We've basically played direct football with wingers most of the time, while promoting from our academy into the first team for 70 years.
There is a tradition at United.
Let's bust some myths about Manchester United
- Thread starter devilish
- Start date
There is a tradition at United.
I think they are happy with that. To win the UCL or the EPL requires an investment and a restructuring that is in their eyes economically inefficient, given that it puts them into competition with oil states for whom money is no object, or even with clubs like Bayern or Liverpool that place football infrastructure above marketing infrastructure. So a top four finish while prioritising revenue is pretty much their main aim.
Unless you're talking about Mickey Mouse trophies.
Ronaldo isn't the problem. Ole has never been good enough for this club as a manager it's what fans have been saying for years. Ole destabilized his own project because he had to learn on the job he wasn't qualified to do. He then lost the one thing he had, the players, by playing favorites.
Only a sentimental fan base with their head in the sand could be delusional enough to blame this mess on Ronaldo or SAF. If ole didn't want Ronaldo he should have said it, and if he couldn't or wasn't able to, it's just further proof he's not nearly good enough to manage united.
SAF handled the retirement poorly in that we didn't get a good replacement, but that wasn't his job, that was the clubs. He tried for pep and klopp and supposedly mourinho but they didn't want it. Replacing a legend isn't something anyone wants.
You’ve given a bit of a glib answer but that poster does have a point, albeit not necessarily the only one. Ferguson always talked about not making the mistakes Busby did, and though to some degree he’s achieved that I bet that every manager of Utd since Ferguson left thought secretly that they’d rather he’d retired to Australia and taken up horse racing. The generally accepted truth is that he was responsible for identifying and recommending Moyes after all. I very much doubt he’s had no say in the other managers. Flip side to that is that Bayern Munich have made a habit of doing just that, and done it very well.
but the club is indeed investing alot of money.
Sure, bringing in a goalscorer fecked up Ole’s grand plan
We were playing great scintillating stuff under him under one striker signing fecked up everything.
The Glazers are happy with Ole and a 4th EPL place
I actually do believe the Glazers are happy with CL qualification. They'd ne happier with a treble, of course, but the cash that comes in with CL qualification is what keeps them happy. Speculation on my part, but it's hard to see any other explanation.
Ole has build a great side
This is correctly labeled as a myth. We've assembled great names, but not a great side.
Ole believes in youths
Another correctly labeled myth.
Trust the process. This is a team for the future
Correct. What "process"?
Workrate, Workrate, Workrate
I don't doubt that Ole demands that the players work hard, but it's clear as day that the players are not on same page as to what cohesive workrate is. It's completely useless to see one player chasing down the keeper while everyone else watches. We see a lot of pointless workrate and it's no surprise to see us get filleted open at the end of games. Against Atalanta and Liverpool, we got filleted in the first half largely due to errant "workrate".
I actually do believe the Glazers are happy with CL qualification. They'd ne happier with a treble, of course, but the cash that comes in with CL qualification is what keeps them happy. Speculation on my part, but it's hard to see any other explanation.
Ole has build a great side
This is correctly labeled as a myth. We've assembled great names, but not a great side.
Ole believes in youths
Another correctly labeled myth.
Trust the process. This is a team for the future
Correct. What "process"?
Workrate, Workrate, Workrate
I don't doubt that Ole demands that the players work hard, but it's clear as day that the players are not on same page as to what cohesive workrate is. It's completely useless to see one player chasing down the keeper while everyone else watches. We see a lot of pointless workrate and it's no surprise to see us get filleted open at the end of games. Against Atalanta and Liverpool, we got filleted in the first half largely due to errant "workrate".
Unfortunately much as I love SAF the poster is right about how the Rock of Gibraltor row let in the Glazers. And while we were always likely to end up with American capital owning us, we got about the worst manifestation of it.
I can't believe what I'm reading.... Sir Alex Ferguson basically recruited Ronaldo over the head of OGS. That is my point. He can't then sit in the stand, shaking his head, as if to say: 'oh look at Ole, what's he doing' - its just mean, cowardly and mean, in fact.
Sir Alex Ferguson needs to be told to take a step back, but is anyone big enough to do it? Isn't he employed on a life-time basis as a club Ambassador? (on £1m a year or something). Has anyone considered the ridiculousness of that, when all things are considered....
SAF was rewarded handsomely when manager of Manchester Utd. and his success deserved it - but to continue to reward the man when his greed (over a horse) and his constant meddling in the club (over Ronaldo) are ruining the club now, defies comprehension.
