If you don’t understand why Ole is a gamble worth taking… you’re doing football support wrong

[AFC NimbleThumb]

You need to find a buyer to sell a player first. For all the shite Woodward deserves, selling Lukaku for that amount was a pretty good business.

How is it that Ole is praised for the players we signed (Maguire, AWB, James), yet completely absolved of the fault of players we didn't sign (CM,CF,RW) ?

If you are blaming Woodward for bringing in half the replacements you should then praise him for bringing the other half or it is only valid for Ole?

Who are the names that Woodward didn't bring and is at fault this Summer ? Sancho?

You can blame Woodward for vetoing Maguire only to buy him at premium price(once again), but as you said he doesn't identify targets. Of all players in the world we couldn't find 2-3 that would cover the CM/CF positions at least?

This man get a it

 

[Rood]

You’ve just done exactly what my post highlighted.

Yes, it is all evil Woodward’s faults cause of course you were in on every negotiation. People passing opinion off as fact needs to end.

OgS stated the players he wanted weren’t available but let’s read between some hidden lines because we fall in the ‘OgS In’ camp & says it’s all Woody’s fault when it doesn’t go the way we like.

I’ll say it again. You either give OgS the credit for transfers in & out [entirely] or you do not.

Let’s go with your theory, he gave him a list of players to sell & buy - what the hell was he doing sanctioning sales without the replacement transfers being in place?

However you try to spin it, OgS played a role in a catastrophic summer window.

All I ask for is consistency in the way he is reviewed. He’s either responsible for transfers or he isn’t; we have no inside knowledge of the dealings so can’t simply determine which he has more responsibility for to suit our arguments.

Well its not that simple at all - we do know a fair bit about how our transfers work since the club went out of their way to brief about the new system and it is a fact that Ole has nothing to do with negotiations on players leaving or signing, his input is only to give the names of who he wants in/out

You need to find a buyer to sell a player first. For all the shite Woodward deserves, selling Lukaku for that amount was a pretty good business.

How is it that Ole is praised for the players we signed (Maguire, AWB, James), yet completely absolved of the fault of players we didn't sign (CM,CF,RW) ?

If you are blaming Woodward for bringing in half the replacements you should then praise him for bringing the other half or it is only valid for Ole?

Who are the names that Woodward didn't bring and is at fault this Summer ? Sancho?

You can blame Woodward for vetoing Maguire only to buy him at premium price(once again), but as you said he doesn't identify targets. Of all players in the world we couldn't find 2-3 that would cover the CM/CF positions at least?

Because he has no control over closing deals - he is only responsible for choosing which players go in and out

Sure Woodward did well to bring in the 3, but it was the bare minimum really

No one knows the answers to the other questions, all just speculation

The main fault of Woodward (and its not just him TBF, there is a whole negotiation team but he is ultimately responsible) this summer was leaving the Lukaku and Sanchez deals too late in the window to sign a replacement. In the end we got more money but at the cost of going into the season short upfront.

 

[momo83]

It was a good movement from the board to appoint him. Even if we are shite, hardly the matchgoing fans will turn against him. If it was Moyes however...

I think quite a few match going fans already realise he’s no good as a manager... booing the manager isn’t good and rarely happens... even Moyes didn’t get directly booed in the stadium.

But you’re right. Fans are less vocal about being crap and taking it on the board because Ole is manager.

 

[Enigma_87]

Because he has no control over closing deals - he is only responsible for choosing which players go in and out

Sure Woodward did well to bring in the 3, but it was the bare minimum really

No one knows the answers to the other questions, all just speculation

The main fault of Woodward (and its not just him TBF, there is a whole negotiation team but he is ultimately responsible) this summer was leaving the Lukaku and Sanchez deals too late in the window to sign a replacement. In the end we got more money but at the cost of going into the season short upfront.

Same can be said about Ole (speculation). He came and said the squad is good enough and he came out and said that chose not to buy available players in the summer.

He brought in 3, which was the bare minimum and overlooked some very important positions due to either overly trusting the youth or making a bad judgment.

As you said Woodward is not responsible to identify targets, so how come he gets the sole blame for not bringing in more players this Summer?

Would you condone bringing in Longstaff for 50m pounds or thereabouts if we were to pull the trigger?

 

[Green_Red]

I like his willingness to take a risk on the kids.

 

[Rood]

Same can be said about Ole (speculation). He came and said the squad is good enough and he came out and said that chose not to buy available players in the summer.

He brought in 3, which was the bare minimum and overlooked some very important positions due to either overly trusting the youth or making a bad judgment.

As you said Woodward is not responsible to identify targets, so how come he gets the sole blame for not bringing in more players this Summer?

Would you condone bringing in Longstaff for 50m pounds or thereabouts if we were to pull the trigger?

I already answered that, read my post again

No I wouldnt pay £50m for Longstaff but thats not really the point

Ole wanted more players, he said it several times

 

[Enigma_87]

I already answered that, read my post again

Lukaku was known to be leaving since the end of last season. Selling him should have no effect on our business of getting a replacement.

Sanchez was a poor deal, not sure who condoned that, considering we pay his wages.

Either way we should have identified a target long time before we sold Lukaku, unless if we didn't have the money, but I hardly doubt that's the case.

 

[INF-AMOS]

I've bought into the plan that Olly is trying to run with, but then again what other choice is there. His three signings have been good so i really would like to reserve judgement until say January 21. Results have improved, we're playing plenty of youth and we're not parking the bus. So I'm ok.

 

[Paul_Scholes18]

Our squad is a bit of a mess. Very light and players like Mata, Young and Matic are past it. Spending so much money on Maguire was totally insane when central defense was our strongest position. We could really need two more midfielders and strikers. The problem is that it will cost a lot and I don't think we have the money for it.

 

[INeedAbsynthe]

You have a manager who after the Cardiff disaster almost no championship club would have touched with a barge pole. Since his permanent appointment you look like a team with a manager of that description.

We all dream of having a legendary player coming back to be a legend again as a manager but you’ve eventually got to put the sentiment aside and look at the cold hard facts.Persisting just because he was a great player for you is insanity, I think it’s safe to say he has already received the sentimental extra time other managers wouldn’t have gotten.

Simply playing the young players means nothing if you aren’t actually developing them in to stars either.

 

[Rood]

Lukaku was known to be leaving since the end of last season. Selling him should have no effect on our business of getting a replacement.

Sanchez was a poor deal, not sure who condoned that, considering we pay his wages.

Either way we should have identified a target long time before we sold Lukaku, unless if we didn't have the money, but I hardly doubt that's the case.

We could not bring in a Lukaku replacement until he was gone, our wage bill was already over the usual maximum of 50% wage to turnover ratio so yes there were financial restrictions (not on transfer fees but on wages)

That is all on Woodward/Glazers, zero blame on Ole.

