Club Ownership | INEOS responsible for the football side

Status
Not open for further replies.
golden_blunder said:
Do you still work for them?
Click to expand...

No, I was only there part time in a couple of different roles for a few years, but I know a lot of people who struggled on there and the way the management handled the pandemic and forced office closures was the final straw for most. Every single person I knew there left over the last 2-3 years.

Werd. said:
Shagging the waitstaff :lol:

Reminds me of a multinational I previously worked at where there were weekly management only orgy sessions with the hot P.As they hand-picked for recruitment..
Click to expand...

Exactly the same toxic culture. A load of middle aged bald men with zero skills lording it over their staff, boasting to anyone that would listen that they were a manager at Manchester United and abusing their position in any way imaginable.

I really feel for the women who worked there, it was like going back to the 70s in terms of attitudes. All complaints from female members of staff were fed back directly to the person accused before being brushed under the carpet.

There was a manager there who had been forced out after years of staff complaining about bullying, but months later they rehired him with a promotion. He immediately set about hiring a woman who he'd previously 'worked with' elsewhere despite her total lack of skills and relevant experience. She threatened and bullied anyone who was unfortunate to work under her, and it took repeated sightings and reports from multiple people at United catching the two of them in the middle of various compromising positions before the club gently asked them to resign their positions.

I honestly don't believe there was anything you could do to get the sack there so long as you had 'manager' in your job title.
 
Escobar said:
Yeah right, as if the employer cannot change anything and needs to follow the employees commands. If they dont like it, resign
Click to expand...
That's not how contracts work though, is it?

Also, did it ever occur to you that offering remote working allows an organisation to attract staff it otherwise would not be able to due to geographic limitations? As an example, that's how I got my job. They tried to find someone local with my skills and experience but came up short for 12 months. They offered me remote working because it is advantageous for both parties - they get to employ me and I don't have to travel the 120 miles there and back every day.

United could be unnecessarily losing excellent members of staff out of nothing but ignorant and dated ideology.
 
Last edited:
Lash said:
The tidiness one I don't really care about, it seems a weird thing to focus on, but I'm not against making sure you don't work in a shithole.

The WFH is just a typical thing people point to when things aren't going well or try to improve something, when clearly there are far more important things that effect performance. It's a dumb power move and old hat.

There's nothing wrong with your second point of trimming the fat of a big company. Dressing it up as a WFH policy being a problem is just stupid, because you'll also lose good employees as well as the ones you think are taking the piss. Not every WFH advocate is lazy and everyone who goes to the office is a harder worker.

Funnily enough in my old company, was a big part of my role with the consulting base. Just to clarify no where near the size of United, but still a big publicly traded fintech.

I like how they've been ruthless at exec level, that is certainly how it should be. Attacking a policy that's a benefit for most lower level workers on spurious grounds, is just dumb.

Sure, but like with every exec, I guarantee they'll get special dispensation and will be out the office a lot of the time.

Of course it's at their discretion, it's just stupid to take away a policy based on very little data backing up it's an issue. If you think people aren't working, you can discipline them and put them on performance plans. If you think people work better in person, you can just designate days where all the team should be in or strive to be and use collaboration tools. There are so many options to you apart from a blanket cancel of a policy that benefits your workers.
Click to expand...
Agreed entirely.
 
philipos said:
Would be helpful if you could elaborate just a little on this sweeping statement.
Click to expand...

All of the marginal gains bollocks. Most inside British Cycking freely take the piss out of him for it. He wrapped some business speaks around professionalism and made it all about him.

British Cycling and Olympic success came about through obscene amounts of money being thrown at it. He didn’t get clever and trailblaze his way through adversity and compete against better nations through 1% gains. It was dickloads of money.

Team Sky? Leaving aside the fact they never became a top cycling team and only focused on the Grand Tours… that was all about money too. They were like The City of pro cycling. Spending money across the whole year to focus 70% on France and less so on Italy/Spain. It’s not like it was a new idea. Discovery/Postal had done it. Between Brunyeel and Brailsford, cycling got worse. It used to be a unique sport with an unwritten code. That pair kind of tore up the non existent rules and applied laser focus on single races. Cycling has far less magic now than it did. Plus, he cheated too.

I’d find it lots easier to acknowledge everything he IS brilliant at; analysis, planning, professionalising. If he wasn’t such a bellwhiff. Outsized sense of importance, the marginal gains bollocks, and some kind of contortion for the fact he sucks the life out of everything in order to try and win. And only win what he deems relevant. Team Sky using the full weight of a TV channel and unlimited money, to shine a light on Tour successes while bombing in The Classics, and just… not caring and pretending they don’t matter?

