Erik ten Hag - Manchester United manager

[VP89]

I have no issue with this, I don't expect to challenge for top titles in the next few years, and am happy to give ETH time. One thing he absolutely can control, are tactics, and substitutions, and what we seen yesterday was genuinely worrying. he's not doing himself any favours playing mctominay as a 10, bruno out right and leaving varane on the bench to let Evans play.

First half I thought tactics were bang on. We had chances and I genuinely thought we could have taken the lead once or twice. That was his plan A and I had no problem with it.

His plans almost worked out vs Arsenal too, away from home in a performance if we look generally in away form. And if you recall the first half to spurs, his plan was good for that too.

My problem with him is how we were against Palace, Sheffield, Brentford and Copenhagen. I have an issue with it not for tactics though, but for the leggy performance we had. Devoid of confidence and treating the ball like it's a hot potato. I thought the execution was poor rather than the tactics themselves in these fixtures. Now Ten Hag and the players need to both take accountability and he did. He mentioned it in an interview that we aren't good enough on the ball and it's no excuse for him nor them.

That leads me to my second gripe which is favouritism on Bruno and rashford. Despite acknowledging the above, he continues to play the pair of them.

I think these two issues can be ironed out but I don't think his game plans are that bad. Yes, he hit the offensive move yesterday too early at 45mins but I could buy into his plan from 0-45.

 

[crossy1686]

Only Antony.

Im actually fine with all the others, Mount included. I think the bad transfers argument is a poor stick to beat ten hag with. But while we are using it let's not forget there is a structure needed to support the manager. And that structure doesn't mean blindly saying yes and overpaying for transfers there isn't a unanimous agreement for.

Outside of maybe Martinez and Casemiro (jury's still out on both), none of his signings have improved us. From the position the board are in, considering how many protests against them there are, they have to support the manager so they can say they've supported the manager when they eventually sack him and no one can come to their houses looking for them. Without Ten Hag at the club we wouldn't have signed most of the players we've signed so these transfers are on him. He knew Antony had no right foot yet he sanctioned the purchase anyway at £90m, he called Mount the 'complete' midfielder before sanctioning a £55m transfer on that one, even Chelsea fans were confused by that comment.

You can put whatever structure in you like, but the man in charge of bringing in players to improve the squad doesn't have a clue what he's doing.

 

[Isotope]

Anyway @crossy1686 , I'd imagine on healthy run big club, it's not hard for the DoF to negotiate with the manager.

"Hello, sir. This little shit will cost us this much with this kinda wage. Do you mind to look at these other 5 players with similar skillsets but will cost lower. SO we can go to get more players you need, sir?"

I'd imagine, any sane, smart and progressive manager wouldn't mind with the later.
Main key is for DoF to come up with alternatives that might satisfy the manager's need.

 

[BluesJr]

His pragmatism has killed him. Called it last year. You need to stick with it despite dodgy results.

 

[VP89]

Outside of maybe Martinez and Casemiro (jury's still out on both), none of his signings have improved us.

Malacia was brought in to be a squad player. He effectively replaced Telles and I'm totally fine with that and see that as an upgrade.

Eriksen has a very underrated impact on us because of the form he had post injury. But he was most certainly a tangible upgrade to our middle and that too for free. He also unlocked Rashford to getting his career best season, and had Bruno purring over the course of last season at least.

The jury is out on Hojlund, Onana and Mount. The latter hasn't actually played near enough minutes for a sample size and the former 2 look to actually be getting better with each game so you can't exactly call them flops.

From the position the board are in, considering how many protests against them there are, they have to support the manager so they can say they've supported the manager when they eventually sack him and no one can come to their houses looking for them. Without Ten Hag at the club we wouldn't have signed most of the players we've signed so these transfers are on him. He knew Antony had no right foot yet he sanctioned the purchase anyway at £90m, he called Mount the 'complete' midfielder before sanctioning a £55m transfer on that one, even Chelsea fans were confused by that comment.

You can put whatever structure in you like, but the man in charge of bringing in players to improve the squad doesn't have a clue what he's doing.

Thats bullshit, with respect. They can't think "oh there's protests outside let's give Ten Hag what he wants because we don't have a clue".

And if THEY DID think that, that's a problem with our structure not ten hag. He was signed as manager. Not manager and full time footballing director.

 

[Rista]

Nah you're just trying to excuse a lack of depth of thought there. You wouldn't suggest playing 10 men instead of playing Antony, you'd suggest a replacement and why they'd be better.

It's very simple, if you think a manager could do a better job than ETH, then name them and explain why. If you can't do that, then your opinion that he should be sacked is worthless. Ironically, not being able to name a better replacement is what actually means "ETH is the best possible man for the job and nobody could do better". If you don't have an alternative, then you don't have a solution, only a reaction.