 

[Bastian]

I'm not really on social media pouring over United fan's rantings and ravings, so I can't attest to whether or not they are either "perfect fans" or "entitled short-sighted brats", which is kind of the gist of this piece. But I thought some points made merit some criticism.

From the POV of the Caf there were loads of supporters who were happy to have Mourinho come in but did not expect him to return us to the top with a flick of a switch, at all. Some just wanted him at that stage in the diabolical process of what is the Woodward era as some kind of chance to return to ambition. And it did lift us up a bit, just not a fantastic amount.

Yes, if Ole would be a great manager it would be great (insightful). This is the romanticism that got a lot of people on board in the first place. The evidence of said greatness in non-existent. While most can agree that dishing out personal insults and the like is poor form, it doesn't mean his managerial record and ability cannot be scrutinised and criticised. That is the nature of the job.

Then there's this: “those calling for a replacement present their choice as a sure-thing, handily ignoring all that happened, at supposedly their club, since Sir Alex Ferguson left”. Is anyone really claiming anything is a sure-thing? I've failed to see that. I mean, is this piece taking on 12 year old's opinions on Twitter or is this meant to address slightly more nuanced debate? I don't think there is any manager in the world who could come in right now and transform this club. We know the problems are varied, and they definitely do not just revolve around the manager, if only! It is just that we've failed to see a cohesive team, a clear vision (other than a one dimensional counter attack) or foresight (literally everyone knew our midfield was a serious problem going into the season, for example). So it is only natural to be looking at alternatives.

 

[Enigma_87]

We could not bring in a Lukaku replacement until he was gone, our wage bill was already over the usual maximum of 50% wage to turnover ratio so yes there were financial restrictions (not on transfer fees but on wages)

That is all on Woodward/Glazers, zero blame on Ole.

So the wages were the problem, yet Ole agreed a 3 year, 160k per week deal for Mata ? That's zero blame on him too? Or what about the new contract Jones signed in February, and then splashing close to 200k on Magure? Again zero blame?

Or is it everything good - praise Ole, everything bad - blame Woodward?

 

[momo83]

Then there's this: “those calling for a replacement present their choice as a sure-thing, handily ignoring all that happened, at supposedly their club, since Sir Alex Ferguson left”. Is anyone really claiming anything is a sure-thing?

Our post SAF managers have not all been equally crap some have done decent jobs.

On paper Mourinho was the most successful, but in my opinion LVG was the one that deserved more time. Regardless, both those two did decent jobs that are the norm for Man Utd managers post Sir Mat and Pre SAF and are the jobs that managers usually do in their first 1-2 seasons that would then get them an extra 2-3 years to see if they could get a league title.

That’s where United gets it’s reputation of giving managers time, not by giving clearly incompetent and underachieving managers time, those always get sacked quick.

 

[Rood]

So the wages were the problem, yet Ole agreed a 3 year, 160k per week deal for Mata ? That's zero blame on him too? Or what about the new contract Jones signed in February, and then splashing close to 200k on Magure? Again zero blame?

Or is it everything good - praise Ole, everything bad - blame Woodward?

I dont have any issue with Mata or Maguire deals - Jones I would have let go but that wouldnt have cleared the type of money that Lukaku and Sanchez command so its irrelevant

You can keep spinning whatever scenarios you want, but the major failing this summer was simply Lukaku and Sanchez going too late in the window and thats nothing to do with Ole

 

[Bastian]

Our post SAF managers have not all been equally crap some have done decent jobs.

On paper Mourinho was the most successful, but in my opinion LVG was the one that deserved more time. Regardless, both those two did decent jobs that are the norm for Man Utd managers post Sir Mat and Pre SAF and are the jobs that managers usually do in their first 1-2 seasons that would then get them an extra 2-3 years to see if they could get a league title.

That’s where United gets it’s reputation of giving managers time, not by giving clearly incompetent and underachieving managers time, those always get sacked quick.

I'm not claiming they are all the same, far from it. All I was saying there is that there is no trend of thinking "this manager will make everything amazing". At least not from supporters who understand the plethora of problems at the club. What all those managers have in common is having worked with an incompetent board, and Ole is suffering from that too - but he's not beyond valid criticism of course.

@Rood
Suppose Ole wanted 2 more midfielders, suppose he wanted a striker, or a right sided forward. Why would he continually harp on about them needing to be the right fit and make it sound as if we did not sign players because they did not fit. Either the backing was there, or it wasn't. If it wasn't, he's doing himself zero favours slinging those lines and inviting pressure on himself. Could it not be that he was naive enough to think we could make do with what we have?

 

[Rood]

[

@Rood
Suppose Ole wanted 2 more midfielders, suppose he wanted a striker, or a right sided forward. Why would he continually harp on about them needing to be the right fit and make it sound as if we did not sign players because they did not fit. Either the backing was there, or it wasn't. If it wasn't, he's doing himself zero favours slinging those lines and inviting pressure on himself. Could it not be that he was naive enough to think we could make do with what we have?

The absolute last thing we need at the club at the moment is any internal conflict, Jose left a mess in that regard and Ole is doing his best to fix the culture and keep a positive spin and it's the right thing to do in my opinion. Plus it's his first window so he can't be throwing his weight around immediately, he needs to have a good relationship with Woodward to have any chance of fulfilling the long term vision. but if he didn't get what he needs in the next 2 windows then he would have to push harder - it's what Neville was talking about this week.

As I said above, I think the issues were not really about lack of backing anyway but it was more a timing issue in the end (Lukaku and Sanchez deals coming too late).
But it is possible that Ole thought we had enough to stay in contention until the next window (and TBH I thought we did too) - i wouldn't really call it niave, it was a bit of a gamble which looks bad in hindsight but you just don't plan for best player being out for nearly the whole season so far or for all 3 forwards/midfielders getting injured at the same time.

 

[SteveJ]

With their green and gold membership cards showing how much more they care than others, they don’t fail to miss an opportunity.

This is egregious as hell, and follows Neville's shameless lead in depicting concerned supporters as grandstanding whingers who are insincere in their concern. Note how similar the quoted criticism is to the usual pathetic tactic of right-wing zealots worldwide: 'It's just faux outrage. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see.'

 

[Michael T]

It's not just Ole taking over a team and running with it, we also have a pretty much newly assembled starting 11 that has only played 13 premier league games together as anything like a unit.

We were always going to suffer after going into the season with such a diabolical shortage in midfield, as the game against Sheffield United showed.

If Ole played a part in that back-room fiasco then fair enough, but all the dead wood I wanted out has gone, and I'm pretty sure Matic, Mata and Jones will soon follow. I'm really happy with the new additions too.

