At what point are we going to say it's the manager?

[norm87cro]

Mourhino and Ole got slaughtered here so I guess its that "we found a new euro Jesus" kind of thing that keeps about 50% of the CAF on ETHs side aldo he has done f... all to earn that kind of loyalty

 

[Chumpsbechumps]

Excellent come-back post. I respect it. My point about Fernandez was that although I like Reguilon, Fernandez was good enough to have a chance and just another example of the favouritism and inconsistency that ten Hag is guilty of. I'm also not referring to De Gea staying on but just the manner in which he was jettisoned out of the club for no reason. I would promote more youngsters in place of Maguire, Martial etc. (they can't be any worse), and I'm sorry but you don't bench Varane behind Maguire, Lindelof, Evans and an out-of-position Shaw, you just don't. And despite all of ten Hag's positive achievements, when you look at the overall picture, you just see the same sequence of events unfolding as with all the other managers post SAF.

The question is at what point do say it's the manager? You can't deny that he is scoring some massive own goals at the moment. And who else is going to take responsibility for team performances?

“At what point do you blame the manager” is interesting if you have a more inquisitive, as opposed to a more absolute opinion on the topic.

One could argue that no other manager at United has had to navigate so many issues at the one time. No one United manager has had all the usual issues and more.

I think it’s a very fair question but there’s so much been going on it’s a hard one to answer.

The mistakes ETH has made are far worse because I don’t think United in its current situation is a place that can afford mistakes. I personally think that everything that could go wrong or unsettle things is happening all at the same time.

In saying that, it’s hard to defend what you see on the pitch. It’s hard to really know how much of this is a manager struggling to juggle everything versus a dysfunctional club making it harder the it needs to be. Maybe it’s a bit of both.

when it comes to “he’s spent 400 million” I wonder how relevant that truly is.the Chelsea owners have spent over double that in the same tine and look at how that’s gone. The previous owner knew how to run the club.

This is at the heart of the divide on manager I think. People think “the glazers don’t coach the team” as if what the glazers do or don’t do is completely separate from the team. Signing off on top targets , having finance or commercial people in positions that do affect first team (pre season or player retention for book value), top 4 target (turn off funds when we get top 4- look at transfers season after we qualify for CL) and many other thugs that have been highlighted in the past.

We keep buying players who are available, it’s remarkable how many top signings United make where it’s players looking for a move. On paper they look good and have a “why would any manager not want them” look , but they were not planned and usually look like part of our lack of planning.

I want to see what a fit ETH team with no other dramas looks like. Ownership clarity, no injuries (and players Fit, not just available), no player issues/scandals , players like martial gone (why is he even here), an actual starting fit striker etc. these aren’t crazy requests for a super club, but we can’t even put our manager in a position to have some of the most basic things that other top clubs take as a give.

I mean even thinking of the Ighalo, weghorst, martial situation, that’s what United managers have to work with up front. Do people think these are the strikers man United managers want? This is what our club has given our managers. I don’t see Klopp/pep having a beautifully balanced front line with this options.

I feel like people act like managers are ringfenced from the sh*t and all they have to do is coach. I wish it were that simple. How do Varane and Casamerio feel when they see United have to start either martial or an unproven/unfit Houjland? How do they feel when they see our manager have to get loanees in because the club hasn’t the funds to act like a proper super club?

People need to realise that players need hope and when our club does things like sign Dalot and Fred to help bridge the gap with city, it destroys everything. Managers might aswell quite when the club has quited.

 

[Alex99]

I see this argument over and over again, we dont give managers time. But seriously the appointed managers are so horrible appointed! None of them is top tier. Moyes struggles everywhere, Van Gaal had some good ideas but it was sadly time when he got sacked, never liked Mourinho even though he had some tactics they are just outdated and boring, I liked Ole but never ever a top tier manager and never good enough for United and now ETH one with a promising style of play from Ajax - said the right things in the beginning but fails in every aspect, maybe because he have not tried to manage a top side before, a club without a clear structure and a club who demands a lot of you. The job is not suited for any of the appointed managers. So for me its all back to the Glazers.

I wasn't arguing that we should have given those managers more time. I was pointing out that no one argued for them to have more time.

Regardless of whether anyone thinks they should have had more time, all of them were sacked as soon as things slipped even a bit.

They were all horrible appointments, and Ten Hag is the first "modern" manager we've hired, which in itself is a massive indictment of the Glazers and the clowns they've employed to run the club, and even if it turns out he's not up to the job, we're going to look for someone of a similar profile to replace him.

 

[desirere]

You mean most of the players he's brought in?

Exactly that is the issue, he shouldn't be the one bringing in anyone. We are stuck in the past.

And just to clarify something Casemiro has been one of our few best players in a very successful season, this year he's a turd, but also injured. Varane last year very good, this year a bit of injuries and all in all bad form (just like the rest). Martinez is awesome and him missing has hurt us a LOT. Anthony still young, has time, too expensive being the only issue for me. Hojlund a really good investment, maybe 10 mil over what should have been, but still. Onana and Mount are the only ones anyone could argue so far to be flops, but even then it's too early.

