I don't agree. They stated the process they were going to use. Used the process, not letting the FA cup euphoria get to them and made a decision. The media made it out to be a debacle when it was a logical process really. If INEOS had been in place throughout the course of last season, he would have definitely been sacked. The truth is, not everyone in leadership or the fanbase believes that he's the person to drive us forward. So a long review was necessary to come to a clear path forward for the immediate future, which would have needed to take time. This is clearly not Abramovich with Chelsea or Levy with Spurs where solitary figures can make quick decisive decisions. Some of which can be good, but a lot of which can be impulsive. With this group and even with the process they used, they cannot be accused of being impulsive.
The situation with Ashworth can happen and has happened with many other clubs. Newcastle decided to be petty over it. As a club, we're trying to change how we deal with situations with other clubs who try to fleece us. We also can't renege on our commitment to Ashworth, now that would be amateur. So, in the long run, this is just a small step in the process that fans and media are overblowing because their too impatient for the structure they asked for.
Structure includes having a process of assessment that might take time. This structure includes having a laser eye focus on the manager and not letting them run free.
Ten Haag and the squad are the ones that had a poor campaign last year, not INEOS. If he had a better campaign, there won't have been an evaluation period needed, but like any employee who has been underperforming, a review should have been expected. We didn't treat him unfairly as the process was spelled out to him and his performances justified such a process. His job from preseason onward is to prove that he actually does have the tactical and man management capacity to drive us forward.