Ruben Amorim | 2025-26

0161_UNITED said:
This is getting murky.

"Ruben Amorim is understood to feel Emi Martínez’s character and experience would have been beneficial for his side
@lauriewhitwell, @J_Tanswell"

For one thing, it's twitter so it may not be real. But if it is, who said that, or leaked that, and why, and who stands to benefit? I'll leave that there.

Second, I'm pretty astounded that United were able to pull off Cunha, Mbuemo, Sesko and Lammens given our financial constraints. There was a certain manager (Ok, I'm talking about Mourinho) who went pretty public (also leaking to journos) about his grievances not getting the backing for signing older players with no resale value on high wages when his ass was on the line for poor performances, nutty press conferences, and clawing out excuses.

Just sayin'.
Click to expand...
To be fair, Ole bought Varane and Ronaldo to try and turn a counter attacking top 4 team into a title winning team and EtH bought Casemiro and also Eriksen on a free, so I don't think it was just Jose signing experienced players to take the next step (but yeah, Matic was clearly not a future signing nor was his request for Perisic).

It's always a tricky one getting the balance right. Amorim said last year the squad was severely lacking in leaders and Bruno was basically carrying the team at times, so maybe Martinez might have been seen as the better option for him, just on character and influence. However, you buy an older player and put him on big wages and he doesn't perform then you're stuck with him.

Let's just hope Lammens settles very quickly.
 
Dominos said:
I agree we shouldn't be letting managers dictate decisions.

But he had a point in this case, or more generally he had a point that United should have an experienced goalkeeper.

We don't really know what the finances behind the Martinez deal would have been so hard to judge if it was feasible.

The Lammens deal is a huge risk for a young inexperienced keeper coming from a weak league to walk into this spotlight and scrutiny.
Click to expand...
Yeah you shouldn't listen to the manager all the time, however this already says to me that Lammens won't be going straight into team whereas Martinez definitely would. I can see them going over his head on this definitely leading to some trouble behind the scenes. Club needed to find a way of being able to sign both instead of picking the inexperienced high risk option.
 
Irwin99 said:
To be fair, Ole bought Varane and Ronaldo to try and turn a counter attacking top 4 team into a title winning team and EtH bought Casemiro and also Eriksen on a free, so I don't think it was just Jose signing experienced players to take the next step (but yeah, Matic was clearly not a future signing nor was his request for Perisic).

It's always a tricky one getting the balance right. Amorim said last year the squad was severely lacking in leaders and Bruno was basically carrying the team at times, so maybe Martinez might have been seen as the better option for him, just on character and influence. However, you buy an older player and put him on big wages and he doesn't perform then you're stuck with him.

Let's just hope Lammens settles very quickly.
Click to expand...
Also, to be fair, it wasn't about who Mourinho bought, my post was about who he wanted to buy your right I'm pretty sure your're right - one was Perisic, and as I recall it was some end-of-life CB at Bayern and probably someone else from Chelsea. It was leaking at the time, and as I recall at the time it was a horror-show of names pretty roundly rejected on the Caf. The narrative that we "didn't back Mourinho" has always been false if anyone looks at the list of people we were linked with in the media. Not saying the media is the truth, but it was basically all Perisic and and Matic types, and also let's not forget, Jose had some experience in that team. He already had Matic :)

As for Ole, well that's different for 2 reasons. One, Varane was class. Maybe it was the end of the line for him, and we certainly didn't get his prime. However, I think if anyone is going around saying Varane was our worst signing post-SAF, that's a laugh. Ronaldo was completely different. One, I'm not totally sold Ole actually wanted him. Second, Ronaldo had our balls in a vice in the media, either we step up and sign him or he'd go City and if that happened, well it could armageddon. Same as when SAF kept Rooney from City. That's a totally different ballpark and discussion.

RE: Amorim and Martinez, though... there are only a few things to say. Either Amorim really wanted Martinez, and the club discounted his opinion (this is the "club signings vs Manager signings debate" argument), or Amorim wanted the signings we made and still wanted more even though we can't afford it (the limited budget argument), or ... it's just an excuse, because he knows he's going to get sacked (what I would call the "Mourinho" argument which is, "I know you are going sack me, so I'll say you didn't back me, so here's my excuse why I got sacked"). There's only one post-SAF manager who can say maybe he didn't get fully backed, and maybe that's Moyes. But he did get Fellaini and we tried for that FB that looked like the bass-player from Oasis from Everton, too. And Fabregas. Moyes talked about it.