Give Ole and the team a year to gel and get used to each other, get Pogba sorted one way or another and some quality signings in January and the Summer.

I feel confident we can blossom from that, and am happy to give Ole the time and belief. I think he's building something young and exciting and in the image most of us crave.

I just hope the United hierarchy are willing to do their best to ensure the right deals happen in those two transfer windows.

 

[Bastian]

[


The absolute last thing we need at the club at the moment is any internal conflict, Jose left a mess in that regard and Ole is doing his best to fix the culture and keep a positive spin and it's the right thing to do in my opinion. Plus it's his first window so he can't be throwing his weight around immediately, he needs to have a good relationship with Woodward to have any chance of fulfilling the long term vision. but if he didn't get what he needs in the next 2 windows then he would have to push harder - it's what Neville was talking about this week.

As I said above, I think the issues were not really about lack of backing anyway but it was more a timing issue in the end (Lukaku and Sanchez deals coming too late).
But it is possible that Ole thought we had enough to stay in contention until the next window (and TBH I thought we did too) - i wouldn't really call it niave, it was a bit of a gamble which looks bad in hindsight but you just don't plan for best player being out for nearly the whole season so far or for all 3 forwards/midfielders getting injured at the same time.

I think the quagmire story is ultimately about backing. A combination of factors perhaps, i.e. having too limited a scope, and then having idiots conduct transfer dealings. But the reality of the situation was our midfield was thin and even with everyone fit, it was a big ask. Not least as Ole has no faith in Matic, so that's us down to 3 senior midfielders, one of which we got absolutely scammed for and we couldn't really tell at that time that McTominay would step up so dramatically. So my focus is less on the forward line and more on the midfield. I think that was the glaringly obvious problem at the end of the window.

I also don't think he has to go full on imploding-Mourinho to partly absolve himself from blame. He could simply have said he'd have wanted to sign a midfielder as we are light in that area. Hardly sack worthy. If the backing is there, there is no way we cannot find a midfielder who fits our criteria.

I also think the issues at the end of Mourinho's tenure were down to Mourinho, Woodward and Pogba.

 

[hobbers]

You'll be waiting forever for the moment when you can pat yourself on the back for this top notch top reddery.

Success is success. Makes absolutely no difference if it comes under the management of a club legend or a superstar manager or some managerial journeyman.

Winning a title wouldn't feel any less special or connect fewer people or whatever other wishy washy way you want to word it, just because a better manager than Ole delivered it.

 

[Sky1981]

I dont have any issue with Mata or Maguire deals - Jones I would have let go but that wouldnt have cleared the type of money that Lukaku and Sanchez command so its irrelevant

You can keep spinning whatever scenarios you want, but the major failing this summer was simply Lukaku and Sanchez going too late in the window and thats nothing to do with Ole

In your opinion. What aspect of this club that has got things to do with ole?

Need to stop scapegoating ed on every turn.

 

[Class of 63]

You need a shower to get all that sand out of your hair mate.

I'm away with the mixer at the moment, but i'll try reading that again later today when i'm nearly sober because that has totally gone right over my head.

 

[Cheesy]

You'll be waiting forever for the moment when you can pat yourself on the back for this top notch top reddery.

Success is success. Makes absolutely no difference if it comes under the management of a club legend or a superstar manager or some managerial journeyman.

Winning a title wouldn't feel any less special or connect fewer people or whatever other wishy washy way you want to word it, just because a better manager than Ole delivered it.

Indeed. We literally won our first ever European Cup under a manager whose entire playing career was spent with our two main rivals! And yet he's (rightfully) seen as being United's defining figure in many respects.

 

[devilish]

Should he be blamed for last season? I thought the consensus when he took over as caretaker was that the season would be a write off. Nobody expected him to actually come close.

I am not blaming for last season however since we ended the season the way Mou left us (ie out of the CL zone) then why the feck did we sacked Mou in the first place? Also what's the point of keeping Ole if we end up out of the CL zone once again? Some might say he made some good signings. Well with all due respect signings are made by the club on scout's recommendation and with some input from the manager. That's certainly not enough to keep the man in place. Managers are judged on team morale, tactics and results. Ole is doing meah on the former but he's failing big time on the latter

 

[Sky1981]

Ole knew Lukaku WILL NOT feature in his plans, long before last season ends. Sold or not he needs to fill the gap.

So I don't see why people need to blame him being sold late, you knew it from the start. Unless everything is rosy then suddenly Lukaku is sold at 11 hour.
I don't believe we need to free wages before we can sign, if it's only a matter of 2-3 weeks earlier i'm sure there's compromise to be made. We could have sign first, and finalise lukaku signing after, it's not like Inter isn't in advance agreement with us

 

[Bobcat]

No, we've made mental decisions on an attempted quick fix top manager. Jose and LVG were never going to work here in the long run, neither will do things the way many fans and people at the club expect.

I personally think Mourinho worked out fine (much better than 12 months of OGS) until he and the club clearly had different ideas on the future of Manchester United, 2 trophies and then a 2nd place finish. Then the club decided that "no, we don't agree with want you want to do" and that's fine, but they should've already fecking known exactly what Mourinho wanted to do before they hired him.

Now that doesn't mean you forget about top managers and take a massive gamble on an old player, it simply means that next time, do your fecking due diligence and identify a top proven manager that fits the club and the clubs idea of the players and tactics it wants to see on the pitch.

Cleaning out good players like Lukaku is fine, if you can be certain that his replacement is top drawer, but the truth is, Ole alienated Lukaku and didn't replace him, leaving us short and hanging around 10th in the league. There's just one example. Why do you blindy trust Ole? Do you really think Daniel James and AWB* are 2 players to take us back to the very top or are you being a Liverpool fan ca. 2007?

* I like them both, really likeable lads they are but cream of the crop? we're a long long way from that. James isn't great against a packed defence and AWB offers next to nothing in an attacking sense right now. Thing is, lot's of fans would prefer a likeable AWB or James any day over Paul Pogba or Lukaku even if the latter are better players.

The manager you are asking for here is basically Fergie. Or Klopp.

Loads of people want Allegri, which looks a lot like Jose v2, Pochettino coached a really good Tottenham side into regular top 4 contender and was declared a genius. Nagelsman, Marco Rose and Ten Haag all look like exciting young coaches, but taking on us now is a BIG step up

Lukaku wanted to leave and acted really unprofessionally as a result, skipping training because he was sulking and going AWOL on away matches. Hes a decent enough player on his day, but if you have questionable attitudes among the players you cant have a player like that around. Every day there are new reports about Haaland joining us and hes a better version of Lukaku (and younger). AWB might not be the best attacking fullback, but hes a damn good defensive one and he has plenty of time to improve. What did people expect really? Prime Phillip Lahm?