We need a footballing structure that handles everything transfer-related, the only thing a manager does is describe what he needs and the scouting department should hand him 5-10 names he can choose from.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Hence why I highlighted how no one would argue to give them more time. Fans simply aren't arguing to blindly give managers six or seven years in the vain hope they'll turn into Ferguson, which is what is argued whenever anyone dares suggest we have a little more patience, or that the manager isn't solely to blame.

The reality is that Ten Hag is the first time we've attempted to hire a remotely "modern" manager (or however you want to describe him) and any replacement should be of a similar profile.

I do think that there's a reasonable argument for having a full reset again when the INEOS deal finally happens, but we are going to have to be patient with whoever comes in as there's a lot of work to do. We also need to understand that finishing in the top four one year isn't a guarantee that we'll manage it again the year after.

I get where you are coming from. If there's some real potential that could be seen from the manager, I wouldn't mind giving him 3 years despite getting periodically poor results. The question is, whether ETH is likely to be the one we could count on, or just another flops like what we've had over past decade. I'd say Fergie is probably one in a million (sort of), and we could have tried 20 or 50 other managers and none would have ended up one fifth as good, even if we have given them long term trust.

 

[RedPed]

“At what point do you blame the manager” is interesting if you have a more inquisitive, as opposed to a more absolute opinion on the topic.

One could argue that no other manager at United has had to navigate so many issues at the one time. No one United manager has had all the usual issues and more.

I think it’s a very fair question but there’s so much been going on it’s a hard one to answer.

The mistakes ETH has made are far worse because I don’t think United in its current situation is a place that can afford mistakes. I personally think that everything that could go wrong or unsettle things is happening all at the same time.

In saying that, it’s hard to defend what you see on the pitch. It’s hard to really know how much of this is a manager struggling to juggle everything versus a dysfunctional club making it harder the it needs to be. Maybe it’s a bit of both.

when it comes to “he’s spent 400 million” I wonder how relevant that truly is.the Chelsea owners have spent over double that in the same tine and look at how that’s gone. The previous owner knew how to run the club.

This is at the heart of the divide on manager I think. People think “the glazers don’t coach the team” as if what the glazers do or don’t do is completely separate from the team. Signing off on top targets , having finance or commercial people in positions that do affect first team (pre season or player retention for book value), top 4 target (turn off funds when we get top 4- look at transfers season after we qualify for CL) and many other thugs that have been highlighted in the past.

We keep buying players who are available, it’s remarkable how many top signings United make where it’s players looking for a move. On paper they look good and have a “why would any manager not want them” look , but they were not planned and usually look like part of our lack of planning.

I want to see what a fit ETH team with no other dramas looks like. Ownership clarity, no injuries (and players Fit, not just available), no player issues/scandals , players like martial gone (why is he even here), an actual starting fit striker etc. these aren’t crazy requests for a super club, but we can’t even put our manager in a position to have some of the most basic things that other top clubs take as a give.

I mean even thinking of the Ighalo, weghorst, martial situation, that’s what United managers have to work with up front. Do people think these are the strikers man United managers want? This is what our club has given our managers. I don’t see Klopp/pep having a beautifully balanced front line with this options.

I feel like people act like managers are ringfenced from the sh*t and all they have to do is coach. I wish it were that simple. How do Varane and Casamerio feel when they see United have to start either martial or an unproven/unfit Houjland? How do they feel when they see our manager have to get loanees in because the club hasn’t the funds to act like a proper super club?

People need to realise that players need hope and when our club does things like sign Dalot and Fred to help bridge the gap with city, it destroys everything. Managers might aswell quite when the club has quited.

He bought in his own players in and you would argue that none of them are performing on a consistent basis, if at all. He's also very inconsistent in his man management, dropping some players after one bad game but blind to the ineffectiveness of others. Those two factors alone are purely down to him.

 

[parmenio]

Any Manager who keeps picking Martial deserves the boot imo. No doubt Rashford and Him will start together again soon and guess what neither will try a jot.

 

[Acheron]

He would have been sacked already at most big clubs in Europe. It's a long-term legacy of Ferguson's unique story of escaping the sack and setting up a dynasty, and then Ferguson saying you must back the manager when he left, that United are very patient with managers. But every case is different, there is no guarantee it will get any better with patience.

Yes it is different in every case and Manchester United also has different circumstances than let's say Bayern. As the team seems to be constantly in transition it's not as clear if the problem are the players, the manager, both or something else.

 

[Okey]

We can have more than one problem. The manager definitely seems to be one at the moment. Let's see what we serve up tonight. Jekyll and Hyde have nothing on us these days, at least result's-wise.

 

[The Oracle]

A must win game in the Champions League group stage at home...

and his team produced one shot on target all night in the 23rd minute, with that shot being a strike from Luke Shaw outside of the box, straight at their keeper who saw it out over the bar for a corner.

One shot on target. Come on that's pathetic.