Last edited:
It is but it is 'investing' it with non-football aims uppermost in its mind. Which is why there is money for Ronaldo but not a pair of DMs. Hence losing 0-5 to Liverpool.
So the current manager of Manchester united is being bullied into decisions that he doesn't want? Is that what you're getting at?
If true then he certainly has even less of a right to be the manager. Not sure how you can blame this on anyone but him
This is what im talking about. You say he easily would start for most 4-6 club in Europe. That's a myth. At that time I'd say these teams were the top 6, Man Utd, Real Madrid, Ac Milan, Juventus, Arsenal, Bayern he wasnt getting anywhere near those teams. In my opinion the goal against Bayern made him a legend and that has clouded many peoples memory of him. He was a squad player used as a late substitute most of his time here. He got his banner olegend on Stretford end because he had a knee injury and the fans felt bad for him. That's it he was a likeble guy. Gary Neville is another one that I would never consider a manchester united legend.
I think that was Ole's decision as well. His 'tactics' are built around moving the ball as swiftly from defense to midfield at possible bypassing the midfield. He relies heavily on individual brilliance and no one provides that better then Ronaldo.
That was phrased poorly by me. Top 4-6 across PL, LL, Serie A, as in he wouldn't get into the top teams in each league but the clubs under them he could probably have started for. Teams like Chelsea, Villa, Blackburn.
Yet again, people are inadvertently backing me up! Even though they don't mean to.
Yes, the current manager of Man Utd. is being bullied into making decisions he doesn't want to. I'm criticising the bully, you are pointing the finger at the victim.
I think I'm right.
Sir Alex Ferguson shouldn't be having anything to do with the running of Manchester Utd. he lost that right when he cosied up to the Glazers and did very well personally, as a result. Does SAF love Man Utd. or does he just love still having power, even more?
Are you a match going fan?
We will never know. Personally I think he's there to pretend to be in charge and not embarrass Ed and the Glazers with the consequences of their own greed.
I agree.
This has been obvious for years - to anyone but people who can hardly be called anything other than conspiracy theorists.
Nothing the Glazers have ever done as owners of Manchester United indicates that they're actively seeking "doing an Arsenal" (as the phrase once went).
The evidence indicates that they're simply not very good at spending money effectively - not that they're happy with relative mediocrity as such.
Because in this case the "victim" needs to stand up for himself. You aren't right, you're just confirming ole is a coward without the ability to manage the club. Imagine pep being told by someone else who to sign.
Who cares what SAF loves, I find it hard to believe someone who recovered from a major surgery is involved in the day to day business of united.
Ole probably asked him to call Ronaldo, you saw how giddy ole was at that press conference the morning we signed him?
Also your point of ronaslo disrupting oles project is just laughable. Ole is a bad manager. It's over. Move on.
Ronaldo fits Ole's 'philosophy' perfectly. He's an experienced striker, whose part of the United way, whose versatile, is known for individual brilliance and has a reputation of turning the slightest of chances in goals. He's also loved by mates FC including SIR. That means everything for Ole.
They said the same with Busby. He shouldnt be on the board to make decisions nearly 10 years later. Football has moved on and Fergie knew his time as a dominant manager would end sooner or later. He only battled one other dominant team all through his Premier career. Blackburn, then Newcastle, Arsenal and Chelsea, and then he had to contend with 2 as City came to the fore. Now there are at least 3 and winning trophies has evolved into many setups, formations, tactics etc. The United way that Ole thinks he is implementing is a dinosaur and needs dropping as it shows it doesnt work.
Ole's philosophy isn't why the Glazers made extra funds available to buy him though. It was his ability to sell shirts. Ole was probably not asked.
Ole isn't a legend? Jesus Christ
I knew this was gonna happen should he fails as a manager
Last night some people (I'm not talking just about this place) were calling him names,insulting him. OK,he's not good enough to manage this team, he should leave, but reactions from some "fans" were as disgraceful as the team's performance.
Do you think that he took over the job without knowing what risk he was taking?
As for the poll, people at first were mostly against giving him a chance, then majority of you changed your votes, then, again. Votes were being changed, as the wind blew.
Now that we all pretty much agree that this is the end, let's start insulting him.
I knew this was gonna happen should he fails as a manager
Last night some people (I'm not talking just about this place) were calling him names,insulting him. OK,he's not good enough to manage this team, he should leave, but reactions from some "fans" were as disgraceful as the team's performance.
Do you think that he took over the job without knowing what risk he was taking?
