Nah. I just meant nuanced, thanks.
Ruben Amorim. Fired for being crap. Full stop. Just another addition for Amol as he loves it
- Thread starter horsechoker
- Start date
-
In the latest edition of the United Hour Podcast, we interview Duncan Drasdo of MUST - covering ticket prices, new stadium, INEOS and what fans should be demanding from our club.
Also, due to technical issues we couldn't put a notice up for the previous episode which was about the game against Bournemouth and other stuff. If you'd like to listen to it, click here.
- Status
Sesko is attributed to Vivell specifically, I have no doubt Amorim would meet and try to sell any player we were signing but his top choices were not Sesko. I'm not sure who said he was spitting his dummy out, but his top choices were different players.
Sure, Martinez might have been fine - but he's erratic, hugely expensive (fee + wages) and it's not only the "budget" option, it is the club centric option. Amorim wanted someone with a few years left in the game, who is proven (no issue with that, most coaches do the same) and it is because they are selfish and want success immediately. Again no issue, but it's not good for the club and is the theme with the links to Welbeck and/or Watkins.
We know Ineos run transfers and we know the head coach has, in theory, a veto. So, Amorim simply not blocking our signing is what you seem to be praising him for?
Yes, while framing it as "we don't know who gets the credit so let's say both".
today's the 1 month anniversary, no? I feel alive again. guy had me on the verge of crippling alcoholism
also, Merson
It is crazy. What happens when, after 3 years of suffering, there is no success. We would be cemented as mid table but at least we can say "we saw the project through to the end". What nonsense.
It is only in American sports that you can potentially "suffer" by tanking and get rewarded with a high draft pick to bring in a super talent. In a sport like Basketball, that can work because 1 player can make a massive difference but in football, tanking will only reduce the quality of players you can bring in. Even so, there is never any guarantee that the tanking will lead to success and it defies logic that Amorim losing more games than he wins would benefit us in the future.
It's very emblematic of where internet culture has gone in the last 10-15 years and really shows in politics. People are always clamoring for "a guy" and whenever someone who talks well enough comes along they entrench themselves in the cult of personality. I don't know if people have always been this way or if it's more noticeable as the internet has been opened for everybody but this sort of behavior was unseen on the internet at least until the 2010's.
Win record Fergie's 2nd full season 35%
Win record Fergie's 3rd full season 35%
Thank God he wasn't sacked. That's all I'm saying
I've said it all at this stage. If you're confused, I can't help.
Thank God that Amorim was.
And Ole, Moyes, Louis. Sack to victory
The people who wanted Amorim to stay said no coach can get these players to play good football and win and that the players are bad. But now that we are winning and playing some good stuff it's now "Amorim deserves credits for his signings" and cultural reset of the club. Funny
I mean, where would we be if Ron Atkinson hadn't been sacked to make way for Fergie? People talk like Fergie is the only manager we've ever had before 2013.
Not every manager is Fergie-level, and Ron had better results than Amorim.
Not every manager is Fergie-level, and Ron had better results than Amorim.
Last edited:
Yes it's great that he wasn't sacked and that's the product of the level of performances he showed before these two seasons and the fact that he was revamping the club with Eric Harrison. But I'm not really sure about the relevance of this when it comes to Amorim.
Sorry, but this is a ridiculous oversimplification. Martinez was his preference, much like everyone else. No head coach in their right fecking mind would ever say, yeah give me a kid from the belgian league instead of a WC winning, prem proven keeper - especially when that was the brief for ALL the transfer targets. Also we chased Martinez up until the last day of the window, so it's not like they were dead set on Lammens over Martinez, he was just the plan B that turned out very well.
How did the position open up for Fergie to be hired again?
Yes Ole got sacked, because results plummeted, but truth be told it was pretty clear he'd taken us as far as he could and should have been replaced the summer before. As much as I love Ole.
Why? What will that achieve?
You can't just give some 5 years regardless of results. It's a foolish idea, there has to be progression. Ron Atkinson won an FA Cup in 83 and 85 and never finished outside the top 4 but his reign was going nowhere. Should we have kept him on instead of hiring Fergie.
