Mal donaghy
Full Member
Tukaaaarrrrr jjjjooooobbbbsss !!
Is it possible they're waiting to see if Liverpool win the Europa and they can announce it tomorrow morning to overshadow it in the news stories?
#blindhope
No.Is it possible they're waiting to see if Liverpool win the Europa and they can announce it tomorrow morning to overshadow it in the news stories?
#blindhope
Very good summary. Just came in to post something like this.I'm sorry but the "divine right" argument is really, really, really stupid. It would be like saying that you can't complain about Memphis performances because he doesn't have a divine right to be good at football.
Clubs have goals that reflects their means, if they invest and work to achieve their goals, they ought to reach them. Fans expectations almost always reflect the means and goals set by the clubs themselves, they don't pull them from their backsides.
Asked when he needed to sign a contract by, the London-based Mourinho responded: “June 30 – that’s fine.”
Its immaterial of the shirt they wear. Evans is in a WBA side that face attacks far more often and don't play possession football, and as such would be far more exposed than Rojo would. Anyway, my point is Evans last year was no way near as pathetic as Rojo is this year. Rojo is absolute cack for us this year and its overkill to say Evans was worse in a united shirt. McNair was playing very well last year, even by a mature CBs standards, so you saying Mcnair outperformed Rojo means little.
Rooney scored 2 more goals over 6 more appearances. Robin's goals to game ratio was actually (marginally) better, and that's ignoring the fact that more of his apps were off the bench. You can't say "Either him or Rooney had to be benched and it was always going to be him". He's unequivocally a better striker and always has been. Yes, you can say it was always going to be Rooney because of the English bias/illogical LVG love... but that just points to the lack of logic in choosing Rooney and selling RvP (hence my point).
Yes, we ideally would have preferred more quality than Nani but we didn't get it. So really it was daft to sell him with this in mind. Defoe has 15 goals this season, he'd improve City, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea let alone us. Not that it has anything to do with our discussion (or the Mourinho one for that matter).
It won't be announced until 30th June. That's when Mourinho said he was going to start his next job. Presumably, there was a clause in his Chelsea contract that prevents him from joining any club sooner than that.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/may/12/jose-mourinho-management-june-manchester-united
Another 6 weeks to wait.
It won't be announced until 30th June. That's when Mourinho said he was going to start his next job. Presumably, there was a clause in his Chelsea contract that prevents him from joining any club sooner than that.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/may/12/jose-mourinho-management-june-manchester-united
Another 6 weeks to wait.
It depends on the clauses in Mourinho's Chelsea contract. The fact he mentions a specific date suggests that a move wouldn't be as clean as when we left Nike. Not all contracts are the same. Some include non-disclosure clauses.Nah, there would no reason that - once LVG is given the flick - they couldn't announce it. Even if that meant he officially started on 1st July, there would be no contractual issue announcing it. Think about when our Nike kit deal was running down, we announced Adidas prior to it starting and while Nike was still running. Same basic principle.
If there wasn't a load of legal red tape involved, Mourinho would have taken over in January. There's obviously something stopping Mourinho's appointment and, presumably, the announcement thereof.Even assuming he couldn't start until that date, there's not really a good reason to suggest it couldn't be announced long before then. Moyes couldn't join until his contract allowed it, we still announced him (shudder).
It won't be announced until 30th June. That's when Mourinho said he was going to start his next job. Presumably, there was a clause in his Chelsea contract that prevents him from joining any club sooner than that.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/may/12/jose-mourinho-management-june-manchester-united
Another 6 weeks to wait.
If there wasn't a load of legal red tape involved, Mourinho would have taken over in January. There's obviously something stopping Mourinho's appointment and, presumably, the announcement thereof.
We won't announce the signing of a contract until a contract has been signed! Read what Mourinho says. He can't sign anything until 30th June, presumably for legal reasons.Once LvG has gone there's nothing to stop us announcing Mourinho will start on 1st July, even if he can't officially be employed by the club until then.
I can just about imagine one where he couldn't sign for a club until the summer, thus forcing us to stick with Van Gaal for the rest of the season and keep quiet so as not to undermine his position. Doing it after he's been sacked would be nonsensical.The statement doesn't even say he has to wait until then, it says he signs one by then. Which has a completely different meaning to what you're saying.If there wasn't a load of legal red tape involved, Mourinho would have taken over in January. There's obviously something stopping Mourinho's appointment and, presumably, the announcement thereof.
There's absolutely nothing stopping us announcing he's taking over from 1 July. His Chelsea contract will prevent him taking a new post before that date, they can't stop him from finding one and confirming he'll be starting then.It depends on the clauses in Mourinho's Chelsea contract. The fact he mentions a specific date suggests that a move wouldn't be as clean as when we left Nike. Not all contracts are the same. Some include non-disclosure clauses.
Given the faff that's gone on since December (when LvG looked odds on to get the sack) you'd have to imagine that Mourinho has had his hands tied and mouth gagged for the the last 5 months. Otherwise, he'd have been appointed by New Year's day.
We won't announce the signing of a contract until a contract has been signed! Read what Mourinho says. He can't sign anything until 30th June, presumably for legal reasons.
Mourinho's second contract with Abramovic was probably quite different form Moyes' with Kenwright!There's absolutely nothing stopping us announcing he's taking over from 1 July. His Chelsea contract will prevent him taking a new post before that date, they can't stop him from finding one and confirming he'll be starting then.
Moyes Everton contract ran till 30 June which is why he didn't start with us til 1 July, it didn't stop us announcing it.
