the summer, that didn't stop them from signing them when available though.

For me, if either of Alvarez, Dias or Vlahovic fit the profile of player envisioned for the squad they where trying to build then they should have been long term targets and the club should have been looking to bring them in regardless of whether ETH was here or not.

 

[Pexbo]

It’s no wonder the two heads scouts have gone.

We used to be the biggest club in the world. We’re a wealthy club competing in the most competitive league in the world, we’re in two cup competitions and pushing for an all important champions league spot and the manager who has lost one important forward comes to you and says he needs a replacement to achieve the clubs goals this season and the reply is that they don’t know of any available.

The more I think about it the more staggering it is.

 

[Adnan]

This doesn't make sense really, if they had decided on the kind of player they want, it shouldn't matter when said player becomes available on the market either January or summer.

I am sure Liverpool, Juve and Man City could have signed the players they did in the summer, that didn't stop them from signing them when available though.

For me, if either of Alvarez, Dias or Vlahovic fit the profile of player envisioned for the squad they where trying to build then they should have been long term targets and the club should have been looking to bring them in regardless of whether ETH was here or not.

That's the thing, maybe they (the club) had decided on other targets and not a left forward (Diaz) when we already have several left forwards already at the club. Vlahovic who would've cost 80m and a kid from South America who is far from being able to hit the ground running in new surroundings and a dysfunctional setup.

 

[Becks00]

That's the thing, maybe they (the club) had decided on other targets and not a left forward (Diaz) when we already have several left forwards already at the club. Vlahovic who would've cost 80m and a kid from South America who is far from being able to hit the ground running in new surroundings and a dysfunctional setup.

I agree with the above. I was just contesting the point made in the tweet about ETH being the arbiter of what signing should be made or the fact that signing players might eat into the summer budget.

 

[Adnan]

I agree with the above. I was just contesting the point made in the tweet about ETH being the arbiter of what signing should be made or the fact that signing players might eat into the summer budget.

Tbh with you, I think it's sensible to sit down with Erik ten Hag and decide on who should be bought. Because there's a clear difference in how ten Hag likes to play in comparison to Rangnick and I've described the differences in the past on this forum from my perspective.

 

[Andy_Cole]

2 down 30 to go in terms of back room staff who are institutionalised the shit United way.

 

[Foxbatt]

In what context did the scouts say none were available? We don't have that information and we're only hearing one side of the story.

But what we do know is Rangnick name dropped three players (Diaz, Vlahovic, Alvarez). And he refers to players that are inside forwards as strikers. And why on earth was he recommending a left sided forward (Diaz) when we are stacked with left sided forwards? The kid from River Plate likely would've taken at least 6 months to acclimatise in new surroundings especially in a dysfunctional team. And Vlahovic went to Juve for 80m.

For me the morale in the team is at a all-time low under Rangnick and the coach (Armas) he brought to assist him seems to have had as much impact as his CV/resume suggested.

It would be a new level of stupidity for the club to go ahead and back the place holder, when the permanent head coach implements a different game style.

because at that time by all information available united had not decided to get ETH or a permanent manager.

 

[Josep Dowling]

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/61354478

Probably warrants it's own thread to be fair.

So let me get this right. Both the manager and board agreed that we needed a forward but our scouts overruled this decision? Has does that even happen? Surely a head scout doesn’t have that much control. No wonder we are in a mess.

 

[r3idy]

So let me get this right. Both the manager and board agreed that we needed a forward but our scouts overruled this decision? Has does that even happen? Surely a head scout doesn’t have that much control. No wonder we are in a mess.

Don't think it's a case of vetoing or over rolling RR and the Board. But the three names mentioned seemed a pretty sensible approach

Vlahovic - Too expensive and too complex to complete in 48 hours
Diaz- Relatively covered in that area
Alvarez - Would not hit the ground running (City loaned him back)

 

[Josep Dowling]

Don't think it's a case of vetoing or over rolling RR and the Board. But the three names mentioned seemed a pretty sensible approach

Vlahovic - Too expensive and too complex to complete in 48 hours
Diaz- Relatively covered in that area
Alvarez - Would not hit the ground running (City loaned him back)

Agreed. I sense Ralf is trying to mitigate blame coming his way. To be honest I’m more concerned that he didn’t identify CM as the real issue. I would have much preferred a DM being the January signing. If Rangnick was so concerned about our forwards why did he let Martial go out on loan? I’m not suggesting Martial was the answer to our problems but we needed numbers at the very least to rotate.

 

[crossy1686]

So let me get this right. Both the manager and board agreed that we needed a forward but our scouts overruled this decision? Has does that even happen? Surely a head scout doesn’t have that much control. No wonder we are in a mess.

And that's how you get sacked when you've had a cushy number for years. Disgraceful response from the scouting department that, their job is to scour the earth and find players that will improve us, if they're only answer is Haaland or Mbappe there's zero point in having them when you could employ a 14 year old kid who players too much FIFA to recommend players to you.

 

[crossy1686]

Agreed. I sense Ralf is trying to mitigate blame coming his way. To be honest I’m more concerned that he didn’t identify CM as the real issue. I would have much preferred a DM being the January signing. If Rangnick was so concerned about our forwards why did he let Martial go out on loan? I’m not suggesting Martial was the answer to our problems but we needed numbers at the very least to rotate.

Our midfield is undoubtedly an issue but of forwards don't work hard enough or are willing to track back enough to help out the team in anyway, on top of that they don't score goals except for Ronaldo.

Regarding Martial, he told the club he wanted to leave before Rangnick even arrived and then refused to work under Ralf also, at one point he even refused to play remember?

 

[mewnew11]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Heads have rolled and rightly so. It's so lazy to just say no one is available and shows that our recruitment was sleeping and powerless.

 

[I'm a beautiful thing]

It's frightening that we seem to be so far behind other top clubs, since Fergie there looks to have been an air of complancy around the club, cushy jobs, no accountability, rewarding failure, let's hope things change quickly

 

[Foxbatt]

So let me get this right. Both the manager and board agreed that we needed a forward but our scouts overruled this decision? Has does that even happen? Surely a head scout doesn’t have that much control. No wonder we are in a mess.

They didn't overrule. They told that there is no one available. They didn't even try to find one. At a big club like United they should be keeping tabs on all the top players around the world all the time.
That's why they had to leave.

 

[VP89]

They didn't overrule. They told that there is no one available. They didn't even try to find one. At a big club like United they should be keeping tabs on all the top players around the world all the time.
That's why they had to leave.

I think this was the reason. Mark Ogden also reported how shocked Rangnick was that the scouts had no tabs whatsoever on Nkunku for example.