Fergie came and and showed progression, stabilized us in his first half season, finished 2nd in 88. And won the FA Cup in 90, Cup Winners Cup in 91 and challenging for league titles by 92. He only had one bad season really, but he had some money in the bank. Because he was restructuring the Academy behind the scenes. Contrast that to Amorim.
Klopp didn't need 5 years, he was challenging for titles, getting to finals and winning trophies within 2 or 3 years. There was clear and constant progression, in terms of results, performances and league finishes.
Arteta hasn't won a title yet and might still never.
How did the position open up for Fergie to be hired again?
Yes Ole got sacked, because results plummeted, but truth be told it was pretty clear he'd taken us as far as he could and should have been replaced the summer before. As much as I love Ole.
Why? What will that achieve?
You can't just give some 5 years regardless of results. It's a foolish idea, there has to be progression. Ron Atkinson won an FA Cup in 83 and 85 and never finished outside the top 4 but his reign was going nowhere. Should we have kept him on instead of hiring Fergie.
Fergie came and and showed progression, stabilized us in his first half season, finished 2nd in 88. And won the FA Cup in 90, Cup Winners Cup in 91 and challenging for league titles by 92. He only had one bad season really, but he had some money in the bank. Because he was restructuring the Academy behind the scenes. Contrast that to Amorim.
Klopp didn't need 5 years, he was challenging for titles, getting to finals and winning trophies within 2 or 3 years. There was clear and constant progression, in terms of results, performances and league finishes.
Arteta hasn't won a title yet and might still never.
Some people really take the very base surface level observation from a phenomenon. Fergie won titles after being in charge for a number of years, therefore, time = success. Also ignores what happens across the whole football landscape.
Sure, no coach would, hence why I said I didn't have an issue with him wanting to go for a proven player (read the thread?) but it shows he had no real clout on who we signed else we would have got Martinez and/or Watkins and/or Gyokeres etc.
I like how you think this is some kind of a gotcha.
How did the position open up for Fergie to be hired again?
Yes Ole got sacked, because results plummeted, but truth be told it was pretty clear he'd taken us as far as he could and should have been replaced the summer before. As much as I love Ole.
Why? What will that achieve?
You can't just give some 5 years regardless of results. It's a foolish idea, there has to be progression. Ron Atkinson won an FA Cup in 83 and 85 and never finished outside the top 4 but his reign was going nowhere. Should we have kept him on instead of hiring Fergie.
Fergie came and and showed progression, stabilized us in his first half season, finished 2nd in 88. And won the FA Cup in 90, Cup Winners Cup in 91 and challenging for league titles by 92. He only had one bad season really, but he had some money in the bank. Because he was restructuring the Academy behind the scenes. Contrast that to Amorim.
Klopp didn't need 5 years, he was challenging for titles, getting to finals and winning trophies within 2 or 3 years. There was clear and constant progression, in terms of results, performances and league finishes.
Arteta hasn't won a title yet and might still never.
Saying that Klopp was just given 5 years is such simplistic, inaccurate nonsense. I wonder why no club in the world is giving this "let's try with this guy for half a decade no matter what" method a try
Signings were good in fairness but think that would have happening with any new manager in fairness. They got two of the top proven players in the premier league last season in Cunha and Mbuembo. They had to stop signing not proven players in lower leagues like Sancho and Anthony and Hojlund. Cunha and Mbuembo a good age as well. I think Sesko was signed for teams that play a low block. A big strong tall lad that should be showing more physicality but think he’ll come good. Amorim deserves no praise for these signings really, it’s just the board finally starting to get it right. I can see the board signing established players in the premier league for the next season or two. There afraid of making the same mistakes unless a lad breaking all records, not like Anthony or Sancho.
As has been pointed out to you multiple times, once a manager comes in and proves himself with 18 months of incredible improvement, resulting in our best league campaign for over 2 decades…. Then, and only then, can can talk about them earning patience for a sticky patch.
Has any post SAF manager done anything remotely close to SAF in his first 18 months?
"His" thing is how all clubs in the world operate. Your thing hasn't been tried because it is objectively foolish and makes zero sense from business perspective. Not to mention a head coach today is very different what what a manager was in the 80s and 90s.
Manchester United already give managers/coaches more time than literally any other top flight club. The club can't base decisions and let failing out of their depth coaches plough on sinking the clubs fortunes because of an anecdote.
