Not at the moment obviously because the manager they have in charge will never succeed here.
Are you confident of success in the INEOS era?
- Thread starter LawCharltonBest
- Start date
Owners and the structures they build deserve so so much more time than a lot here are really willing to give. Obviously City were way further behind than us but it took four years, but they also had unlimited money. Liverpools took a good while until they got Klopp. Arsenal hired Edu and it looked like a flop until Arteta started to fire (yes they haven’t won anything yet).
Hope disappearing fast due to their baffling reluctance to sack Ten Hag
For all the talk of people wanting to see a new structure, the vast majority of people clearly wanted us to go and spend a shit load of money on Casemiro/Varane type signings in different positions. It might have been OK for a bit but we would have been back here in 18 months.
The situation looks grim at the moment but the process was always going to take time.
And I said on the other thread, everyone wants rid of Ten Hag but people are less vocal about what comes next. People keep talking about short-term/interim options but 10 years of short term options with zero idea of long term strategy has led us to this current situation. Be patient.
The situation looks grim at the moment but the process was always going to take time.
And I said on the other thread, everyone wants rid of Ten Hag but people are less vocal about what comes next. People keep talking about short-term/interim options but 10 years of short term options with zero idea of long term strategy has led us to this current situation. Be patient.
This is quite sensible.
The thing is alot of people who want Ten Hag out (I want him out too), are using that as a stick to beat INEOS. "I dont support INEOS because they haven't sacked Ten Hag"
We dont know what is going on behind the scenes. Berrada and Ashworth took over in July, they are not going to make a rash decision because it doesn't serve anything right now.
Let me paint a different picture to what most people have been paining.
Berrada and Ashworth who are in footballing charge know that Ten Hag isn't good enough, they gave him different tools this summer to try and improve and be Ok, which is why Ten Hag came out and said even top 4 will be difficult.
This shows the club understand where we are at, they could be planning on the next manager who is not available, there is no point putting someone in charge when its not the man they actually want.
We have seen Berrada in the past have the set up ready for the manager they want to take over.
Which is why I think Ten Hag will only be sacked if it becomes completely untenable but I also think there is 0% chance he starts the next season with us too.
Definitely not the majority. Claiming that is just false. Some rare cases for sure, but most I saw wanted to build a squad for the future as they are aware it will take time. But people also wanted to see more creativity instead of signing even more Dutch players.
Yes. But it appears to be going in the wrong direction. Which has to be fixed, the sooner the better.
Did you follow the "Life after EtH" thread? Or other threads about managers who might be an option? People are discussing that, it's just a bit offtopic in this thread (if you only followed this one)
That's true. But hiring an interim who fits an actual (good) long term strategy still is better than what is happening right now.
Guilty as accused
Keeping someone who think isn't good enough and who knows you think that in an executive position (or really, any position) is a recipe for disaster. As a responsible supervisor you need to find a better solution NOW if that is the case.
Where?
Agree on this. Which doesn't mean I like it, but I think you are right here. Just that it's a mistake.
One cannot 'forget the politics' of state ownership.
It is a political act.
Would we be better off? Probably.
Would still feel dirty and hollow.
I understand those that disagree with INEOS keeping ETH after the FA Cup final, and/or with them not sacking him now...but I swear this thread is a great example of most football fans having the attention span of a goldfish. INEOS have already made so many good changes, promising appointments, and shared very ambitious long-term plans like the new stadium as well.
And then, there's one decision some people suddenly don't agree with, and they get labelled as "clueless" etc.
Give me a fecking break...especially when you can just look at it from a long-term point of view, and realize that it's not exactly crucial for United's long-term future whether ETH gets sacked now, or at Christmas, or sees out the season, etc. It doesn't matter as much as you think it does, whether you want him our or not.
And then, there's one decision some people suddenly don't agree with, and they get labelled as "clueless" etc.
Give me a fecking break...especially when you can just look at it from a long-term point of view, and realize that it's not exactly crucial for United's long-term future whether ETH gets sacked now, or at Christmas, or sees out the season, etc. It doesn't matter as much as you think it does, whether you want him our or not.
Yep. Why do people still not understand this?
But there have been lots of decisions and actions I disagree with.And then, there's one decision some people suddenly don't agree with, and they get labelled as "clueless" etc.
Many were simply INEOS acting too slow and not being decisive, getting important people to late in their jobs (which ultimately resulted in EtH still being in the job, but I treat that as a result of earlier failings), some were pure neglect (how they - not - dealt with the women's team was disgraceful), others are weird (enforcing "back to office" policies even if it doesn't make sense.
Allowing EtH to further destroy the club's standing surely is the pinnacle of their bad decisions, but it's not like it is the only one. Sure they did change some things for the better, but overall I don't have a positive impression of INEOS.
Acting slow and indecisive: When?
Getting important people too late in their jobs: Not sure what they could've done here differently. Which appointment was the one where you disagree with Ineos' actions?
Berrada was straightforward and brought in as soon as they could get him.
The same happened with Wilcox, because Southampton acted reasonably.