We may be under INEOS now, but I've never seen United not back a manager. Moyes signings were Moyes signings, Van Gaal - definitely Van Gaal's, Mourinho's too, Ole's were Ole signings, and EtH, my god, were those EtH signings. I'm sure the club sanctioned some signings, or refused some of those managers certain signings. Maybe some things were sprinkled in. But the overall theme is.... the vast majority of those signings reflected the manager, maybe not all of them, maybe not 100%.

Nobody can convince me that the vast majority of transfers for Man United since SAF left did not reflect that the manager had a large, if not almost total say in those transfers. So now, after INEOS sanctioned 200 mil of EtH signings, we've suddenly changed course and are not allowing Amorim his signings anymore? His voice doesn't matter? And it was Emi Martinez who broke the donkey's back? Amorim hasn't been clamouring for a goalkeeper the past 10 months. In fact, he's been saying, "Everything's fine, there's no fire here!" He's been saying we needed goals. And, surprise(!!) we bought players who can score goals. Now, after we buy players who can score goals, we play crap, and then something comes out about "Amorim wants an experienced goalkeeper to be a leader." How fecking god-damned convenient is that? He wants the weight of leadership to be off the shoulders of the #10 he's playing out of position that we could've got $100+ million for from the Saudi's to solve all this if you felt that strongly? Or maybe, you should not buy one of those #10's and play your leader there, and spend the rest on Martinez if you want Martinez and Fernades to be your leaders?

I mean this is guy who just said publicly some weeks he hates our players, some weeks he loves them. He's had absolutely no problem ostracising players and forcing them out. He's just clocked on, on transfer deadline day, that after 10 months here Bayindir and Onana aren't great? Jesus, we knew that 10 months ago.

This guy is going to get sacked, and suckers will buy into the "club didn't back" him narrative. All the managers got backed.
 
Last edited:
TsuWave said:
I think United just needs a good keep, at the very least a non-calamitous one.

Martinez earns more than Onana and Villa wanted a substantial fee. Personally, I'd rather an upcoming keeper - especially when Martinez isn't all that good in my opinion
Click to expand...
Isn't all that good and yet he won World Cup please someone try to help that make some sort of sense
 
croadyman said:
Isn't all that good and yet he won World Cup please someone try to help that make some sort of sense
Click to expand...

Not sure of what you're trying to say here. Onana is a CL finalist/runner-up - does that mean he's a good keeper?

International football, knockout football is like that sometimes. Especially when you have the best player of all time playing in your side and regularly coming up with miracles. It also could just mean he had a good tournament (see; Onana and CL)
 
TsuWave said:
Not sure of what you're trying to say here. Onana is a CL finalist/runner-up - does that mean he's a good keeper?

International football, knockout football is like that sometimes. Especially when you have the best player of all time playing in your side and regularly coming up with miracles. It also could just mean he had a good tournament (see; Onana and CL)
Click to expand...
I think you can't ignore someone being a World Cup winner was my point. Honestly I'm just very annoyed that INEOS haven't bought experienced no 1 GK for him. Nah instead they think hey let's buy an inexperienced keeper to provide competition for the clowns instead. No wonder people haven’t got trust in them with decisions like that.
 
croadyman said:
I think you can't ignore someone being a World Cup winner was my point. Honestly I'm just very annoyed that INEOS haven't bought experienced no 1 GK for him. Nah instead they think hey let's buy an inexperienced keeper to provide competition for the clowns instead. No wonder people haven’t got trust in them with decisions like that.
Click to expand...

How is that point relevant to the post you quoted? It’s not as if I was doing an inventory of his accolades.

I simply said that I prefer an upcoming keeper, and that I don’t think Martinez is all that good. How is that ignoring or mutually exclusive with him being a World Cup winner?
 
TsuWave said:
I take encouragement that the club isn't building a squad solely/mostly on the manager's "wants"

Click to expand...


From past public comments, its a team effort between the manager and a few of the execs (probably Berrada, Wilcox, and Vivell). Ruben, provides specific player profiles on what he needs, and also has the ability to veto in case they're pushing someone on him who he definitely doesn't want.
 
