Sir Jim reportedly deems ETH's position not a priority unless results are particularly dire - missed opportunity or the right decision?

fastwalker

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
422
According to a report in the Guardian, Sir Jim's Ratcliffe's priority is a root and branch examination of how the club is run including: playing staff, executive, club structure, revenue investment]. Notably, the review, will not include an assessment of ETH's position. That will not come until later unless results are particularly dire.

Here's my take, whilst I completely understand why INEOS may not want to make an immediate decision about ETH as it could smack of knee jerkism, to suggest that ETH's position would only be a priority for discussion unless results are particularly dire seems like it would be an even more knee jerk response. Clearly what INEOS seem to be suggesting is that they want to take a root and branch overview of the club, before deciding whether ETH is the right leader. However, isn't ETH a critical part of the club's structure and executive decision-making structure? Why not include him in the review now?

Are INEOS tip-toeing around the ETH conversation for fear of further undermining on pitch performances? Should they do as they suggest and wait until they have completed their main review [excluding ETH] and only escalate things if results are particularly dire?

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...d-by-erik-ten-hag-manchester-united-deep-dive
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Right call, we all know that this season is a bust, why waste necessary time looking into the manager when everyone else around him is failing also?

They have 10+ years of work to undo and find out where exactly its going wrong and then have to work towards implementing changes to put it right.
 
Ten Hag has 18 months left on his deal. I don’t see any manager going into the final year of their deal without an option being exercised or new deal being lined up. So no matter what SJR says, Ten Hag is on a 6 month make or break period in his United tenure.
 
We've got to a point where losing 50 % of the games and having more or less nothing to play for by January is not 'dire'. Congrats to everyone who wanted this joker to buy the club.
 
Can we not scrutinize every sentence that is being said and sensationalize it? INEOS just got their foot on the door. Let them assess the situation and analyze the issue before making big decisions. If it means giving ETH till end of season so be it. We are going to have a mediocre season, write it off and move on.
 
Sounds like a diplomatic way of saying this season is a write-off and thus we won't bother sacking before the summer unless we somehow get dragged into a relegation fight.
 
If his current level of performance continues, they will be forced to act. I think we're well past the point of no return with ETH and this will happen, personally.

But it makes sense from their PoV to put the DoF etc in place first, and let them make the call on the next boss when they have all of the data at hand.
 
He’s the last one in for starters. Last season bought him some credit which is fair. He was the overwhelming candidate for the job.The players have let him down this season, that is obvious, whether it’s his fault or not they will find out. It’s also a fact that lots of these players have previous form for sulking and coasting once high standards are required of them for longer than a few months. The squad is massively overpaid relative to output, same with our transfer fees. I hope the manager outlasts some of these stalwart failures even though what he’s given us this season is also far from good enough. The way he has Antony playing etc is disgraceful. It’s all a shit show but if we are really going deep with this it’s time to purge the squad who have achieved nothing under any manager
 
Putting that kind of pressure openly on the manager would make me worry about INEOS. This is the right communication.
 
I believe the INEOS team aims to conduct a thorough assessment initially, examining all aspects related to the football side of things. If, after the assessment, it is determined that EtH is not the right person for the job, he may well find himself out of the picture. However, locating a new manager who aligns with the assessment results and the future direction is likely a subsequent step in the takeover plan.

Taking action against EtH at this moment could relegate all other assessments to secondary priority, as we would be left without a manager. Although I don't believe this would necessarily worsen the results, I don't think they desire such a situation.

A comprehensive reevaluation is a task that I speculate will take at least until the summer, and perhaps candidates will be considered during this process.
 
crossy1686 said:
But things are dire?
Click to expand...
As it has been with every manager post SAF, what INEOS are trying to do is find out why that's the case. Replacing yet another manager within the existing structure isn't going to yield the results we want over a sustained period.

This needs going at and finding out why managers are failing and what they can do to prevent it from keep happening.
 