Apex Capitalist, as is Radcliffe. But they talk a good game and it almost feels palatable at times.

The pair will improve many things at the club, but fans expecting it to be done with heart and passion? Never happening. We’ve already seen signs with the snarky memos and changes to working contracts. They’ve walked in with zero footballing success and are being instantly lauded simply because they’re ’Not the Glazers’.

All that to say, I’d love everyone to laugh at me in three years as we look at a stadium build, a trophy or two, and competitive attacking football. Ashworth might unstill that culture, because those two won’t.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
All of the marginal gains bollocks. Most inside British Cycking freely take the piss out of him for it. He wrapped some business speaks around professionalism and made it all about him.

British Cycling and Olympic success came about through obscene amounts of money being thrown at it. He didn’t get clever and trailblaze his way through adversity and compete against better nations through 1% gains. It was dickloads of money.

Team Sky? Leaving aside the fact they never became a top cycling team and only focused on the Grand Tours… that was all about money too. They were like The City of pro cycling. Spending money across the whole year to focus 70% on France and less so on Italy/Spain. It’s not like it was a new idea. Discovery/Postal had done it. Between Brunyeel and Brailsford, cycling got worse. It used to be a unique sport with an unwritten code. That pair kind of tore up the non existent rules and applied laser focus on single races. Cycling has far less magic now than it did. Plus, he cheated too.

I’d find it lots easier to acknowledge everything he IS brilliant at; analysis, planning, professionalising. If he wasn’t such a bellwhiff. Outsized sense of importance, the marginal gains bollocks, and some kind of contortion for the fact he sucks the life out of everything in order to try and win. And only win what he deems relevant. Team Sky using the full weight of a TV channel and unlimited money, to shine a light on Tour successes while bombing in The Classics, and just… not caring and pretending they don’t matter?

Apex Capitalist, as is Radcliffe. But they talk a good game and it almost feels palatable at times.

The pair will improve many things at the club, but fans expecting it to be done with heart and passion? Never happening. We’ve already seen signs with the snarky memos and changes to working contracts. They’ve walked in with zero footballing success and are being instantly lauded simply because they’re ’Not the Glazers’.

All that to say, I’d love everyone to laugh at me in three years as we look at a stadium build, a trophy or two, and competitive attacking football. Ashworth might unstill that culture, because those two won’t.
Click to expand...
This is the thing I worry about with the footballing structure as well. We've not signed anyone with any real experience in their respective roles, they are just people ready to step up. We think they will do well because we've literally had no one doing those roles properly, but there's no guarantee they don't feel the enormous pressure of the role at United - something they've never experienced.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
All of the marginal gains bollocks. Most inside British Cycking freely take the piss out of him for it. He wrapped some business speaks around professionalism and made it all about him.

British Cycling and Olympic success came about through obscene amounts of money being thrown at it. He didn’t get clever and trailblaze his way through adversity and compete against better nations through 1% gains. It was dickloads of money.

Team Sky? Leaving aside the fact they never became a top cycling team and only focused on the Grand Tours… that was all about money too. They were like The City of pro cycling. Spending money across the whole year to focus 70% on France and less so on Italy/Spain. It’s not like it was a new idea. Discovery/Postal had done it. Between Brunyeel and Brailsford, cycling got worse. It used to be a unique sport with an unwritten code. That pair kind of tore up the non existent rules and applied laser focus on single races. Cycling has far less magic now than it did. Plus, he cheated too.

I’d find it lots easier to acknowledge everything he IS brilliant at; analysis, planning, professionalising. If he wasn’t such a bellwhiff. Outsized sense of importance, the marginal gains bollocks, and some kind of contortion for the fact he sucks the life out of everything in order to try and win. And only win what he deems relevant. Team Sky using the full weight of a TV channel and unlimited money, to shine a light on Tour successes while bombing in The Classics, and just… not caring and pretending they don’t matter?

Apex Capitalist, as is Radcliffe. But they talk a good game and it almost feels palatable at times.

The pair will improve many things at the club, but fans expecting it to be done with heart and passion? Never happening. We’ve already seen signs with the snarky memos and changes to working contracts. They’ve walked in with zero footballing success and are being instantly lauded simply because they’re ’Not the Glazers’.