TsuWave said:
How is that point relevant to the post you quoted? It’s not as if I was doing an inventory of his accolades.

I simply said that I prefer an upcoming keeper, and that I don’t think Martinez is all that good. How is that ignoring or mutually exclusive with him being a World Cup winner?
Click to expand...
Yeah an upcoming keeper we probably won't see until Sunderland game at home on October 4th knowing Ruben
 
AjaxCunian said:
I say that given that we were already playing well vs other top teams last season, but I find us playing significantly better vs the mid table and minnows so far. With Cunha, Mbeumo, Amad we seem a lot more dangerous up front and our set-up is a lot morr attacking than last season.
Click to expand...
We do seem better but we also lost to Grimsby with a strong side. It's a very small sample size. People say with a bit of luck we could have had more points. Well, without the 97th minute penalty we would be sitting with 2 points and a negative GD. The positive is that we have a lot of shots although most of them came against the side that's going down. So again, probaly not representative.

We have a top 5/6 squad so I agree we should be thereabouts. Still not convinced that's happening.
 
With the transfer window over and the business we have done along with the remaining squad Ruben remains the biggest obstacle in us securing a top 5 spot in the league. Bomb squad, players undermining him, no goals, no time to train, blah blah blah - all these excuses need to be put to bed and he needs to start winning games while developing an attacking style of football. With no European football and only one cup competition which starts in January, we should be do a lot better and become a fearful football unit.
 
People are reading a lot into a tweet.

It can be true that Amorim's preferred choice was Martinez, but it doesn't mean he was against Lammens. Both deals were clearly explored until the last moment.

I don't think this will be the cause of a Mourinho-style third season meltdown.
 
Insanity said:
With the transfer window over and the business we have done along with the remaining squad Ruben remains the biggest obstacle in us securing a top 5 spot in the league. Bomb squad, players undermining him, no goals, no time to train, blah blah blah - all these excuses need to be put to bed and he needs to start winning games while developing an attacking style of football. With no European football and only one cup competition which starts in January, we should be do a lot better and become a fearful football unit.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the goal.
 
TsuWave said:
I take encouragement that the club isn't building a squad solely/mostly on the manager's "wants"

Click to expand...


Hate tweets like this which just stir the pot. I’m sure he believed that about Martinez, we could all see what he’d bring. But it doesn’t mean he’ll be disappointed or against Lammens. I’m sure he’s fairly happy with our summers work, it hopefully means there’s not much to do to have a solid squad which we can build on.
 
pocco said:
Hate tweets like this which just stir the pot. I’m sure he believed that about Martinez, we could all see what he’d bring. But it doesn’t mean he’ll be disappointed or against Lammens. I’m sure he’s fairly happy with our summers work, it hopefully means there’s not much to do to have a solid squad which we can build on.
Click to expand...
If Lammens starts off nervy and makes some mistakes, this story will keep coming back.
 
croadyman said:
I think you can't ignore someone being a World Cup winner was my point. Honestly I'm just very annoyed that INEOS haven't bought experienced no 1 GK for him. Nah instead they think hey let's buy an inexperienced keeper to provide competition for the clowns instead. No wonder people haven’t got trust in them with decisions like that.
Click to expand...

The club has bought the best/most practical option for the club. They aren't and shouldn't be buying players for Amorim or any manager. We've done that in the past and that's what lead to us pissing away over a billion and a half.
 
0161_UNITED said:
This is getting murky.

"Ruben Amorim is understood to feel Emi Martínez’s character and experience would have been beneficial for his side
@lauriewhitwell, @J_Tanswell"

For one thing, it's twitter so it may not be real. But if it is, who said that, or leaked that, and why, and who stands to benefit? I'll leave that there.

Second, I'm pretty astounded that United were able to pull off Cunha, Mbuemo, Sesko and Lammens given our financial constraints. There was a certain manager (Ok, I'm talking about Mourinho) who went pretty public (also leaking to journos) about his grievances not getting the backing for signing older players with no resale value on high wages when his ass was on the line for poor performances, nutty press conferences, and clawing out excuses.

Just sayin'.
Click to expand...
Of course he would want the experienced goalkeeper. He's looking at it from the shorter term, the results here and now.

The club (Wilcox and co) are looking at it from a longer term squad planning view. Which is what people in their positions are supposed to do. Sometimes the manager and higher ups don't agree. Also the club have been very vocal about being ready for the title challenge for 2028 season.