As for the poll, people at first were mostly against giving him a chance, then majority of you changed your votes, then, again. Votes were being changed, as the wind blew.
Now that we all pretty much agree that this is the end, let's start insulting him.
Last edited:
This is often reported: that a certain type of player can be bought without risk because they earn the money back in shirt sales. Its rubbish.
What is Ronaldo on a week: £500,000 ish. That is an awful lot of shirts!
Okay then surely we will see leaks from oles mates that this was the case and that he never wanted him.
Until that happens stop with the nonsense that he didn't want him. He's said the whole time he was excited to have Ronaldo and hasn't bother playing Sancho or Dvb, we see what he does with players he doesn't want.
Then again I don't think ole knows what he really wants. He hands out new contracts like Halloween candy but doesn't play those players. Promises young players gametime then lies to them about it possibly ruining their careers.
Spot on thread ….needed to be said.
We were told there was a hundred million pound net budget this summer for players. Which went on Varane and Sancho. And no further players were planned, despite the obvious need for a DM. There was no need for a striker though.
Then suddenly Ronaldo cam available and suddenly the money was there. So clearly his purchase was financially acceptable in a way that the players we actually needed were not. Because he sells shirts and because wages are more affordable than transfer fees in our fekked up business structure.[/QUOTE]
Well we did see leaks that he wanted a DM and was told no. But by and large Ole doesn't leak.
Exactly, all clubs have their own style. And ours is as what I mentioned previously above.
You make a fair point about why Fergie should have been required to cut all connections once he retired - the club has developed an unfortunate streak of sentimentality it never had at our peak, because you know who wouldn't tolerate it. Sentiment over Fergie. Sentiment with Ole. Sentiment over Ronaldo (who should never have been signed). Sentiment over our history rather than a ruthlessness about our future. Worst of all, sentimental fans who enable all this shit by being the gallery the club plays to. You ask what culture... "The United Way" is. Culture is what's not tolerated and that comes from the top. The whole club needs an enema.
Last edited:
The board only sack managers when 4th is impossible.
Utter codswallop this one, it happened with one manager this, Moyes, and that no doubt due to the ridiculous 6 year contract and bravado about “Standing by your manager” and how United always give managers time.
LVG was never getting sacked whilst on his way to an FA Cup final win, and even in his most boring and darkest times he never slipped to what Mourinho and Ole did in their third seasons, he started the season until late November the exact opposite of Mourinho and Ole in season 3, we were flying high until the Luke Shaw injury, and looked good into December. Add to that LVG, Arsenal aside, always had good results against our biggest rivals. He finished joint on points with City that season, in 5th, and the Mourinho deal was already wrapped up so no chance was a single point more in the league keeping him in a job. He’d have been let go even with 4th.
Mourinho was sacked mid-season.
Utter codswallop this one, it happened with one manager this, Moyes, and that no doubt due to the ridiculous 6 year contract and bravado about “Standing by your manager” and how United always give managers time.
LVG was never getting sacked whilst on his way to an FA Cup final win, and even in his most boring and darkest times he never slipped to what Mourinho and Ole did in their third seasons, he started the season until late November the exact opposite of Mourinho and Ole in season 3, we were flying high until the Luke Shaw injury, and looked good into December. Add to that LVG, Arsenal aside, always had good results against our biggest rivals. He finished joint on points with City that season, in 5th, and the Mourinho deal was already wrapped up so no chance was a single point more in the league keeping him in a job. He’d have been let go even with 4th.
Mourinho was sacked mid-season.
Last edited:
- I never said culture is not important. But I need to see it backed up by concrete naming of values and tangible evidence that Ole instills those.
- Last year, yes, but this year our age profile is not particularly young any more, but rather premier league average (we are 10th youngest team) https://www.transfermarkt.com/premier-league/altersschnitt/wettbewerb/GB1
- Ok, let’s go to cold, hard facts and compare Ole’s transfers to Mourinho and LvG by calculating the % of under-25 transfers (https://www.transfermarkt.com/manchester-united/alletransfers/verein/985):
Ole transfers: 6 u25 players (Sancho, VdB, Amad, Pellestri, AWB, Dan James), 7 over-25 players (Varane, Ronaldo, Heaton, Alex Telles, Cavani, Maguire, Bruno). Share of under-25 players: 46%
Mourinho transfers: 5 u25 players (Dalot, Lukaku, Lindelof, Pogba, Bailly), 6 over-25 players (Fred, Grant, Matic, Alexis, Mkhitaryan, Ibra). Share of under-25 players: 45%
LvG transfers: 5 u25 players (Martial, Depay, Shaw, Blind, Mininkovic-Savic), 7 over-25 players (Schneiderlin, Darmial, Schweinsteiger, Romero, Di Maria, Herrera, Victor Valdes). Share of under-25 players: 42%
You can argue that Mininkovic-Savic was not a first-team signing for LvG, but then there are questions about Amad and especially Pellistri for Ole. You can add loans - Falcao for LvG, but then you would need to add Ighalo for Ole. So there are no significant anti-Ole biases here.