But I'm not suggesting we play without a manager. I'd do exactly what I said, I'd suggest Antony isn't good enough and was a terrible waste of money and recruitment team should do their job better and bring a more capable player in. It is really that simple. If it was up to you, the likes of De Zerbi and Postecoglou never would have happened at their respective clubs. We're somehow acting like there aren't capable managers around and no matter how terrible the football is, ETH is the best we can do.

 

[fallengt]

If Murtough vetoed Ten Hag's targets what would you say? What would the media say?

What is the point of him if he doesn't do what he's supposed to do. Is he ETH's boss or it's other way around?
The truth is he didn't know it better and want to play 'yes man' as long as manager is the one that gets the blame so Murtough can keep this well-paid job which he wouldn't get it anywhere else

 

[Ronaldo's ego]

We wanted our own Pep Guardiola is my idol and the club took it literally.

 

[Berbaclass]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[VP89]

But I'm not suggesting we play without a manager. I'd do exactly what I said, I'd suggest Antony isn't good enough and was a terrible waste of money and recruitment team should do their job better and bring a more capable player in. It is really that simple. If it was up to you, the likes of De Zerbi and Postecoglou never would have happened at their respective clubs. We're somehow acting like there aren't capable managers around and no matter how terrible the football is, ETH is the best we can do.

You're acting like de zebri and ange doing well at Brighton and spurs can be extrapolated to them potentially doing well at United.

Do you not see the problem there?

 

[FriedClams]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

how much have the other 58% cost?

 

[3KDré]

https://x.com/mufcMPB/status/1719055245110546923?s=20

https://x.com/mufcMPB/status/1719054722277986651?s=20

Not what you want to be hearing.

 

[VP89]

https://x.com/mufcMPB/status/1719055245110546923?s=20
https://x.com/mufcMPB/status/1719054722277986651?s=20

Not what you want to be hearing.

Bullshit source. Also stating the obvious.

 

[Rista]

You're acting like de zebri and ange doing well at Brighton and spurs can be extrapolated to them potentially doing well at United.

Do you not see the problem there?

I'm not doing anything as such. I'm saying both of them would have been dismissed by the same people who think nobody can do a better job than ETH with us. You could have asked Spurs and Brighton fans and they most likely wouldn't have named those managers before. All I'm saying is that the idea that there aren't potentially good managers around and worth thinking about is ridiculous.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

There's no such thing as an entirely known quantity, short of someone who's already managed this poorly run Man Utd. Failing that, we have to look at what experience they've had, what skills they've demonstrated, and how that could translate to the United job. In Ten Hag's case, he demonstrated a lot of the skills and experience we were looking for. It was in a lesser league, I agree, but the potential was there. Nobody in the world is hired as an unknown quantity, that's what CVs, interviews, and references are for.

I think you are getting bogged down in how 'unknown' an 'unknown quantity' has to be before we put 'relatively' in front of it. That's a linguistic consideration that isn't relevant to my broad argument.

Ten Hag had a good CV on paper. But it wasn't amazing, or special, or unique. Manchester United should be able to find candidates with similar combination of skill + experience + potential. They will have weaknesses, but hey, so does Ten Hag.

Ultimately the argument is simple, you rate Ten Hag, other people don't rate him much anymore. There's no broader principle behind that. If you are a Redcafe poster who thought Ten Hag had potential, and no longer think he has potential, then any manager who has potential is a better option. If you still think he has potential, then that is no longer the case.

 

[VP89]

I'm not doing anything as such. I'm saying both of them would have been dismissed by the same people who think nobody can do a better job than ETH with us. You could have asked Spurs and Brighton fans and they most likely wouldn't have named those managers before. All I'm saying is that the idea that there aren't potentially good managers around and worth thinking about is ridiculous.

They aren't worth thinking about though, because they have no more established pedigree than the current manager has.

 

[Cassidy]

100% agreed to this. I should clarify that the fault is NOT 100% on EtH. Although for the type of players, priorities to spend, and positions to get are still 100% on him.

I agree with is this.
The rest will be a back and forth between the manager and Murtough, because priorities will change depending on how well the recruitment team can actually execute the plan.
Its all well and good in saying get me a CM with this profile, but if they are unable to get one over the line and then you suggest a couple and they can't get those done either, then you have to compromise or wait till next window.
This for me is where the major break down is because our execution on both sales and buys are poor, and this has a severe knock on effect.
Also the recruitment team would suggest players for positions the manager is not going to draw up that list, or at least he should not be, and if he is that another clear sign of an issue (we were told we had to rely on ETHs list last summer because the recruitment team didn't have enough time to plan after his hiring)
Well what was their excuse then this summer?