In the end Martinez was just way too expensive at £35-£40mil. If he was £10-£15mil, the decision could have been different.

We allowed the previous manager to bring in who he wanted and he bought us Onana, Antony, etc etc.
 
stevoc said:
The club has bought the best/most practical option for the club. They aren't and shouldn't be buying players for Amorim or any manager. We've done that in the past and that's what lead to us pissing away over a billion and a half.
Click to expand...
Please explain how buying a 23 year old goalkeeper with barely 2 years of experience in Belgium, to take over gigantic shoes of starting goalkeeper at Man United was "best option for the club" in a year when it is critical for us to fight for top 5 or 6 in an extremely competitive Premier League.

Any interesting arguments?

It was stupidest bullshit gamble based on nothing but "young goalkeeper will have value in coming years".

Idiots are running this club. Same "practicality" that got us in this shit situation - thinking like an accountant and not a football person
 
0161_UNITED said:
Also, to be fair, it wasn't about who Mourinho bought, my post was about who he wanted to buy your right I'm pretty sure your're right - one was Perisic, and as I recall it was some end-of-life CB at Bayern and probably someone else from Chelsea. It was leaking at the time, and as I recall at the time it was a horror-show of names pretty roundly rejected on the Caf. The narrative that we "didn't back Mourinho" has always been false if anyone looks at the list of people we were linked with in the media. Not saying the media is the truth, but it was basically all Perisic and and Matic types, and also let's not forget, Jose had some experience in that team. He already had Matic :)

As for Ole, well that's different for 2 reasons. One, Varane was class. Maybe it was the end of the line for him, and we certainly didn't get his prime. However, I think if anyone is going around saying Varane was our worst signing post-SAF, that's a laugh. Ronaldo was completely different. One, I'm not totally sold Ole actually wanted him. Second, Ronaldo had our balls in a vice in the media, either we step up and sign him or he'd go City and if that happened, well it could armageddon. Same as when SAF kept Rooney from City. That's a totally different ballpark and discussion.

RE: Amorim and Martinez, though... there are only a few things to say. Either Amorim really wanted Martinez, and the club discounted his opinion (this is the "club signings vs Manager signings debate" argument), or Amorim wanted the signings we made and still wanted more even though we can't afford it (the limited budget argument), or ... it's just an excuse, because he knows he's going to get sacked (what I would call the "Mourinho" argument which is, "I know you are going sack me, so I'll say you didn't back me, so here's my excuse why I got sacked"). There's only one post-SAF manager who can say maybe he didn't get fully backed, and maybe that's Moyes. But he did get Fellaini and we tried for that FB that looked like the bass-player from Oasis from Everton, too. And Fabregas. Moyes talked about it.

We may be under INEOS now, but I've never seen United not back a manager. Moyes signings were Moyes signings, Van Gaal - definitely Van Gaal's, Mourinho's too, Ole's were Ole signings, and EtH, my god, were those EtH signings. I'm sure the club sanctioned some signings, or refused some of those managers certain signings. Maybe some things were sprinkled in. But the overall theme is.... the vast majority of those signings reflected the manager, maybe not all of them, maybe not 100%.

Nobody can convince me that the vast majority of transfers for Man United since SAF left did not reflect that the manager had a large, if not almost total say in those transfers. So now, after INEOS sanctioned 200 mil of EtH signings, we've suddenly changed course and are not allowing Amorim his signings anymore? His voice doesn't matter? And it was Emi Martinez who broke the donkey's back? Amorim hasn't been clamouring for a goalkeeper the past 10 months. In fact, he's been saying, "Everything's fine, there's no fire here!" He's been saying we needed goals. And, surprise(!!) we bought players who can score goals. Now, after we buy players who can score goals, we play crap, and then something comes out about "Amorim wants an experienced goalkeeper to be a leader." How fecking god-damned convenient is that? He wants the weight of leadership to be off the shoulders of the #10 he's playing out of position that we could've got $100+ million for from the Saudi's to solve all this if you felt that strongly? Or maybe, you should not buy one of those #10's and play your leader there, and spend the rest on Martinez if you want Martinez and Fernades to be your leaders?