Considering the state of the squad it was never possible to fix in one window. Everyone was gutted when we did not sign more players, but no one knows why exactly. Reportedly Roma want to sign Smalling on a permanent deal and Inter want Sanchez. That it two more players off our books and we also free up a lot of wages. We saw 6 players go and just brought in 3, with a squad as thin as ours that is going to hurt then and there, but its going to be beneficial in the future. Everyone on here was baning on about the need to clear out deadwood, so if only 2 players left would people be any happier? I Sincerely doubt that

As a comparison, Klopp is extremely methodical in how he does his transfers and during his two first years plenty of Liverpool fans were starting to lose patience with him because they felt progress was to slow. Compare that to how we have handled our transfers by throwing money around like drunk sailors on high profile signings and end up doing loads of terrible transfers. I am not saying Ole is Klopp, but i am saying the former is the better way of handling transfers, especially in our circumstances. City and PSG might afford to spunk money on 2-3 duds every year, we cant

We entered the CL three times in 6 years. It's only under Ole that we will probably be out of the CL 2 years in a row

Also every man and his dog is noticing a huge flaw in our tactics. As said time and time again we are being outsmarted by average manager with worse/equal sides then ours. The guy is out of depth and the results shows that

You keep saying that, but would you care to elaborate? Does he make bizarre team selections? Play players out of position? Keep sticking with severely under performing player? Everyone was moaning about Pogba being played in a double pivot at the start of the year, which is fair enough, hes better in a midfield 3, but does that not make him purely a luxury player?

I know people keep complaining about us playing a counter attack style instead of possession and i just find it absurd for a couple of reasons
1) When did counter attacking football fall so out of favor? I can only speak for myself, but when it clicks its brilliant to watch. Even prime Barca with all their talent was a bore to watch at times imo when they just kept playing triangles in the middle
2) We dont have he right players to play possession football. Not even slightly
3) When did people become convinced possession (especially without the right personnel) is so great? Did people forget about LvG's entire tenure here? We continually struggled to break down lesser sides and often ended up with almost no shots on target.

If tactics are that important why does every league in the world have 1-6 "big teams" that keep winning the league every year? Is it because the managers of those teams are brilliant tacticians and everyone below them dont know the difference between a RB and a CM? Take Wenger and Arsenal as an example. They were incredibly good at the start of the millennia and played some truly brilliant football at times. So what happened between 2005-2018? Did Wenger suddenly forget how to coach or how to set up his team? Or just maybe it could be explained by penny pinching owners which lead to a dramatic drop in squad quality?

You say: Bad tactics = Bad results. Sorry but im not buying it

 

[Nickelodeon]

The manager you are asking for here is basically Fergie. Or Klopp.

Loads of people want Allegri, which looks a lot like Jose v2, Pochettino coached a really good Tottenham side into regular top 4 contender and was declared a genius. Nagelsman, Marco Rose and Ten Haag all look like exciting young coaches, but taking on us now is a BIG step up

Lukaku wanted to leave and acted really unprofessionally as a result, skipping training because he was sulking and going AWOL on away matches. Hes a decent enough player on his day, but if you have questionable attitudes among the players you cant have a player like that around. Every day there are new reports about Haaland joining us and hes a better version of Lukaku (and younger). AWB might not be the best attacking fullback, but hes a damn good defensive one and he has plenty of time to improve. What did people expect really? Prime Phillip Lahm?

Considering the state of the squad it was never possible to fix in one window. Everyone was gutted when we did not sign more players, but no one knows why exactly. Reportedly Roma want to sign Smalling on a permanent deal and Inter want Sanchez. That it two more players off our books and we also free up a lot of wages. We saw 6 players go and just brought in 3, with a squad as thin as ours that is going to hurt then and there, but its going to be beneficial in the future. Everyone on here was baning on about the need to clear out deadwood, so if only 2 players left would people be any happier? I Sincerely doubt that

As a comparison, Klopp is extremely methodical in how he does his transfers and during his two first years plenty of Liverpool fans were starting to lose patience with him because they felt progress was to slow. Compare that to how we have handled our transfers by throwing money around like drunk sailors on high profile signings and end up doing loads of terrible transfers. I am not saying Ole is Klopp, but i am saying the former is the better way of handling transfers, especially in our circumstances. City and PSG might afford to spunk money on 2-3 duds every year, we cant



You keep saying that, but would you care to elaborate? Does he make bizarre team selections? Play players out of position? Keep sticking with severely under performing player? Everyone was moaning about Pogba being played in a double pivot at the start of the year, which is fair enough, hes better in a midfield 3, but does that not make him purely a luxury player?

I know people keep complaining about us playing a counter attack style instead of possession and i just find it absurd for a couple of reasons
1) When did counter attacking football fall so out of favor? I can only speak for myself, but when it clicks its brilliant to watch. Even prime Barca with all their talent was a bore to watch at times imo when they just kept playing triangles in the middle
2) We dont have he right players to play possession football. Not even slightly
3) When did people become convinced possession (especially without the right personnel) is so great? Did people forget about LvG's entire tenure here? We continually struggled to break down lesser sides and often ended up with almost no shots on target.

If tactics are that important why does every league in the world have 1-6 "big teams" that keep winning the league every year? Is it because the managers of those teams are brilliant tacticians and everyone below them dont know the difference between a RB and a CM? Take Wenger and Arsenal as an example. They were incredibly good at the start of the millennia and played some truly brilliant football at times. So what happened between 2005-2018? Did Wenger suddenly forget how to coach or how to set up his team? Or just maybe it could be explained by penny pinching owners which lead to a dramatic drop in squad quality?

You say: Bad tactics = Bad results. Sorry but im not buying it

Why? Does it not seem like the most obvious thing?

What you are suggesting is that its all on the players and managers do not have any major influence and which is why Ole is not doing well?

You have clearly positioned an argument in favor of Ole but removing him from any blame for tactics, recruitment, style of play and player management. Sorry but I'm not buying that.

 

[Bobcat]

Why? Does it not seem like the most obvious thing?

What you are suggesting is that its all on the players and managers do not have any major influence and which is why Ole is not doing well?

You have clearly positioned an argument in favor of Ole but removing him from any blame for tactics, recruitment, style of play and player management. Sorry but I'm not buying that.

I am not, but we are 13 league games in and people are losing their fecking shit, when its pretty evident this is a long term project. What i would ask in return are:
1) What specifically is wrong with his tactics?