And besides the point both Ten Hag and Amorim had their moments where the club and the fans stood by them. Both could and should have been sacked multiple times by the time they did get the boot.
But unlike Fergie they never took advantage of the extra time by turning things around. There in lies the key difference, Fergie was given a chance and took it. Ten Hag and Amorim wasted their 2nd chances and just carried on doing the same things they had been doing that weren't working and rightfully got sacked.
We finished on 81 points a matter of months before Ole joined, and in 3 years we never reached that level again, that’s why.
Not only could Ole not match Mourinho’s league points total, nor trophy haul; Ole couldn’t even match Mourinho’s win rate, or ppg despite spending hundreds of millions, that’s why.
Had Ole come in, and in 18 months taken us to second again on 91 points… well, then you’d have a point about him earning patience and time. A 66 point season followed by a 74 point season and then a big drop just doesn’t scream ”here’s the new Fergie, we must keep him at all costs”.
It was clear Ole was inferior to the man he replaced, who already wasn’t good enough.
Last edited:
Indeed, it's baffling.
Not just a business perspective there isn't a single sport where this kind of logic exists and work, whether it is at professional or amateur level. Also I said it multiple times there is no meaningful difference between the 80s and today when it comes to managers or head coaches average tenures, it's under 3 years.
Also it should be said that Arteta won next to nothing and Klopp has one league title in 9 years. Neither are examples of successful models.
Last edited:
I like how you think this is some kind of a gotcha.
Saying that Klopp was just given 5 years is such simplistic, inaccurate nonsense. I wonder why no club in the world is giving this "let's try with this guy for half a decade no matter what" method a try
Yeah, if West Ham hire someone tomorrow they should just set a reminder in their calender for 5 years. By which time they'll be in a league title challenge.
People need to let go of the Fergie myth, he was a great manager who was making progress on and off the pitch. If anyone thinks he was only great because he was given time, they those people should stop watching football. Because they clearly don't get it.
today's the 1 month anniversary, no? I feel alive again. guy had me on the verge of crippling alcoholism
also, Merson
Absolutely bang on. He wanted to be sacked and got himself sacked. He also pulled the I'm going to walk away nonsense when he first joined one of Braga / Sporting I believe. It's a pattern and I hope whoever hires him next sees this and stays far away.
We can all discuss okay if he stuck around would he have made Europe or is Mainoo really that good or if the 3-4-3 is really that much different to a 4-4-2 or how he pulled off a cultural reset or improved player fitness or set pieces and blah blah blah but ultimately the guy didn't want to be here at all.
I don't understand how the narrative suddenly shifted to oh Wilcox is a meddler .. the meddling was just an excuse. He wanted to be sacked, he engineered a bust up and he got sacked. Simple as. Doesn't mean INEOS can't work with a more old school manager like Tuchel or Nagelsmann or whoever and we must get a head coach next.
OleCurls is clearly taking it too far. It's not just a matter of giving just any manager time. And Amorim was a football terrorist who should never have been hired. But at some point if you find one that works within your structure and shows some promise for a few seasons with top 4 performances we aren't obligated to abandon the entire project after a bad half season surely? This constant 30 month manager cycle hasn't gotten us anywhere in there last 12 years.
Surely a mature organization would genuinely look for what went wrong and try to correct for the next year instead of just burning the entire thing down? For example: If the team is unbalanced fix that for the next season. You don't need to fire the manager - of course given he still works within the structure, recognizes the problem correctly and seems competent enough to help you fix the problems - which may not even be on him since now he doesn't control the recruitment.
It’d be a good reminder for some when invoking Fergie and “needing time”, to consider that matching Fergie’s start at United would be the equivalent of Amorim finishing this season with 91 points.
I’m sure a lot of people would have more patience with Amorim next season if he managed such a feat.
That’s exactly what we appear to have done since ineos in fairness, we’re building a structure and taking away the “manager”’ role for a head coach.
The problem hasn’t been changing managers every 30 months, the problem has been allowing every manager to rip up the squad and build it agan in his image. It’s left us in a constant 3 year rebuild, it’s absolutely idiotic.