I mean this is guy who just said publicly some weeks he hates our players, some weeks he loves them. He's had absolutely no problem ostracising players and forcing them out. He's just clocked on, on transfer deadline day, that after 10 months here Bayindir and Onana aren't great? Jesus, we knew that 10 months ago.

This guy is going to get sacked, and suckers will buy into the "club didn't back" him narrative. All the managers got backed.
Click to expand...
Whilst you can attribute some quotes to Amorim, a lot of what you are basing your argument on if conjecture, you have no idea what discussions have gone on between Amorim and the board, and whilst Amorim does not have a problem throwing the team under a bus (and rightly so) he has not singled out players for criticism over their performances, but assuming he did what was he meant to do, he has 2 crap GK throw them both under the bus? even still the noise coming out of the camp was that Utd were actively looking to get a GK in but would be dependant on sales, it was lower priority than other positions but it was identified, and we were linked with Martinez very early on, I do not think anyone would have anticipated just how bad Bayindir and Onana have been this season.

In terms of crap football? we have actually played some brilliant football so far, we should have beaten Arsenal, been 3-0 up Fulham by half time and probably 4-0 at Burnley by half time, okay should-have-beens don't matter, and yes we have capitulated in the 2nd halves of Fulham and Burnley.

I think there is a good chance that Amorim gets booted, and yet if our strike force actual start converting chances then there is a good chance we go on a decent run of games and all is forgotten, if Amorim does go I think we need to appreciate that there are a lot of good things that he has done with INEOS, the dressing room has been a problem post SAF it seems now to be in the best shape it has been for a long time, with INEOS signing the right type of players, with Amorim, more physical players with a good attitude then whoever comes in next will be better set up for it.
 
NewGlory said:
Please explain how buying a 23 year old goalkeeper with barely 2 years of experience in Belgium, to take over gigantic shoes of starting goalkeeper at Man United was "best option for the club" in a year when it is critical for us to fight for top 5 or 6 in an extremely competitive Premier League.

Any interesting arguments?

It was stupidest bullshit gamble based on nothing but "young goalkeeper will have value in coming years".

Idiots are running this club. Same "practicality" that got us in this shit situation - thinking like an accountant and not a football person
Click to expand...


Explained in this article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c62023rxk1go

"..Club sources say that in key metrics, such as claimed crosses, shot stopping, preventing goals from rebounds and mistakes, or rather the lack of them, Lammens rates exceptionally highly.

They also say Lammens made more saves than any other goalkeeper in Europe's top 10 leagues and made the most 'progressive' passes for any goalkeeper under the age of 23..."
 
Zed 101 said:
Whilst you can attribute some quotes to Amorim, a lot of what you are basing your argument on if conjecture, you have no idea what discussions have gone on between Amorim and the board, and whilst Amorim does not have a problem throwing the team under a bus (and rightly so) he has not singled out players for criticism over their performances, but assuming he did what was he meant to do, he has 2 crap GK throw them both under the bus? even still the noise coming out of the camp was that Utd were actively looking to get a GK in but would be dependant on sales, it was lower priority than other positions but it was identified, and we were linked with Martinez very early on, I do not think anyone would have anticipated just how bad Bayindir and Onana have been this season.

In terms of crap football? we have actually played some brilliant football so far, we should have beaten Arsenal, been 3-0 up Fulham by half time and probably 4-0 at Burnley by half time, okay should-have-beens don't matter, and yes we have capitulated in the 2nd halves of Fulham and Burnley.

I think there is a good chance that Amorim gets booted, and yet if our strike force actual start converting chances then there is a good chance we go on a decent run of games and all is forgotten, if Amorim does go I think we need to appreciate that there are a lot of good things that he has done with INEOS, the dressing room has been a problem post SAF it seems now to be in the best shape it has been for a long time, with INEOS signing the right type of players, with Amorim, more physical players with a good attitude then whoever comes in next will be better set up for it.
Click to expand...

This is never a good thing.
 
NewGlory said:
Please explain how buying a 23 year old goalkeeper with barely 2 years of experience in Belgium, to take over gigantic shoes of starting goalkeeper at Man United was "best option for the club" in a year when it is critical for us to fight for top 5 or 6 in an extremely competitive Premier League.

Any interesting arguments?

It was stupidest bullshit gamble based on nothing but "young goalkeeper will have value in coming years".
Click to expand...