Think it’s a good priority. ETH has shown he can coach, if they think they can improve the club without replacing him then I’m onboard with it. If they review the whole club and decide he has to go too then fair enough. Seems a sensible approach
 
pascell said:
As it has been with every manager post SAF, what INEOS are trying to do is find out why that's the case. Replacing yet another manager within the existing structure isn't going to yield the results we want over a sustained period.

This needs going at and finding out why managers are failing and what they can do to prevent it from keep happening.
Click to expand...
No, no, this is the worst it’s ever been. There have been varying stages of dire but this is pretext to relegation dire.
 
crossy1686 said:
No, no, this is the worst it’s ever been. There have been varying stages of dire but this is pretext to relegation dire.
Click to expand...
It'll get better to a certain degree once everyone is fit, we're obviously not going to get relegated and top 4 is more or less out the question, we need to accept this and find out why several managers are failing, along with every other aspect of the club, bar the academy.
 
What’s the point of sacking him to hire a caretaker only to find his replacement in the summer.

Main priority is to fix the people making the footballing decisions first and if ETH is found to be not suitable in the plans of those people they hired, than find someone who’s suitable.
 
pascell said:
It'll get better to a certain degree once everyone is fit, we're obviously not going to get relegated and top 4 is more or less out the question, we need to accept this and find out why several managers are failing, along with every other aspect of the club, bar the academy.
Click to expand...
It certainly won’t get better, there are fundamental flaws in the way we approach and manage games that start and end with the managers decision making. You’ve only got to look at the Forest game for the latest examples of terrible management. There are many things that need fixing at United, and the manager is right up there with the most important things to address.
 
Worst season in club's modern history: "unless it gets dire".

pascell said:
It'll get better to a certain degree once everyone is fit, we're obviously not going to get relegated and top 4 is more or less out the question, we need to accept this and find out why several managers are failing, along with every other aspect of the club, bar the academy.
Click to expand...
They are failing because they aren't very good. I don't get this "several managers" talk. Clubs change managers, it's the way it works. Only the most successful stay for more than a couple of years. We can't make a case for any of the previous managers being close to good enough. None of them doing anything of note after leaving proves that.
 
I don't think it's fair to say ETH is a part of the executive decision making structure and hence he should be under review for THAT and i'll lay out why.

It's not his decision to involve himself in that structure, the club execs have made that choice and offered him that position. He's obviously agreed, but it's the club who set the terms and rules and have either decided or agreed to give him that role and make him an integral part of decision making in key areas. He might well not be qualified for that, or the structure might be that poor that they are relying on him to do so. Either way - neither of these are his fault - they are a fault of the management and the way the club is run.

It's fair for him to be under review for the performances on the pitch, but i assume they want to see what he can do with a stable - better structured club with him as a cog, rather than a key decision maker.
 
Results are dire. But they’ve been dire time and time again under different managers.

It makes sense to at least work on the consistent failings that has culminated in what we’ve seen the last 10+ years. We see a goodish season followed by a horrific one and the managers out the door. Rinse and repeat.

The higher ups have had no idea how to sustain any sort of success. And they clearly just do not care enough about what success looks like in the pitch unless it has effected their pockets.

INEOS looking at systemic change in how we operate in the football side and getting the right folk on board is far more important than sacking a manager with no better alternatives out there.
 
The root of the problem isn't ETH or the previous managers, though obviously they haven't been without their own issues.
The problem / issues have been the ridiculous amount of incompetency regarding the behind the scenes running of the club. We need to fix that aspect first and foremost.
 
Better to implement a structure for the next manager than firing ETH now and put his replacement in a directionless team.

If results improve I can actually see ETH lasting longer than the summer.

The priority now is to overhaul the club not just the squad.
 
crossy1686 said:
It certainly won’t get better, there are fundamental flaws in the way we approach and manage games that start and end with the managers decision making. You’ve only got to look at the Forest game for the latest examples of terrible management. There are many things that need fixing at United, and the manager is right up there with the most important things to address.
Click to expand...
It does need addressing, just not right now. Say we bring in a new manager with a completely different style of play and the players don't take to him and we keep dropping points, what then?

