When did I make stuff up? All I was saying is Lukaku was sold in last 2 days of the market. In the last 2 days he was still a United player, and he was still under contract, and we failed to secure any replacement for him during the summer. Why did we let him go then in the dying minutes of the market knowing fully well he wouldn't be replaced as there was no more time to search for a replacement. We could have always forced him to stay for 1 more season and he would have to play, no more options for him. Cancel the deal and sell him next summer, much better than entering the season with such options. Not all players get their wish of leaving instantly. Pogba wanted to leave the last 2 summers and he's still here. Hazard had wanted to leave Chelsea for years and only got his wish last summer. The club is in full control as long as players are under contract so saying "but he wanted to leave" as an excuse for letting him go without replacement doesn't make sense for me. We know he wouldn't get replaced and still let him go anyway.
Beside have we really been in the market for any top striker? Only striker we were interested in was Mandzukic, 34 years old, who wasn't going to be anything here more than a backup. All evidences point to the fact that Ole was content with Rashford and Martial as options, and wanted to sell Lukaku and get short term backup option. When he failed to get him he still had no problems agreeing on Lukaku sale in the dying minutes of the market. Otherwise why did not we keep him? Since when the club chooses the options for transfers and not the managers at United? Ed always leaves the targets and choices for the manager. He sucks in negotiating deals but he doesn't put the list of players chosen himself.
Yes it's hindsight, but for us, however it's the duty of the manager to analyze every possible outcome and has a better and longer sight vision than some fans on internet. He should have analyzed which would have been better, spending another season with Smalling while reinforcing the attack and midfield or spending 130m on defense alone while leaving the attack and defense to dry. If he isn't the one to do such analysis then who would? And if he did then he took the wrong choice, obviously. He has to live and die with his choices.
I like Ole as a person, he's a decent block and a lovely guy, but he has been unfortunately a terrible manager here from every single perspective. His management of injuries, his organization of transfer window and targets, his tactics and boring football, his quotes and pressers. Even the young players thing he only plays 2 of them regularly (Greenwood and Williams) while preferring the likes of Lingard ahead of Gomes, at least LvG was playing shite ton of youngsters while having an injury crisis. Nothing in his short reign will be worth noting few years from now on. He hasn't put a base for anything and the next manager will find a team that has no football style or identity and needs ton of money to compete after what we had done in the full summer Ole got.
Yes we have other different problems in the club and yes the next manager might fail but doesn't change anything from the fact that Ole is another big problem. Both aren't related.
The real question to be asked is if we miraculously get a better board and get a top class squad over the night will anyone trust Ole then to lead them to glory? I guess the answer on such question is gonna be obvious for most here. He wasn't even on the list of anyone to replace the previous manager before he got the interim job.
We can agree to disagree or have this discussion in other thread about Ole.