Is it Ashworth? We basically let Newcastle blink first and made them embarrass themselves by both saving a lot of money by not even going anywhere near their 20 million demand, and also avoided a lengthy gardening leave for him, as it was widely reported at the time that Ashworth might not even get to start his new job in this calendar year, unless we give in to Newcastle's ridiculous demands...but we took advantage of their PSR situation and it was them who blinked first, ultimately.
I'm not sure Ineos could've acted better than they did in any of the three cases, unless you expected them to change British laws and abolish the gardening leave altogether...
I agree about the women's team being neglected, that's not ideal.
"Allowing EtH to further destroy the club's standing" not sure what you mean by this...
Probably because it's me telling them...
Guilty as accused
Keeping someone who think isn't good enough and who knows you think that in an executive position (or really, any position) is a recipe for disaster. As a responsible supervisor you need to find a better solution NOW if that is the case.
Where?
Agree on this. Which doesn't mean I like it, but I think you are right here. Just that it's a mistake.
The decision to keep Ten Hag was made before Berrada and Ashworth joined though. They are also looking at other elements within the club, yes I get the manager needs to be sacked and I have been quite vocal saying if he doesnt then we could be in relegation battle etc.. so I understand the need to find a solution NOW.
However; we can see we are making improvements that will take a longer term to come to fruition and the fans want results now. There could also be a possibility that they hired Ruud and Hake in a view to sack Ten Hag and give them the interim and whilst the season has gone on realised, actually neither are actually any good so the succession plan may not work.
We have always criticised the former structure to be reactive rather than proactive, now we are moaning that the new board isn't as reactive as Woodward...
Berrada and Ashworth have been in clubs Barca and City, mainly City where they got everyone in about 12 months before Pep came in. Ashworth got the recruitment of managers at Brighton and Newcastle right too.
This isn't quite accurate, in fairness. Tony Bloom has always been the brains behind the operation at Brighton. He was the one who appointed Graham Potter, Roberto De Zerbi and now Fabian Hürzeler. He's the reason they continue to be in somewhat decent shape despite losing players like Mac Allister, Caicedo, White, Bissouma, Groß, Trossard, Cucurella and staff members like Potter, Ashworth, Winstanley, Jewell in quick succession. Dan Ashworth did not recruit the manager of Newcastle United either. Eddie Howe has been at the club since 2021, whereas Dan Ashworth was appointed sporting director in 2022.
Fair enough but if you look at the signings for both, they are all at a good age profile, his work for England also was very good.
I believe they should have been able to fill every position they wanted to have their people in around the time Wilcox started work at latest. So I'm fine with Wilcox, but the new CEO and DOF started far too late in my opinion. And I don't write their names in this sentence because I believe that there could have been alternatives to Berrada and Ashworth who are just as good. Waiting for them for roughly up to nine months (considering the timing the talks to take over started as the starting point) is what I think was acting too slow.
Which is exactly my point. They (or someone else in their job) should have been there in time to be able to make that decision. Them being appointed far too late to set the direction for this season effectively wasted this season in my opinion.
I think INEOS heart is at the right place and things will improve. I do wonder whether that's enough for us to compete with Abu Dhabi and Saudi
United are so big they should compete with Abu Dhabi and Saudi anyway, especially in a world of PSR (or whatever FPP is this week).
We are losing money mate
Yes, I get that but this is one of those things you have to deal with right? They were on gardening leave so not much INEOS could do once they identified their men.
We just have to be a bit patient before judging INEOS, I think they an be successful, but the next year and next managerial appointment will be crucial.
Not really sure much has changed other than the optics so far.
The long--term plan has to be led by the club. Short-term managers are fine as long as they suit the rough style of play that the club wants to develop. That way they can easily be fired if they end up failing (or even if they do a decent job but can't take us any further) and then replaced with another relatively easily. Obviously each manager will have differences, but it won't require an entire rebuild of the playing squad or all the players having to be coached to a completely different style.
Considering how ETH has us playing, I'll be quite worried if there isn't someone available who is closer to how we ultimately want to play, even if they probably aren't good enough in the long-term.
Last edited:
The deal between the Glazers and Ratcliffe was completed in December 2023, and the whole thing was only ratified by the Premier League in February 2024. I'd argue Ineos getting Berrada and Ashworth to start in the summer was actually impressive from them.
I don't doubt that there must've been alternatives, and I would've been more than satisfied with guys like Mitchell or Freedman, especially the latter from Palace would've been a very intriguing appointment for me, but these are long-term roles that these guys must've taken up with the view of them staying in it for multiple years...and I think Ineos hired them with the same expectations...so if we look at the bigger picture, starting 1-2 months later than some potential alternatives doesn't make a difference long-term IMO...and the alternatives would've had to serve gardening leaves too, at least some of them.
Last edited:
Its interesting just how little faith the fans have in the new management. I suspect its borne of a decade of awful decisions by the last guys rather than anything they've done. Ratcliffe took over in February, but realistically his team only arrived in July. So they've had their hands on the tiller for about 3 months now, yet many have given up on them.
