I'm sure most brothels would do that for you if that's the way you like your bread buttered. Oh wait... you said up not on my bad.Don't you mean pissed up in a Brothel … hold on a minute?
one mistake? my word. the man has got almost everything wrong since he came in, in terms of football matters.
Like what?
ah here, if you have to ask this, then i wont bother.
Some major mistakes:
1. Ferguson and Gill. Woodward didn't make that decision.
Is it? I'm less than convinced by his dual role at the club by way of controlling transfers and sponsorships etc. I personally think he fannies about with attempted marquee transfers and lets real ones slip. He needs to hire a DoF and accept he isn't knowledgable for matters on the pitch. This is independent of whether he sacks or keeps LVG.
I think its a simplistic way of looking at things, Woodward knows that we have lost out on 40 million and that's something he'd have known long before the event. Van Gaal's total compensation wouldn't come close to half that loss so football man or not that's easy math. I think Van Gaal being Woodward's pick played a significant part because pride and loss of face were considered more than they should have been.
I begin with the assumption that Mourinho will succeed Van Gaal. If I'm right about that I can't see United appointing a DoF. Jose won't want one and I can't see why Woody would want to create potential discord with his new manager. United was run well (considering all things) with Ferguson as manager and Jose is a virtual clone of Ferguson in how he approaches transfer business, man-manages his players, his dealing with the media and his tactics. (Referring to last decade of Ferguson, of course.)
Very true, but would that not go against the Berta affiliation suggested by Di Marzio?
which is quite ironic because the decision not to sack him when things were clearly not improving in december has arguably hurt woodward's reputation more than if he had just owned up to the mistake and sacked him earlier.
1 and 2 - picking Moyes was one thing, but whoever gave him that 6 years contract deserved to be shot.
Right on but his reputation has taken worse hits than these but I doubt if the football world's opinion on Woodward matters to the Glazers one jot.
The 6 year contract was insane but it wouldn't have been Woodward. Moyes stuff was done under Gills time.
if glazers don't care about woodward's reputation, and woodward has suffered worse before, then why does woodward still care? now the club has lost more money AND his reputation has taken a hit. it doesn't make sense that a businessman would care so much about his reputation that he would neglect to make a more sound financial decision for the longer term. something just doesn't add up, though admittedly we don't have all the pieces of the puzzle to make sense of this nonsense. but that's the frustrating part.
Without all the relevant information its impossible to come up with an accurate assessment of the situation. I just think that Woodward's relationship with the Glazers is too solid for him to be mortally damaged by his strange refusal to sack LVG, the fact that he is the one they communicate with and through says it all.
It's speculation most of it as I'm not sure if the ones I'll mention would be available or interested but anyhow:
The affiliation seems somewhat speculative. But maybe Jose really does want a sporting director and if he does my answer is to give the man what he wants. We need a change in management and it begins and ends as far as I'm concerned with sacking Van Gaal and going with a man who has conquered England and Europe before. If Jose wants a man he can personally trust as his sporting director to handle certain duties, fine with me. But we have to end this charade with Van Gaal.
I found out he's the technical director at Athletico. How accurate are the claims he'll come if Mou signs? We're deep in conditional territory.
