Non sequitur. The fact remains is that HE DID waste the money and did not veto these deals when the sums of money were getting ridiculous. He pursued these players and would only go for a plan B in rare instances late in the season when cheaper better performing players moved.
The checks and balances were made above him. Money was wasted by decision makers above Ten Hag. Money has been wasted for a decade before Ten Hag. Blaming Ten Hag primarily for money wasted is an absolute bollocks argument, because there's feck all support for any manager since well before he came. Part of the problem at the club was the lack of a proper system to save managers from themselves and embedding a transfer policy consistent throughout the club's ethos.
It doesn't matter whether it's Ten Hag or Klopp, if you give a manager sole reign and no proper support on transfer targets, you'll waste a feck ton of money. Perhaps you should review how Liverpool operated under Edwards or how City operate under Tixi before lazily going round with "blargh xyz wasted money he is sew bad man".
Quote? this is an opinion bro.
There are no quotes with INEOS backing the manager and he hasnt been offered a new contract.
I'm referring to the post quote, which references the Athletic. I don't think theyd need to renew his contract, he has another year to go.
Problem is, he had actually managed Antony. I couldn't see it, so we didn't need scouts to not see it. I couldn't even wrap my head around Antony over Kudus.
Well reported that he had reservations about returning to Ajax to transfers. Also noted that he did not decide the Antony fee, and that the Antony pursuit was unanimous across the club. That being said I definitely blame Ten Hag for the transfer as he should have known better about him. He however did not decide to pay £80m for him, Murtough and the board did. Sure, Ten Hag would have been OK with it if the higher ups were, but it's their job to primarily manage the funds not his.