I often see posts complaining about the optics of things - whether its keeping ETH or Fergie's ambassadorial role - but I think the general chatter shows that there's little value in them worrying about what fans think. Big words and glossy interviews kept people happy until literally the first bump in the road, at which point many turned.
The only thing that will change minds is success on the pitch, something for which there's no shortcut. Until that happens, they just need to take the hits on the chin and not worry about it. And if they're not successful in 3 years time, any efforts to change fans' minds now will have meant nothing anyway.
I often see posts complaining about the optics of things - whether its keeping ETH or Fergie's ambassadorial role - but I think the general chatter shows that there's little value in them worrying about what fans think. Big words and glossy interviews kept people happy until literally the first bump in the road, at which point many turned.
The only thing that will change minds is success on the pitch, something for which there's no shortcut. Until that happens, they just need to take the hits on the chin and not worry about it. And if they're not successful in 3 years time, any efforts to change fans' minds now will have meant nothing anyway.
Yes, but I don't piss my pants with misguided rage when I read every clickbate article and don't expect overnight miracles either.
Its way too early to call, the appointments "upstairs" appear on paper to be the right ones with good CV's and football people which has long been the criticism on this forum. It'll take a couple of seasons before we know whether they're doing the right things, its not a quick fix and winning football matches is 1 strand of what they're doing, their job is far broader.
I agree and people like the Ineos team (or the Glazers for that matter) will have very little interest in fan sentiment at this stage, the point about bump in the road is right too and is largely us losing a game, the Berrada thread got bumped after our last loss which was laughable
Which means they will have entered talks a bit earlier and decided to try it even earlier. Which is why I believe they could have had first informal talks with candidates to join their new structure after the takeover in autumn 2023. This is how I come to the roughly nine months time.
Obviously I advocate for people who could have joined in time, so extended gardening leave would have been a problem IMO. But I do think that it makes a big difference. I am absolutely sure that a competent recruitment team and manager could have ensured that United qualify for the CL again. As of now it looks difficult to reach any European tournament. Which means a financial loss of 100m+ for the club and a loss of attractivity for new players/managers if United can't offer CL football.
I don't really like treating top four like a trophy, but I see it as a basic foundation for a top club to be one and continue to be at the top and having a platform to launch PL/CL title challenges.
This is because fans only see the management side of it. For instance, if they sacked Ten Hag and got someone the fans want... it would be wow! INEOS are amazing. I remember when Woodward stepped down and Murtough got Ten Hag, the term used was Murtough madness.
Its interesting the same fans will comment on Chelsea forums saying their board has no idea what its doing, signing loads of players, sacking managers but will also say INEOS have no clue because they are not sacking the manager.
As fans we jump the gun fairly quick and dont listen to what the board is telling us. We have had a bad structure generally, with little to no engagement. INEOS have given us multiple messages saying its a long term fix.. but obviously as fans we want it short term. They are probably looking at a long term managerial option, instead of always being reactive.
The problem is that we didn't know how long they'd be unavailable until after they'd handed in their resignation at the previous club, at which time we obviously can't just turn around and say "It's taking too long, we're cancelling our contract offer and finding someone else." Admittedly going for City and Newcastle staff members does increase the odds of it happening, but the same could have happened with anyone unless they were currently out of work (which is obviously limiting our options significantly).
Sure we could have paid the unreasonable fee that Newcastle demanded, but that would have instantly put us in a bad spot optically at a time when we're briefing that we're not going to be held to ransom with transfer fees anymore.
You are right with everything you write I think and I acknowledge that it was difficult for INEOS to have a good start. But still I think they didn't have one.
Which doesn't fill me with confidence in them as I think United needs to be "rescued" by people who can find good solutions in difficult situations. This just didn't look like that for me.
We don't really need INEOS to be making those decisions and finding those solutions going forward though. We need the people they put in place to run the club (ie. Berrada, Ashworth, Wilcox) to be able to do it, while INEOS mostly stay out of it from this point forward. Honestly, the more INEOS themselves get involved, the more worried I'll be that things won't go well. Now obviously they had to be main decision makers up until we bought those guys in, but in the future that should be largely irrelevant (or at least that's my hope).
That's true. I think they didn't have a good start, but I also think INEOS made it hard for them to have a good start. But that might not be Berrada's or Ashworth's fault personally.
I think they have made both good decisions and bad ones. Jury is very much still out. Their Nice endeavor has largely been a flop when compared to the promises they made.
We shall see if United is any different.
Think it's to early to say either way.
We shall see if United is any different.
Think it's to early to say either way.
Absolutely not. Done with any trust advances. Trust ist gained by action. So far, not impressed. Let's see what the future brings.
Absolutely not. Decision making so far has been appalling. They are also tight cnuts. And fc Nice still being rubbish after all these years isn’t encouraging either.
I have absolutely zero confidence in the minority owners ability to bring success at this point other than perhaps the occasional domestic cup, if they cant make the simple decision sack the manager thats had us playing embarrasing and hopeless football for the last 9 months how can anyone have any confidence in their ability to bring success?