Last edited:
We'll see. Amorin sort of forced their hand but we'll see what they do moving forward. Honestly the fact that they hired him in the first place made me very cynical about their long term planning. It screamed just getting the shiny toy over regards to what actually fit the club and the squad.
It's frankly uncommon for a head coach or manager to spend close to three years somewhere and not show any success just to show success after that. Typically good managers/head coaches have an impact early in their tenure. And it should be said that United results in the last 13 years aren't actually bad, they are bad in the context of SAF's standards and with regard to the money spent but outside of the last two seasons, United have been around CL Football which is a good level. The reason I make that point isn't to pretend that everything is good but to make the point that our biggest issue is one that everyone has which is reliably hire a top level head coach/manager, no one found the recipe which is why everyone including successful clubs chop and change all the time, at any given time there is maybe three or four bonafide top managers and below that a bunch of flawed candidates.
I don't see what angle there is to defend Amorim. I really don't.
We finished 15th - our lowest ever PL finish - and lost out on a European trophy to fecking Spurs.
We lost 1-0 to a ten man Everton managed by Moysey at Old Trafford not long before he left.
The guy was utterly useless. Period.
We finished 15th - our lowest ever PL finish - and lost out on a European trophy to fecking Spurs.
We lost 1-0 to a ten man Everton managed by Moysey at Old Trafford not long before he left.
The guy was utterly useless. Period.
All the more reason to find one that works for your club and stick with him - again with the caveat that he's reasonable and competent enough to see the problems and have a genuine plan to fix it going forward. Sometimes you have to be like, "ok we're not good this season, we made a mistake here and here, you failed to deal with this and this tactic. here's how we can fix it going forwards, its ok if we don't achieve our objectives this season, we can still complete next season" without having to just fire him because "that's just how football works". Most of football is horribly run. It's full of rich people incompetently running clubs and using the managers as scapegoats to mask their incompetence.
Last edited:
First off I don't think we are where we currently find ourselves solely because we've sacked managers. I would argue at least part of the reason we've struggled so much is we've probably given managers and coaches too much time.
Also while I get your point, why does changing manager mean we've abandoned the project? Surely just as now, we carry on towards our goals with Carrick and then whoever is in charge next year. There should be a plan in place that is not reliant on a particular man being int he dugout.
On your point, yeah there's no reason we should sack a manager after a few bad months if they've had good seasons before that. But it all depends on the circumstances and context of their struggles. The club stood by Ten Hag through his struggles for 18 months. They also kept Amorim in place for over a year while he was struggling despite him having absolutely no money in the bank from previous achievements. So it's clear that Manchester United are not a trigger happy sacking club, quite the opposite in fact. Arguably to our detriment.
Yes absolutely, but I'm not sure Amorim fit any of that criteria. On the pitch he wasn't progressing or adapting. Off the pitch he was publicly lashing out, had constant outbursts throwing players under the bus and behind the scenes seemingly ignoring instructions and requests from his bosses and making every interaction with other figures at the club a battle.
He had to go.
Absolutely, he showed nothing on the pitch in terms of results or performances to warrant any more patience.
And off the pitch his behaviour was incompatible with the positon he held as the public face of Manchester United.
The problem is with finding someone that work, the vast majority don't work. And as an outsider you can say that most clubs are horribly run but you don't actually know better and it's not just Football clubs but pretty much every single sport. The reality of the matter is that sport is highly volatile and almost no one has found a reliable method to hire someone that work for a sustained period of time. That concept is a fantasy that only exist in some fans' minds.
Nah that's not true. Football is a particularly poorly run sport. There's just so many clubs and so many structures, and not all are firing managers left right and center. The problem is if you point to any successful examples you get hit with "everyone isn't that!" because of the aura we create around the success stories.
Klopp was hired after Brendan Rodgers, who was relieved of his duties after 2 seasons (left in October of the third). Arteta was hired after Arsenal dispensed with Unai Emery after ONE full season! I am genuinely curious what you would say in response? Should Rodgers have been given five years and Liverpool let Klopp go somewhere else until they had given Rodgers a fair crack, in your view?
Preaching to the choir about Amorim. I stopped posting here and barely had interest in watching our games under him. It just didn't feel like Man United.
- Status