2) What should he have done different regarding recruitment? We could have bought a CM instead of Maguire, but both positions needed strengthening. If Pogba had been fit this would not have been such a big issue. Was he wrong in letting go a bunch of under performing players? Everyone was desperate for us to start clearing out some deadwood and now thats hes went on and done it its suddenly a terrible decision? People moan about him not replacing the players we let go, but do people honestly think he was given a blank cheque by Ed and was given license to sign 5-6 players in one window, but decided not to?

3) "Style of play" is such lazy criticism. LvG had his style, Jose had his, none of them looked very good. You cant just take any group of players and make them play champagne football. If Pep took over Bolton, do you think they would look like prime Barca?

4) What has he done wrong in terms of player management? He got rid of some bad influnces in the dressing room and has frozen out Matic that has completely lost his legs. Hes also given youth players a chance (which everyone wants) and players have publicly backed him numerous times. This one just last week: Link

 

[devilish]

The manager you are asking for here is basically Fergie. Or Klopp.

Loads of people want Allegri, which looks a lot like Jose v2, Pochettino coached a really good Tottenham side into regular top 4 contender and was declared a genius. Nagelsman, Marco Rose and Ten Haag all look like exciting young coaches, but taking on us now is a BIG step up

Lukaku wanted to leave and acted really unprofessionally as a result, skipping training because he was sulking and going AWOL on away matches. Hes a decent enough player on his day, but if you have questionable attitudes among the players you cant have a player like that around. Every day there are new reports about Haaland joining us and hes a better version of Lukaku (and younger). AWB might not be the best attacking fullback, but hes a damn good defensive one and he has plenty of time to improve. What did people expect really? Prime Phillip Lahm?

Considering the state of the squad it was never possible to fix in one window. Everyone was gutted when we did not sign more players, but no one knows why exactly. Reportedly Roma want to sign Smalling on a permanent deal and Inter want Sanchez. That it two more players off our books and we also free up a lot of wages. We saw 6 players go and just brought in 3, with a squad as thin as ours that is going to hurt then and there, but its going to be beneficial in the future. Everyone on here was baning on about the need to clear out deadwood, so if only 2 players left would people be any happier? I Sincerely doubt that

As a comparison, Klopp is extremely methodical in how he does his transfers and during his two first years plenty of Liverpool fans were starting to lose patience with him because they felt progress was to slow. Compare that to how we have handled our transfers by throwing money around like drunk sailors on high profile signings and end up doing loads of terrible transfers. I am not saying Ole is Klopp, but i am saying the former is the better way of handling transfers, especially in our circumstances. City and PSG might afford to spunk money on 2-3 duds every year, we cant



You keep saying that, but would you care to elaborate? Does he make bizarre team selections? Play players out of position? Keep sticking with severely under performing player? Everyone was moaning about Pogba being played in a double pivot at the start of the year, which is fair enough, hes better in a midfield 3, but does that not make him purely a luxury player?

I know people keep complaining about us playing a counter attack style instead of possession and i just find it absurd for a couple of reasons
1) When did counter attacking football fall so out of favor? I can only speak for myself, but when it clicks its brilliant to watch. Even prime Barca with all their talent was a bore to watch at times imo when they just kept playing triangles in the middle
2) We dont have he right players to play possession football. Not even slightly
3) When did people become convinced possession (especially without the right personnel) is so great? Did people forget about LvG's entire tenure here? We continually struggled to break down lesser sides and often ended up with almost no shots on target.

If tactics are that important why does every league in the world have 1-6 "big teams" that keep winning the league every year? Is it because the managers of those teams are brilliant tacticians and everyone below them dont know the difference between a RB and a CM? Take Wenger and Arsenal as an example. They were incredibly good at the start of the millennia and played some truly brilliant football at times. So what happened between 2005-2018? Did Wenger suddenly forget how to coach or how to set up his team? Or just maybe it could be explained by penny pinching owners which lead to a dramatic drop in squad quality?

You say: Bad tactics = Bad results. Sorry but im not buying it

Having top players do matter but you can't take top quality management out of the equation. A top manager will be able to take a side and make it hit above its weight. Sir Alex won the league with a very weak side same with Mourinho who brought us to second place.

Now there's no shame in not being able to keep up with Liverpool's or City's pace as they have a far better squad then we do. However Ole is constantly being outsmarted by average managers with a side which are as good or even worse to what we have. The players looks clueless and the team look disorganised. You really don't need a team of world class players to get decent results against the likes of Sheffield United, Newcastle, Rochdale and Astana

Also tactics aren't meant to entertain people. That's silly. Keegan's football was entertaining and look what he got him. Tactics are meant to bring results. That's what matter, not philosophy, fitness, 'understanding the club' or British core BS. All of which pale in comparison to RESULTS. Now top managers can adapt their teams to the players they got. For example Sir Alex cynical (if not boring) football at his latter years were a different cup of tea to the sparking football we saw in the treble. The reason to that was that in his latter years he lacked players like Scholes, Beckham, Giggs, Keane and Stam in their prime. Instead he had to rely on Valencia, an ageing Scholes/Giggs and Cleverley. However one thing did remained. Throughout Sir Alex reign Manchester United kept constantly hitting above its weight That was often achieved not through expensive safe bet signings but tactics which often also include playing players out of position as well (Scholes, Phil Nev, OShea and Giggs in CM for example). As a United's fan I shouldn't explain to you what a top manager can contribute to a team

Now if prime Sir Alex or prime Wenger had to take control over this team then I doubt they would win the league with this team. However rest assured that they won't get their arse handled to them so often by managers with weaker teams then theirs. Also if the money is tight then they would go for cheaper signings so they can fill those gaps which tactics alone won't be able to sort rather then blow the entire budget on a CB whose good but nowhere near to WC. That's what brilliance, maturity and top quality management brings to the table. Hence why back in the day we brought in Sir Alex whom even in Scotland was able to make teams hit above their weight against the top dogs like Real rather then simply resort on hiring lets say club legends like Lou Macari or Paddy Crerand who 'understood the club'.

 

[Eleven-Eighteen]

Amen

 

[Nickelodeon]

I am not, but we are 13 league games in and people are losing their fecking shit, when its pretty evident this is a long term project. What i would ask in return are:
1) What specifically is wrong with his tactics?

2) What should he have done different regarding recruitment? We could have bought a CM instead of Maguire, but both positions needed strengthening. If Pogba had been fit this would not have been such a big issue. Was he wrong in letting go a bunch of under performing players? Everyone was desperate for us to start clearing out some deadwood and now thats hes went on and done it its suddenly a terrible decision? People moan about him not replacing the players we let go, but do people honestly think he was given a blank cheque by Ed and was given license to sign 5-6 players in one window, but decided not to?

3) "Style of play" is such lazy criticism. LvG had his style, Jose had his, none of them looked very good. You cant just take any group of players and make them play champagne football. If Pep took over Bolton, do you think they would look like prime Barca?