I see no shift to signing “predominantly u25 players” here, percentages barely differ. You can argue that u25 signings for LvG and Mourinho were largely not successful, but for Ole one of them is already sold (James), two are far from first team (Amad, Pellistri), two are high-profile signings that he has no idea how to use and benches (Sancho, VdB). Only AWB is first teamer and still there are questions about him and we were chasing Trippier in the summer (who is well over 25 by the way).
I am not arguing that Ole’s policy was bad or worse than his predecessors. It was somewhat better and decent-ish as opposed to average-at-best-and-rather-poor under Mourinho and LvG. But for “cultural” and “transfer policy” shifts I just do not see enough evidence.
Building teams - We need to go from building a team, to then challenging for trophies (whatever that is) and the next step is winning (??). Football is rarely linear that way.
Conte came in and won in his first season with Chelsea. RM ruthlessly sack their managers if they don't win even for one season. There's no need to 'challenge' for anything. The objective should be to win every year. That would elevate our standards much higher, and managers are judged by a clear purpose.
This is especially true now, we have a squad which is ready to win (bar maybe a midfielder). The aim would be to win trophies this season or next. Cause 2 years from now, we'll have to replace a whole bunch of starters and the cycle repeats.....
Conte came in and won in his first season with Chelsea. RM ruthlessly sack their managers if they don't win even for one season. There's no need to 'challenge' for anything. The objective should be to win every year. That would elevate our standards much higher, and managers are judged by a clear purpose.
This is especially true now, we have a squad which is ready to win (bar maybe a midfielder). The aim would be to win trophies this season or next. Cause 2 years from now, we'll have to replace a whole bunch of starters and the cycle repeats.....
Let's just go back to the start - this is not an argument about Ole. Ole needs to go, no doubt about that. Let's get that clear.
What I am disputing is that we haven't shifted our transfer policy. No way do we sign Schweinsteiger, Di Maria or Alexis under this current regime. It's also not just about WHO we sign, but who we target. No more messing about with this 'Galatico's' policy we seemed to have previously. Granted, we have just signed the most famous player on the planet, but I really do think that is exceptional circumstances, for obvious reasons
I'd argue that it looks like we signed Sancho without any real plan to integrate him as well. Honestly it feels really similar to signing Alexis. Granted I think Sancho will come good under a competent manager but whoever actually bought him didn't have a clue how he'd fit into oles team
But the evidence contradicts what you are saying. We signed two aging galacticos under Mourinho (Alexis and Ibra), one under Van Gaal (Schweinsteiger) and we signed also two (Cavani and Ronaldo) under Ole. And you just arbitarily labelled the two signings under Ole "exceptions" to support your point. So the number of galactico signings did not decrease. What about substance then - how Ibra signing is materially different from Cavani, for instance? And how is Di Maria signing materially different from Varane (both RM players at their peak)? Yes, Varane wanted to be here and was cheaper - that is why I agree that transfers have been somewhat better. But this just does not make the cut to be considered "a shift" in my view.
If we say that signing good promising players under 25 for the first team is a positive even if manger fails to utilize them properly - like VdB or Sancho - OK fair enough. But under Mourinho we signed the likes of Pogba, Lukaku, Bailly, Lindelof and under LvG - Shaw, Martial, Depay, Blind. On balance and at the time of their signing - were those sets of players somehow significantly worse that the comparable Ole's under-25 set? (VdB, Sancho, AWB, James). I would argue no. But you make it sound as if under LvG and Mourinho we signed only peak/old players.
Whom we target is always a moot point - the likes of Bale and Kross were reportedly targets under Moyes, so what? And the only really credible link in the last transfer window apart from who we signed was to Trippier, who is 31. So it would give been 3 out of 4 signings of players that are close to their 30s or older (4 out of 5 if you include Heaton). Where is the shift? I am sorry, I think your view is based on more perception (since Ole is all United DNA talk, signed only British players in his first window, 2 of whom were young) than facts. I would have agreed with you after the first window that the signs of the shift were showing. But by now it is no more that an outdated perception.