This needs looking at from top to botrom and bringing in a manager mid season isnt going to change anything.

Rista said:
Worst season in club's modern history: "unless it gets dire".


They are failing because they aren't very good. I don't get this "several managers" talk. Clubs change managers, it's the way it works. Only the most successful stay for more than a couple of years. We can't make a case for any of the previous managers being close to good enough. None of them doing anything of note after leaving proves that.
Click to expand...
Moyes,LvG, Jose, Ole, Rangnick, several managers.

Jose won the ECL & EL with Roma and Moyes won the ECL with West Ham so that negates your point they done achieve anything of note.

This football club has been in dire straights since SAF & Gill left, since then its been a plethora of blunders when it comes to structuring the club and the decision making process, sacking and hiring a manager mid season isn't going to change any of that.

He'll be sacked in the summer when a proper structure is put in place.
 
If you view it as a missed opportunity then you’re basically supporting the scatter gun and disorganized approach of the club over the last decade. Let INEOS do their thing and identify the root of the problems. Ten Hag produced good results last season and he hasn’t just turned into a bad manager overnight. If you look at the transfer windows along with the inept handling of the Greenwood situation, Sancho’s petulance and the 1 year it took to resolve the partial sale of the club, then it’s quite obvious the problems at this club are far greater than just the manager. This is the right call and I’m encouraged that INEOS is taking a far more reasoned approach then taking directions from impatient supporters.
 
Simple. Ten Hag has a clean slate until he hasnt. Time to prove he's the man for the job.
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
The thread heading implies a direct quote from SJR… the post doesn’t. Did he say that or is that the Guardian putting two and two together and get 115?
Click to expand...
Good point. There is no direct quote from SJR in the article or even one from a source, so I've edited the thread title and OP.
The OP also omits 'particularly' from that line too- unless results are particularly dire. The line is only from a journo anyway, so is likely an assumption based on little.
 
Spot on call. The mess is around Ten Hag. It's very difficult to see if his own mistakes are exasperated due to the shit structure.
 
ShoePolish said:
Good call, just please take transfer decisions away from him
Click to expand...

They were never on him in the first place. He gave the club a list of his priority targets, and once they are unattainable they move on to his 2nd and 3rd targets in each position. The club pushed hard for his number 1 targets and unfortunately didn't get them all. Whether or not his list of priority targets are good enough or not is another matter.
 
pascell said:
It does need addressing, just not right now. Say we bring in a new manager with a completely different style of play and the players don't take to him and we keep dropping points, what then?

This needs looking at from top to botrom and bringing in a manager mid season isnt going to change anything.


Moyes,LvG, Jose, Ole, Rangnick, several managers.

Jose won the ECL & EL with Roma and Moyes won the ECL with West Ham so that negates your point they done achieve anything of note.

This football club has been in dire straights since SAF & Gill left, since then its been a plethora of blunders when it comes to structuring the club and the decision making process, sacking and hiring a manager mid season isn't going to change any of that.

He'll be sacked in the summer when a proper structure is put in place.
Click to expand...

we’ve basically been operating at an EL level behind the scenes learning on the job. A very expensive experiment that has failed
 
What's more dire than already being out of the CL, not making fourth or being unable to score goals. At this rate, we will probably finish closer to 10th than 4th.
 
I think it's fair enough to use the rest of the season to properly assess the manager while they prioritise making changes above him. We're not getting top 4 anyway so there's merit in seeing if he can fix the massive issues with this team when players start to return.

That being said, I'd be very surprised if he does really fix those issues (we were bad at the start of the season before the injuries and if we play with 1 midfielder we will continue to lose regularly regardless of who plays) and imagine he will be gone in the summer but I do think there are people above him who are more definitively out of their depth who need moving on first.
 
For me it’s the correct choice. Look at what happened when Sir Alex and Gill both left at the same time. It destabilised the club in a way we have not recovered from.
Get the hierarchy sorted, working well and get things moving and then the managers position can be addressed by the correct people - the DOF and CEO not an owner who isn’t necessarily specialist or knowledgeable enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.