4) What has he done wrong in terms of player management? He got rid of some bad influnces in the dressing room and has frozen out Matic that has completely lost his legs. Hes also given youth players a chance (which everyone wants) and players have publicly backed him numerous times. This one just last week: Link

Giving you a point wise answer since you're making an effort to detail out your argument.

1) What specifically is wrong with his tactics? Results. We are 9th in the table and 13 games is not a small sample set. If anything, we'll be worse off once we reach the midpoint. If we're losing against the big sides and beating the smaller ones, we could point towards a lack of quality. But losing the likes of Bournemouth, Palace, Newcastle and West Ham along with the inability to hold onto leads (Wolves, Southampton, Arsenal, Liverpool, Rochdale, Sheffield, Astana) shows that Ole is not learning a tactical lesson. We seem petrified once we're in the lead, go too deep and predictably give a goal or two away.

2) What should he have done different regarding recruitment? We could have bought a CM instead of Maguire, but both positions needed strengthening. If Pogba had been fit this would not have been such a big issue. Was he wrong in letting go a bunch of under performing players? Everyone was desperate for us to start clearing out some deadwood and now thats hes went on and done it its suddenly a terrible decision? People moan about him not replacing the players we let go, but do people honestly think he was given a blank cheque by Ed and was given license to sign 5-6 players in one window, but decided not to?

One thing that you're misunderstanding is that everyone wanted to clear the deadwood and replace them with quality players or at least promising ones. If that were unlikely to happen, then the clearout should've been in a phase-wise manner. The thing that irks me the most is that the fantastic run of results we had under Ole right up till the PSG game, we utilized our squad completely. Martial, Rashford and Lingard starting with Sanchez and Lukaku coming off the bench. With Lukaku and Sanchez starting certain games (Arsenal away in the FA cup) and doing well while always having dangerous options from the bench. To dismantle the squad completely without replacements was a shocking shocking decision. We were always one Pogba injury away from having no midfield and we're there now. Matic, Herrera and Pogba were our starting midfielders and none of them are playing right now. Our major spending was on defence and it doesn't look any better now at least as a unit. The only good piece of recruitment has undoubtedly been Daniel James. That in itself is just not good enough.

3) "Style of play" is such lazy criticism. LvG had his style, Jose had his, none of them looked very good. You cant just take any group of players and make them play champagne football. If Pep took over Bolton, do you think they would look like prime Barca?

A lot of our fans, including me, consider this as the least important criticism of Ole right now. Having said that, all your arguments in favor of Ole do not focus on any of his merits but rather a hypothetical that no one will do well. I'll again point out to losing leads in games while implementing a fearful approach which is our downfall. Repeated instances do make me lose faith in the tactical nous of the manager.


4) What has he done wrong in terms of player management? He got rid of some bad influnces in the dressing room and has frozen out Matic that has completely lost his legs. Hes also given youth players a chance (which everyone wants) and players have publicly backed him numerous times. This one just last week: Link

Does it really matter what Rashford is saying right now? We have had numerous instances of players, including Lukaku, who have waxed lyrical about the managers and team members only to deliver the same shit on the pitch again. As for the player management part, if we knew that not all players could be replaced right now, then the target should've been to draw their maximum potential currently. If we knew that we couldn't sign a forward, why sell Lukaku at all? Freezing out Matic should not be taken sign of power. Had he somehow brought out some good performances from him, that would've been good management from his end. Considering that Matic has lost his legs and Fellaini and Herrera have already left, how come signing a CM wasn't a priority? Surely you have to adjudicate some of the blame to Ole.

Finally, I see that none of your points are actually pointing towards anything good that Ole has done. Arguments such as "people said play Pogba in a midfield 3" or "Play youngsters" etc. are fan opinions. He is not answerable on any of these points. He is answerable on results and for the last 30 odd games, we have shown relegation form. How do you see him as the man who will get us back in the top 4 and then challenging for the league?

 

[Bobcat]

Having top players do matter but you can't take top quality management out of the equation. A top manager will be able to take a side and make it hit above its weight. Sir Alex won the league with a very weak side same with Mourinho who brought us to second place.

Now there's no shame in not being able to keep up with Liverpool's or City's pace as they have a far better squad then we do. However Ole is constantly being outsmarted by average managers with a side which are as good or even worse to what we have. The players looks clueless and the team look disorganised. You really don't need a team of world class players to get decent results against the likes of Sheffield United, Newcastle, Rochdale and Astana

Also tactics aren't meant to entertain people. That's silly. Keegan's football was entertaining and look what he got him. Tactics are meant to bring results. That's what matter, not philosophy, fitness, 'understanding the club' or British core BS. All of which pale in comparison to RESULTS. Now top managers can adapt their teams to the players they got. For example Sir Alex cynical (if not boring) football at his latter years were a different cup of tea to the sparking football we saw in the treble. The reason to that was that in his latter years he lacked players like Scholes, Beckham, Giggs, Keane and Stam in their prime. Instead he had to rely on Valencia, an ageing Scholes/Giggs and Cleverley. However one thing did remained. Throughout Sir Alex reign Manchester United kept constantly hitting above its weight That was often achieved not through expensive safe bet signings but tactics which often also include playing players out of position as well (Scholes, Phil Nev, OShea and Giggs in CM for example). As a United's fan I shouldn't explain to you what a top manager can contribute to a team

Now if prime Sir Alex or prime Wenger had to take control over this team then I doubt they would win the league with this team. However rest assured that they won't get their arse handled to them so often by managers with weaker teams then theirs. Also if the money is tight then they would go for cheaper signings so they can fill those gaps which tactics alone won't be able to sort rather then blow the entire budget on a CB whose good but nowhere near to WC. That's what brilliance, maturity and top quality management brings to the table. Hence why back in the day we brought in Sir Alex whom even in Scotland was able to make teams hit above their weight against the top dogs like Real rather then simply resort on hiring lets say club legends like Lou Macari or Paddy Crerand who 'understood the club'.

Again you are just making broad generalizations and then draw conclusions based on those. No one is doubting Fergies ability to have teams that were greater than the sum of its parts, but even his comparatively weaker sides in the 2010's had loads of quality players like Rooney, RvP, Carrick, Vidic, Evra, Ferdinand, Nani and so on. He also had the benefit of being in charge for a long time, so he could adjust his squad and make sure they had a healthy mix between experienced quality players and promising youth players as back up.

And yes, we've had some utterly diabolical games this year, but if you look at the stats from those games its not like we have been outplayed. Palace, Soton, Wolves, even West Ham and Newcastle we had better xG and a more big chances than they had, but again and again were let down by dreadful finishing and defensive howlers. Historically we have of course been able to brush aside these sides, but if you take a completely honest look at the players we have fielded this season, do you really think they are that much better than the squads we have faced and dropped points to?