Last edited:
I don't really count Ibrahimovic, Cavani or Ronaldo tbh. I think all three were bought in on a short-term basis as specialist 'tools' to do a job for a short period. I see those signings, along with all of the GKs, as separate from the rest really.
You are right though, that it really does come down to perceptions. The stats don't back up a cultural reset, as you point out, so it depends whether you 'feel' the club are genuinely targeting different players.
I personally feel like we are, but under all four managers post-SAF, you are probably right again that the focus has been on signing younger players, if possible. I suppose the proof will be in the pudding over the next few years now, because in theory, if we have the right footballing structure in-place, it shouldn't matter who the manager is necessarily. The profile of target should still be similar.
For me, it comes down to targeting players who are young, hungry, something to prove, here for the right reasons (not just cash), keen to learn, speak good English (don't have to be English) and want to be here for the foreseeable.
The Sancho signing is a strange one. I have said that previously, and like you, I do think he will come good. The problem for me is, his best position is either AML or AMR. Personally, I think he was bought to play AMR, but for me, that's Greenwood's best position. The signing of Ronaldo complicates it further, because clearly he will play when available.
On the left, we have Rashford. Now, my post history will tell anybody I am not a massive Rashford fan...but I still think it's pretty mad to sign a £73m player to potentially replace someone who is arguably doing a good-enough job (for the most part), when you have a gaping hole in the midfield.
The strange thing is, as we all know, this wasn't a panic signing or one of those last-minute signings you make because a quality player is available and it's too good to pass (I am thinking Veron 2000). This was a targeted, strategic and drawn-out transfer saga.
My theory would be - Ole had a plan for this season, based on playing aggressive, front-foot football in a fluid 4-2-4/4-1-3-1 formation, and due to a complete lack of organisation/coaching ability, we clearly can't pull it off and have had to quickly try and find a way to make the formation more solid...without much success
OK, now once you named more concrete criteria, I see you point better and tend to agree with you in principle - yes, our signings have definitely become more "fitting" along those lines - at least on average.
Whether you count/name it as a transfer policy improvement (like me) or cultural shift (like you) and what extent of improvement/shift you see boils down to definitions/different perceptions, so there is no real debate here then
The idea that Manchester United need a manager who oversees all aspects of the club.
I think this is becoming a reoccurring theme when discussing who should be appointed manager. People point to the failures of Jose and LvG as examples of why managers with tactical nous or ones that are just seen as head coaches would not work at United. I think SAF really babied us, to a point where we never had to worry about anything related to the club, whether that would be recruitment, tactics or the general operations of the club. I think this an outdated model. Clubs now have directors of football and a distinct philosophy of which they base their strategic decisions on. Therefore most managers are head coaches, with on the pitch performances being their main remit. This in turn protects the club whenever there is a change in manager, as hiring is based on the philosophy of the club (go look at the Red Bull model).
The faster we move away from this older model, the healthy the club will be for years to come.
I think this is becoming a reoccurring theme when discussing who should be appointed manager. People point to the failures of Jose and LvG as examples of why managers with tactical nous or ones that are just seen as head coaches would not work at United. I think SAF really babied us, to a point where we never had to worry about anything related to the club, whether that would be recruitment, tactics or the general operations of the club. I think this an outdated model. Clubs now have directors of football and a distinct philosophy of which they base their strategic decisions on. Therefore most managers are head coaches, with on the pitch performances being their main remit. This in turn protects the club whenever there is a change in manager, as hiring is based on the philosophy of the club (go look at the Red Bull model).
The faster we move away from this older model, the healthy the club will be for years to come.
Easily the worst of the points I've seen made as to why we've struggled is that it's because we bought Ronaldo. Ronaldo has actually done what Greenwood and Cavani did in the spring, which is save us with big time goals scraping us by in games where we've played shit.Sure, bringing in a goalscorer fecked up Ole’s grand plan
We were playing great scintillating stuff under him under one striker signing fecked up everything.
Honestly I don't see how you can watch us the past few years and then go on and blame any specific players (apart from Maguire who's been horrendous). Every player we have we've seen play well at one point or another, it's not like Ole has gone and purchased a bunch of frauds. Yet clearly we are clueless in games because the instructions amount to "go out and play hard lads", and we just rely on scraping by from some great goals off the cuff or Bruno just spamming passes and shots until something comes off. I mean fecking hell it's been 3 years and we still don't have a reliable pattern to play out of a simple press from teams.