How the feck would I know? I don't work for the club's scouting department, I'm not privy to the thought process and criteria behind identifying Lammens and choosing to sign him ahead of other options. I was only commenting on the fact I think/hope the club are now signing players with a long term plan (looking beyond Amorim) as opposed to just signing whoever the current manager wants.

NewGlory said:
Idiots are running this club. Same "practicality" that got us in this shit situation - thinking like an accountant and not a football person
Click to expand...

Who would a 'football person' have signed then?

Are you a 'football person'?

:confused:
 
gaffs said:
Crook is a moron. It is not "the board" that are not providing a DM and GK.

It is the manager/football dept that have prioritised other areas this window. To the tune of £ 200m. A huge amount considering last seasons failure to not get into Europe.
Click to expand...
And now the Athletic has confirmed that Wilcox prioritised attackers over midfielders, and that Ruben was pushing hard for a midfielder.

 
Raoul said:
From past public comments, its a team effort between the manager and a few of the execs (probably Berrada, Wilcox, and Vivell). Ruben, provides specific player profiles on what he needs, and also has the ability to veto in case they're pushing someone on him who he definitely doesn't want.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I thought we moved away from this after EtH.
 
TsuWave said:
I take encouragement that the club isn't building a squad solely/mostly on the manager's "wants"

Click to expand...

We never did. ETH didn’t want Hojlund or Ugarte. Lets just hope Lammens is good
 
Lammens isn’t some kid we’re stuck with, he’s one of the most promising young keepers in tbe world, plenty of other clubs been linked to him too. We’ve got him at a good age. He’s of course a risk, all keepers are, but Martinez would also be a risk given his dip in form last year coupled with his fee, age and wage.
 
Posh Red said:
And now the Athletic has confirmed that Wilcox prioritised attackers over midfielders, and that Ruben was pushing hard for a midfielder.

Click to expand...

Will have me readjust my discontent with the transfer targets.

Bit torn. You have a football structure above the coach to plan and handle these things, so that's fine, but it still feels a bit weird to bolster positions the coach didn't want bolstering, at least not at the expense of midfield
 
hellhunter said:
Will have me readjust my discontent with the transfer targets.

Bit torn. You have a football structure above the coach to plan and handle these things, so that's fine, but it still feels a bit weird to bolster positions the coach didn't want bolstering, at least not at the expense of midfield
Click to expand...
I don’t really see why it would be a huge surprise to anyone. We have known for a while that the manager no longer has autonomy over signings. I was kind of baffled by the idea that Amorim was somehow to blame for ‘prioritising the wrong areas’ etc.
 
Posh Red said:
I don’t really see why it would be a huge surprise to anyone. We have known for a while that the manager no longer has autonomy over signings. I was kind of baffled by the idea that Amorim was somehow to blame for ‘prioritising the wrong areas’ etc.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's that black and white. He himself said that he has influence over targets, so I don't think it's outlandish to assume those areas were his preference
 
I think the supposed Amorim thoughts on Martinez are only half the story.
Yes, he probably thought those were positives to sign him but have they quoted what he thought might be negatives.
It's not a balanced quote and without the full details of both options is meaningless.
There'll be positives/negatives for both signings and these would have been discussed at club/board level.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
People are reading a lot into a tweet.

It can be true that Amorim's preferred choice was Martinez, but it doesn't mean he was against Lammens. Both deals were clearly explored until the last moment.

I don't think this will be the cause of a Mourinho-style third season meltdown.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. It's just an answer to why Martinez was a target. As in "what were the main reasons Amorim would want him?"

Because he felt his experience etc.

There's another related but unanswered question "why did the club and Amorim opt instead for Lammens?"

I'd speculate because he better fits the long term project, but also likely was cheaper and lower wages too.
 
Posh Red said:
And now the Athletic has confirmed that Wilcox prioritised attackers over midfielders, and that Ruben was pushing hard for a midfielder.

Click to expand...

That's one helluva read. Really interesting.

Everyone if possible should read it.

Can't believe Onana has asked for a pay rise. He's living in cloud cuckoo land
 
hellhunter said:
I don't think it's that black and white. He himself said that he has influence over targets, so I don't think it's outlandish to assume those areas were his preference
Click to expand...
I believe he said ‘we all have to agree’. The reality seems to be that the real power in decision making over targets is above him, as has been consistently reported since the change in ownership structure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.