Half of our defense is good(AWB, Maguire), while the other half is mediocre, though Williams is looking promising. With Pogba injured for long our midfield have been a complete disaster. Fred and Pereira have never shown anything to suggest they are PL-quality, never mind Man Utd quality. McTomminay has been our outstanding midfelder this season, and although hes a great lad and United through and through hes not a top quality CM(not yet anyway). Attack might be our strongest area with Rashford, Martial and James. All of them are young and talented, but none of them have proved they are 20+ goals a season players. Not yet anyway. Overall we also field very young sides and they are bound to blow hot and cold. Also, among all the awful performances there have also been some good ones.

If it was the case that these players we are fielding were playing great under a different manager and now suddenly turned to shit under Ole, then you might say the coaching is lacking or the tactics are wrong, but who? Rashford is on his way to tripple his goal output so he has improved. McTomminay has also looked better than he did last year. Fred has maybe looked marginally better if we are being generous. Matic and Mata have undeniably declined, but unless Ole could turn back time that was going to happen regardless

Wenger in his later years regularly got his arse handed to him by smaller teams. Brilliant manager no doubt, but if you look at the Arsenal sides from 2001-2003 and compare them too the ones they fielded from 2010 an onward its pretty clear the squad declined badly in terms of quality and that affected them on the pitch as well.

 

[AneRu]

Having top players do matter but you can't take top quality management out of the equation. A top manager will be able to take a side and make it hit above its weight. Sir Alex won the league with a very weak side same with Mourinho who brought us to second place.

Now there's no shame in not being able to keep up with Liverpool's or City's pace as they have a far better squad then we do. However Ole is constantly being outsmarted by average managers with a side which are as good or even worse to what we have. The players looks clueless and the team look disorganised. You really don't need a team of world class players to get decent results against the likes of Sheffield United, Newcastle, Rochdale and Astana

Also tactics aren't meant to entertain people. That's silly. Keegan's football was entertaining and look what he got him. Tactics are meant to bring results. That's what matter, not philosophy, fitness, 'understanding the club' or British core BS. All of which pale in comparison to RESULTS. Now top managers can adapt their teams to the players they got. For example Sir Alex cynical (if not boring) football at his latter years were a different cup of tea to the sparking football we saw in the treble. The reason to that was that in his latter years he lacked players like Scholes, Beckham, Giggs, Keane and Stam in their prime. Instead he had to rely on Valencia, an ageing Scholes/Giggs and Cleverley. However one thing did remained. Throughout Sir Alex reign Manchester United kept constantly hitting above its weight That was often achieved not through expensive safe bet signings but tactics which often also include playing players out of position as well (Scholes, Phil Nev, OShea and Giggs in CM for example). As a United's fan I shouldn't explain to you what a top manager can contribute to a team

Now if prime Sir Alex or prime Wenger had to take control over this team then I doubt they would win the league with this team. However rest assured that they won't get their arse handled to them so often by managers with weaker teams then theirs. Also if the money is tight then they would go for cheaper signings so they can fill those gaps which tactics alone won't be able to sort rather then blow the entire budget on a CB whose good but nowhere near to WC. That's what brilliance, maturity and top quality management brings to the table. Hence why back in the day we brought in Sir Alex whom even in Scotland was able to make teams hit above their weight against the top dogs like Real rather then simply resort on hiring lets say club legends like Lou Macari or Paddy Crerand who 'understood the club'.

This, people are looking for all sorts of excuses to justify the continued employment of a struggling manager but the reality of the matter is Ole wouldn't get this leeway if wasn't a club legend, he wouldn't even get a coaching job at United. The things people are using to excuse his underperformance are the exact issues that he is employed to solve or at the very least mitigate.

Last season we sacked the most successful United manager in the post SAF era and he was doing better than this.

 

[Enigma_87]

I dont have any issue with Mata or Maguire deals - Jones I would have let go but that wouldnt have cleared the type of money that Lukaku and Sanchez command so its irrelevant

You can keep spinning whatever scenarios you want, but the major failing this summer was simply Lukaku and Sanchez going too late in the window and thats nothing to do with Ole

If the wages were an issue as you said, a 160k Mata makes no sense if that means we can't sign a quality CM or CF in his place. Terrible management if true and it's down on him in this case.

 

[The Cat]

This, people are looking for all sorts of excuses to justify the continued employment of a struggling manager but the reality of the matter is Ole wouldn't get this leeway if wasn't a club legend, he wouldn't even get a coaching job at United. The things people are using to excuse his underperformance are the exact issues that he is employed to solve or at the very least mitigate.

Last season we sacked the most successful United manager in the post SAF era and he was doing better than this.

He was sacked for more reasons than results though.

 

[kettledrumhamster]

http://sportwitness.co.uk/dont-unde...le-worth-taking-youre-football-support-wrong/

20LEGEND reads the flag.


Legends are increasingly easier to become, but it’s hard to argue Ole Gunnar Solskjaer doesn’t hold a special place in Manchester United history.

It’s not just about that goal in 1999, there’s more to it. He came from nowhere (sorry Molde), respected the club during the times he wasn’t getting the chances he would have done elsewhere, played where told and produced often enough for his scoring record to be 126 goals in 366 matches.

And he wasn’t a star, not a ‘starry star’ at least. At a time when football celebrity was growing at a fast pace, Ole was just Ole. The baby faced assassin, or, more fairly, just a normal guy in extraordinary circumstances.

When the days of Jose Mourinho grew increasingly bitter and damaging, Solskjaer wasn’t a name in the running. Yet he was in the role quickly after the Portuguese storm left Old Trafford, and there was an immediate lift.

Perhaps anyone could have had the bounce, perhaps you could have done it, perhaps it was an almighty fluke. Arguments can, and will, be made on either side of the stance. That said, it can’t be denied that for many it felt like getting a little bit of Manchester United back.

The Glazers have been a financial drain on the club since they took over, with the soul always struggling to stay there… and even that seemed to start slipping under Mourinho. An Ole wave brought some cheer, however, there was always going to be a comedown, the Norwegian has football magic in his past but fairytales rarely see themselves out and, inevitably, the hard times came.

Embed from Getty Images

Missing out on the Champions League was a near-certainty before the change in manager, and then, Solskjaer got it to a point that the failure to qualify was a disappointment.

That was the first strike for some. And some of those were ready, waiting, to pounce. Their man Mourinho had been the answer. They’d been saying it for years, Louis van Gaal’s FA cup victory had been quickly diluted to an afterthought when the Jose circus rolled into town.