 

[mu4c_20le]

Ironically, not being able to name a better replacement is what actually means "ETH is the best possible man for the job and nobody could do better". If you don't have an alternative, then you don't have a solution, only a reaction.

Translation: If you can't convince me that there's someone proven, available, and guaranteed to be better than Ten Hag, then my statement is still 100% correct.

 

[hobbers]

You are conflating matters.
The club signed Antony last minute after failing to sign ETH a RW all summer. And as I keep saying the manager does not get involved in fees.

You're just putting an ETH failing on the club.

He wanted Antony. He could have gone after other wingers but chose not to. What other right wing targets were we strongly linked with? None. God knows there were plenty of good wingers around.

Same with De Jong. He could have looked at players who actually weren't repulsed at the idea of coming to Manchester but he (along with the bozos upstairs) persisted for 3 months. And that rotten decision making is what led to the hurried and ill advised £70m Casemiro deal.

And yeh Murtough is equally culpable for bending over at every decision but the point is none of this transfer farce of the last 2 summers happens if we have a manager who knows about the existence of footballers who havent played in the Eredivisie.

 

[Cassidy]

Who's responsibility is it to find players that the manager wants in his team?

The recruitment department (Murtough), the managers responsibility is to identify the need and profile for a player, the scouts and recruitment department are responsible for suggesting the players who they feel fit said profile.
Then together they agree the targets

 

[Cassidy]

You're just putting an ETH failing on the club.

He wanted Antony. He could have gone after other wingers but chose not to. What other right wing targets were we strongly linked with? None. God knows there were plenty of good wingers around.

Same with De Jong. He could have looked at players who actually weren't repulsed at the idea of coming to Manchester but he (along with the bozos upstairs) persisted for 3 months. And that rotten decision making is what led to the hurried and ill advised £70m Casemiro deal.

Its well reported the club failed to sign adequate alternative RW which is why we ended up going back in for Antony
Saying that though that's 1 transfer and if the club agreed to sign Antony for 85m without doing its scouting and due diligence just because ETH said so and Murtough did not bother exercising veto even though his recruitment team told him Antony was not good enough.
Well I would tell you Murtough is culpable since he is Technical Director and recruitment ultimately is his responsibility.

You do realise Liverpool overide Klopp many times on transfers he didn't even want Salah, he agreed because Liverpool recruitment team convinced him.

 

[Moriarty]

Or at least Ineos and Sir Jim in to make the footballing decisions.

Erm Jim and Ineos are about as qualified as the Glazers in that regard. We need real football people in the job.

 

[spiriticon]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

If we didn't have to waste big money on utter shite, maybe we won't have to rely on loans and free transfers so much

 

[Berbaclass]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[slored1]

If ETH can't or won't get us to play like his old Ajax team, then the point of him actually being here is zero. Our past managers are better than him at doing maverick style counterattacking football. From what I observe, he doesn't seem to have a natural feel for the game. Everything he does (tactics, subs, lineups) is by the textbook and careful prep, and not really through intuition.

And also, why did he buy so many ex-Ajax players if he had no plans to play that way? Boggling.

I feel like he lacks some pragmatism in his decision making, and is afraid to act and play bravely when needed. The signings and his team management are like that as well, no rotation, only signs players he knows, very rarely subs the team leaders and only uses one youngster that is semi-regularly playing games. Even the past apparent "tough" decisions were done because he had no other choice - selling Ronaldo was because CR basically dared him to send him away, Maguire was incredibly shite for almost a year so had to be dropped, De Gea was atrocious last season and Sancho puts zero effort in anything he does.

He has to act and play braver, this is the only way the crowd can support him. So far we haven't seen any signs of significant change yet.

 

[Acquire Me]

16 minute is nail on the head for some whingers in here.

You can't rebuild a club of our stature and complexity on the pitch in a short term. And we are stuck always looking to fix ourselves short term to manage the next fixture. This predates ten hag.

You have to suffer if you want a long term fix. So deal with it.

I respect ten Hag for not giving up on his ideas. I loved that analysis. I am not good enough to do it myself, so it’s really exciting to hear someone with great knowledge explaining.

 

[pratyush_utd]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

We paid close to 150m who are not good enough for first team. We dont operate on unlimited budget, if you waste money on dross which United did even before his arrival, then you have to fill other squad places with loans and free transfer.

Plus it is bit skewed because we had to get an emergency loan for leftback and striker last season due to injuries

 

[fallengt]

Translation: If you can't convince me that there's someone proven, available, and guaranteed to be better than Ten Hag, then my statement is still 100% correct.