Abramovic might be a cnut but he can't just rewrite contract law.Mourinho's second contract with Abramovic was probably quite different form Moyes' with Kenwright!
It depends on the clauses in Mourinho's Chelsea contract. The fact he mentions a specific date suggests that a move wouldn't be as clean as when we left Nike. Not all contracts are the same. Some include non-disclosure clauses.
Given the faff that's gone on since December (when LvG looked odds on to get the sack) you'd have to imagine that Mourinho has had his hands tied and mouth gagged for the the last 5 months. Otherwise, he'd have been appointed by New Year's day.
Noncompete agreements are fairly common.Abramovic might be a cnut but he can't just rewrite contract law.
Yes, and prevent a person from starting work within a set time frame, not from sourcing a job to start when that time frame ends.Noncompete agreements are fairly common.
Noncompete agreements are fairly common.
I think he was referring to the fact that noncompete agreements are common in contract law. Not necessarily that article.And how do you know this? Where in the article does it say Jose had that sort of agreement?
Jose said in his first statement since leaving Chelsea that he is looking to get back into work immediately. He rejected Real Madrid and other silly offers. The reason we haven't signed him is down to Woodward wanting to give Van Gaal a chance.
Incidentally, the link I posted suggests that Mourinho can't even sign until June 30th. That clearly points to some sort of clause preventing the signing of a contract. And until something gets officially signed, nobody's going to announce shit. Not even the sacking of LvG.
I think he was referring to the fact that noncompete agreements are common in contract law. Not necessarily that article.
That's what I was trying to tell you. He may not be referring to Jose in particular. He was making a general statement that contracts have noncompete clauses.Yeah and how does he know Jose has a non compete clause?
WBA essentially defend with everyone except the CF. it's easier for a defender to play there. Even if Blackett plays there he will look half decent.
Anyway It's not relevant how rojo was this season. When we sold Evans we sold the worst CB at the time in our squad.
Benefit of Hindsight isn't something available when a decision is made. Same with Nani. We replaced him with someone who did better than him in a poor league. Memphis. Memphis not doing well cannot be foreseen. Fergie once sold shawcross because we had pique and Evans. In hindsight maybe shawcross would have been a better option as pique left and Evans didn't develop like he did. But hindsight wasn't available. It's a similar thing.
Not really. Rooney is much more useful for a team. RvP can play as a striker and that's it. Rooney at least can do a job as a 10 and even in midfield if required. Plus he was our captain with more years on his contract than RvP and also the country captain. Also less likely to be injured. All must have played a part. It seems a pretty sensible choice which every manager would have taken except Fergie maybe. For instance even when Diego Lopez was better than casillas Madrid still sold Lopez. It's easy for us fans to think sell Rooney but there are lots of things to factor in.
A defender playing for West Brom is called into action far more than a defender playing for Manchester United. That much is fact.
It is, because you said Evans last year was worse than Rojo (This year if I'm not mistaken?) Anyway, I never had an issue with selling Evans. But saying he's a worse player than Rojo is just silly. Yes, he had a terrible season. But he has also had superb ones. Rojo hasn't been able to put a run of even 3-5 games of consistency for us in 2 years.
You don't need hindsight to know that selling Di Maria, Nani, Wellbeck, RvP and Hernandez would result in goal droughts and a lack of creativity. It was being screamed out by fans and pundits alike very early in the season.
Also, you had an issue with comparing Nani and RvP in Turkey to the playing Premier League because its a lesser league. You can't then use Memphis' dutch league form to defend the logic of replacing Nani at United, a player who had a good 18 months of consistently great form in the Premier League prior to injury.
I never said sell Rooney. I said when faced with the choice of Rooney and RvP (ie by way of a striker, which I didn't specify but was implicated because we are discussing our attack rather than midfield), its obviously RvP. Rooney being deployed in midfield makes selling RvP an even bigger brainfart because he was our only proven goalscorer.
Evans had good seasons when Fergie was here. Since he left he has had handful of good games and is injured most of the time. Rojo was quite clearly the better defender last season. A defender of WBA has more help in the form of a defensive unit. They play 3 DMs sometimes and CBs as fullbacks. It's easier to defend in such a system than otherwise.
That was exactly my point. Nani had a good season in Portugal but Memphis had an even better season in Holland. So it made sense. I was talking about hindsight just in respect to nani. We should have replaced Hernandez (assuming RvP was replaced by martial) and di Maria.
As for selling RvP it was he who wanted to leave to a club where he wasn't second choice.
LvG isn't the answer.
Jose isn't the answer.
Giggs isn't the answer.
United still in complete existential crisis.
Ay, this is rubbish. Contrary to the dramatic image you like to present, being a shit football team doesn't benefit the Glazer's, Woodward, the rest of the board or the playing staff.
Our position now benefits nobody at all, because we're in a position that can lead to the reduction of sponsorship revenue and profit. Lots of people like to remind us just how much the Glazer's care only about the money. The bottom line, as you call it.
Well if that's true, then that financial security is in a degree of jeapordy. Keeping Van Gaal isn't "the least difficult thing to do." It's by far the riskiest. It's for that reason we'll make the change in a matter of weeks, if not days.
To see so much anger in this thread borders on impressive. I stopped giving much of a feck a good while back now, in the hope I can enjoy the football for what it is and forget about it the for rest of the week. It's so much easier that way.
feck! Wenger!I see a pattern. Do we consider a manager with one more letter in their name each time?
feck! Wenger!