He could do no wrong for the Cult of Mourinho™, so players were thrown to the baying dogs and the journey, albeit bringing second tier trophies in the League Cup and Europa League, was a painful one.

Those who had wanted the manager for so long, and who had insisted with such effort that he’d be the man to Make Manchester United Great Again, became a social media army. Sometimes pride comes before the club you support, and this whole episode has been one of the better examples of that.

Van Goal lived his final six months at Old Trafford overshadowed by the impending arrival of the only man who could be his replacement, and, to some extent, Solskjaer is playing the role of an unwanted to stepfather to those who will now take more joy from Tottenham victories than those of their own club.

Solskjaer is mocked, as a man and as a professional. His record with the club as a player is even questioned, every bright point is met with negatives by a section, and each low point is grasped with glee as the Ole-Out brigade. With their green and gold membership cards showing how much more they care than others, they don’t fail to miss an opportunity.

Things may work out under the current manager, they may well not. Everything is a gamble, and those calling for a replacement present their choice as a sure-thing, handily ignoring all that has happened, at supposedly their club, since Sir Alex Ferguson left.

It’s the venom which grates. Sure, we can all have different opinions on football, but the enthusiastic social media mockery of a club legend, and the at times competitive nature of it, feels bizarre to many supporters.

Youth team prospects are handed the same mockery. Marcus Rashford, a 22 year old local lad who has scored 10 goals and provided four assists so far this season, is called Rashford by his own supporters much more than opposing ones.

His localness is perversely held against him by people who dismiss that as some worthless connection which shouldn’t bring any bearing when it comes to their joy or anger.

Maybe this is just social media, maybe these people just want their team to win at all costs. And that’s the thing, what are all costs?

Barcelona for years built up the idea of having a club DNA, to those outside it often appeared arrogant. Liverpool and their ‘This Means More’ campaign have done similar, positioning themselves as somewhat special among other, less worthy, football clubs.

But what of Manchester United? What even is Manchester United?

If you’re doing football support correctly then it’s a feeling, for so many it’s something which has defined a big part of their life. Whether that be because you grew up in the area, or had a family member introduce, no, force you into being fan, there are connections which will forever follow you.

Rarely, although perhaps increasingly, people choose their club. In which case if it’s purely about results then that could define support in much the same way personal connections do for others.

Maybe in that case there will always be something missing, especially if a wrong road is taken the first time expected glory isn’t granted. Should football support be almost solely related to results then there’s a hell of a lot being missed out on, the emotions and connection will be diluted and the joy can never be on the same level.

Ole Gunnar Solskjaer may ultimately fail, most managers do. Every manager at United since Ferguson has. But what if… what if he didn’t? What if the unlikely boss managed to bring some of that glory at some point down the road?

That would be so, so special. It would be Manchester United and all the memories and connections that brings for so many people, it would be victory on steroids, a joy which is deeper than that which can be brought by an outsider.

It would be genuine emotion with friends, loved ones and strangers who you know feel the same way as you. There’d be nothing superficial about it, not a success, or a fix, to be quickly cast aside.

A gamble worth taking for a payoff which would be, quite simply, something else.

And if you don’t get that… you’re not doing football support correctly.

Couldn't agree more. The rewards for staying patient with Ole far outweigh the risks.

 

[Mr Anderson]

This, people are looking for all sorts of excuses to justify the continued employment of a struggling manager but the reality of the matter is Ole wouldn't get this leeway if wasn't a club legend, he wouldn't even get a coaching job at United. The things people are using to excuse his underperformance are the exact issues that he is employed to solve or at the very least mitigate.

Last season we sacked the most successful United manager in the post SAF era and he was doing better than this.

Agree totally. Ole shows his inexperience as a top level manager. Sure he gets the club and says the right things, but it is another ball game coaching and teaching this on the training field - then to bring it to the matches.

Ole is underachieving with the squad, simple as. But in saying that, we are still only a team capable of 5th or 6th - relying on the 4th placed team to fall off-the pace - that is the reality. There is no real desired result in this 'gamble' of appointing Ole yet. All it has done is take away the supposed issue in Jose and results still go south. Sacking Ole will give us a lift like we experienced when he came in - but the squad is so average, the shit will come again.

We will never be successful with Woodie and Glazers in charge. They are the common denominator. All business practice and no football plan on the pitch or even the stadium.

 

[Sky1981]

He was sacked for more reasons than results though.

And ole was kept for more reasons than results

 

[Adnan]

Again you are just making broad generalizations and then draw conclusions based on those. No one is doubting Fergies ability to have teams that were greater than the sum of its parts, but even his comparatively weaker sides in the 2010's had loads of quality players like Rooney, RvP, Carrick, Vidic, Evra, Ferdinand, Nani and so on. He also had the benefit of being in charge for a long time, so he could adjust his squad and make sure they had a healthy mix between experienced quality players and promising youth players as back up.

And yes, we've had some utterly diabolical games this year, but if you look at the stats from those games its not like we have been outplayed. Palace, Soton, Wolves, even West Ham and Newcastle we had better xG and a more big chances than they had, but again and again were let down by dreadful finishing and defensive howlers. Historically we have of course been able to brush aside these sides, but if you take a completely honest look at the players we have fielded this season, do you really think they are that much better than the squads we have faced and dropped points to?

Half of our defense is good(AWB, Maguire), while the other half is mediocre, though Williams is looking promising. With Pogba injured for long our midfield have been a complete disaster. Fred and Pereira have never shown anything to suggest they are PL-quality, never mind Man Utd quality. McTomminay has been our outstanding midfelder this season, and although hes a great lad and United through and through hes not a top quality CM(not yet anyway). Attack might be our strongest area with Rashford, Martial and James. All of them are young and talented, but none of them have proved they are 20+ goals a season players. Not yet anyway. Overall we also field very young sides and they are bound to blow hot and cold. Also, among all the awful performances there have also been some good ones.

If it was the case that these players we are fielding were playing great under a different manager and now suddenly turned to shit under Ole, then you might say the coaching is lacking or the tactics are wrong, but who? Rashford is on his way to tripple his goal output so he has improved. McTomminay has also looked better than he did last year. Fred has maybe looked marginally better if we are being generous. Matic and Mata have undeniably declined, but unless Ole could turn back time that was going to happen regardless

Wenger in his later years regularly got his arse handed to him by smaller teams. Brilliant manager no doubt, but if you look at the Arsenal sides from 2001-2003 and compare them too the ones they fielded from 2010 an onward its pretty clear the squad declined badly in terms of quality and that affected them on the pitch as well.

Wenger was restricted in his later years due to the cost of the stadium but still did a good job getting Arsenal in the top 4 consistently. Wenger's net spend was really low but he still overachieved on a low budget for many years.