If you can't even convince yourself those managers in hipster list would last more than 2 years at this club then what the point of this discussion
Until there's a clear plan that actually change what club's been doing in the last 10 years, changing manager would be pointless unless you're happy with 1-2 years of whatever then go back to this same conversation again.

Having DoF that actually blow manager the f out with his transfer targets would be a good start. Current structure demands manager to be master of all, including some bullshit expectation like negotiating player's price down & selling unwanted & bad apples. Everyone is set to fail with this structure.

 

[Berbaclass]

We paid close to 150m who are not good enough for first team. We dont operate on unlimited budget, if you waste money on dross which United did even before his arrival, then you have to fill other squad places with loans and free transfer.

Plus it is bit skewed because we had to get an emergency loan for leftback and striker last season due to injuries

That is exclusive to Ten Hag's tenure is it?

 

[hobbers]

Its well reported the club failed to sign adequate alternative RW which is why we ended up going back in for Antony
Saying that though that's 1 transfer and if the club agreed to sign Antony for 85m without doing its scouting and due diligence just because ETH said so and Murtough did not bother exercising veto even though his recruitment team told him Antony was not good enough.
Well I would tell you Murtough is culpable since he is Technical Director and recruitment ultimately is his responsibility.

You do realise Liverpool overide Klopp many times on transfers he didn't even want Salah, he agreed because Liverpool recruitment team convinced him.

Remind me who we made an offer for who wasnt Antony?

Not even sure what you're trying to argue about. No one thinks Murtough should still be in the job. He's buttered toast. Doesn't absolve ETH of proving to be utterly useless in the transfer market and in signing the right players to build a team that can play football in the way he wants.

 

[Rista]

They aren't worth thinking about though, because they have no more established pedigree than the current manager has.

And what is that "established pedigree" bringing us? Literally the entire reason why people believe in ETH so much is that one cup run from 4 years ago. I admit I was one of those people and I rated him mostly due to that. But the more you think about it and the more you look at his other results, the less impressive it is and more doubtful it is that he's a genius who's being held back by everything at the club.

 

[TsuWave]

This is going to finish me

 

[gaffs]

They aren't worth thinking about though, because they have no more established pedigree than the current manager has.

Would tend to agree that on paper, Ten Hag has as much pedigree as other potential candidates.

But that doesn't mean that is a reason to sick with him. Much more experienced and decorated managers have been sacked than Ten Hag.

 

[Berbaclass]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[jackal&hyde]

The season so far is little short of horrible. Forget losing to much lower level and value sides, but the general play is terrible: very poor defense, we concede chances against under 11s, we can not control games, and we have major issues creating.

I am still full on for ETH, but we can not continue to be shit at every and any single aspect of football for much longer.

 

[Acquire Me]

Would tend to agree that on paper, Ten Hag has as much pedigree as other potential candidates.

But that doesn't mean that is a reason to sick with him. Much more experienced and decorated managers have been sacked than Ten Hag.

Thank goodness Sir Jim will keep him if the bid for United will be successful.

 

[M Bison]

And what is that "established pedigree" bringing us? Literally the entire reason why people believe in ETH so much is that one cup run from 4 years ago. I admit I was one of those people and I rated him mostly due to that. But the more you think about it and the more you look at his other results, the less impressive it is and more doubtful it is that he's a genius who's being held back by everything at the club.

Who are you replacing him with if you were sacking him?

 

[The Hilton]

But I'm not suggesting we play without a manager. I'd do exactly what I said, I'd suggest Antony isn't good enough and was a terrible waste of money and recruitment team should do their job better and bring a more capable player in. It is really that simple. If it was up to you, the likes of De Zerbi and Postecoglou never would have happened at their respective clubs. We're somehow acting like there aren't capable managers around and no matter how terrible the football is, ETH is the best we can do.

De Zerbi and Ange are a result of someone actually thinking about, and planning, succession. Exactly what I'm advocating for.

If you aren't suggesting we play without a manager, then who is the manager you suggest we bring in? And why would they be better? It should be a simple question to answer if ETH is as bad as you say. If you can't name a single manager that would do better, then you can't rationally call for him to be sacked. So who's your guy?

 

[clarkydaz]

"The task of recruiting players will be left to experts"

damn

 

[M Bison]

De Zerbi and Ange are a result of someone actually thinking about, and planning, succession. Exactly what I'm advocating for.

If you aren't suggesting we play without a manager, then who is the manager you suggest we bring in? And why would they be better? It should be a simple question to answer if ETH is as bad as you say. If you can't name a single manager that would do better, then you can't rationally call for him to be sacked. So who's your guy?

Also would like to know the answer to this question from the poster you quoted or any other posters advocating his removal. A few weeks ago there were a few saying we should have gone for Poch but presumably they're quiet now.