All that to say, I’d love everyone to laugh at me in three years as we look at a stadium build, a trophy or two, and competitive attacking football. Ashworth might unstill that culture, because those two won’t.
Click to expand...
Solid honest post that most fans will be outraged as you dare to question INEOS footballing achievements, Like I said 5th, 9th, 5th, 9th, 5th Yo Yo club with Nice and since they’ve taken over officially p10 in PL W2 D4 L4 10 points Relegation form.

Here”s my prediction we finish on 54 Points and 9th place I see Brighton beating us last game to get 54points and go 8th on GD then we might see the Nice yo you transferred to United, there’s a reason INEOS have no footballing successes, org charts and tidy offices with KPI’s measured for how neatly your tie your shoelaces and tick your shirt in, don’t really transfer to on the field football success!
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
All of the marginal gains bollocks. Most inside British Cycking freely take the piss out of him for it. He wrapped some business speaks around professionalism and made it all about him.

British Cycling and Olympic success came about through obscene amounts of money being thrown at it. He didn’t get clever and trailblaze his way through adversity and compete against better nations through 1% gains. It was dickloads of money.

Team Sky? Leaving aside the fact they never became a top cycling team and only focused on the Grand Tours… that was all about money too. They were like The City of pro cycling. Spending money across the whole year to focus 70% on France and less so on Italy/Spain. It’s not like it was a new idea. Discovery/Postal had done it. Between Brunyeel and Brailsford, cycling got worse. It used to be a unique sport with an unwritten code. That pair kind of tore up the non existent rules and applied laser focus on single races. Cycling has far less magic now than it did. Plus, he cheated too.

I’d find it lots easier to acknowledge everything he IS brilliant at; analysis, planning, professionalising. If he wasn’t such a bellwhiff. Outsized sense of importance, the marginal gains bollocks, and some kind of contortion for the fact he sucks the life out of everything in order to try and win. And only win what he deems relevant. Team Sky using the full weight of a TV channel and unlimited money, to shine a light on Tour successes while bombing in The Classics, and just… not caring and pretending they don’t matter?

Apex Capitalist, as is Radcliffe. But they talk a good game and it almost feels palatable at times.

The pair will improve many things at the club, but fans expecting it to be done with heart and passion? Never happening. We’ve already seen signs with the snarky memos and changes to working contracts. They’ve walked in with zero footballing success and are being instantly lauded simply because they’re ’Not the Glazers’.

All that to say, I’d love everyone to laugh at me in three years as we look at a stadium build, a trophy or two, and competitive attacking football. Ashworth might unstill that culture, because those two won’t.
Click to expand...
Great to have someone else on here who doesn't just cheerlead the resident Brexiteer owners.

Some of these points were brought up in the purchase discussion but as we know, people think the Qatari offer was made-up and that we need Ratcliffe's slimy employment tactics to up the levels.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
All of the marginal gains bollocks. Most inside British Cycking freely take the piss out of him for it. He wrapped some business speaks around professionalism and made it all about him.

British Cycling and Olympic success came about through obscene amounts of money being thrown at it. He didn’t get clever and trailblaze his way through adversity and compete against better nations through 1% gains. It was dickloads of money.

Team Sky? Leaving aside the fact they never became a top cycling team and only focused on the Grand Tours… that was all about money too. They were like The City of pro cycling. Spending money across the whole year to focus 70% on France and less so on Italy/Spain. It’s not like it was a new idea. Discovery/Postal had done it. Between Brunyeel and Brailsford, cycling got worse. It used to be a unique sport with an unwritten code. That pair kind of tore up the non existent rules and applied laser focus on single races. Cycling has far less magic now than it did. Plus, he cheated too.

I’d find it lots easier to acknowledge everything he IS brilliant at; analysis, planning, professionalising. If he wasn’t such a bellwhiff. Outsized sense of importance, the marginal gains bollocks, and some kind of contortion for the fact he sucks the life out of everything in order to try and win. And only win what he deems relevant. Team Sky using the full weight of a TV channel and unlimited money, to shine a light on Tour successes while bombing in The Classics, and just… not caring and pretending they don’t matter?

Apex Capitalist, as is Radcliffe. But they talk a good game and it almost feels palatable at times.

The pair will improve many things at the club, but fans expecting it to be done with heart and passion? Never happening. We’ve already seen signs with the snarky memos and changes to working contracts. They’ve walked in with zero footballing success and are being instantly lauded simply because they’re ’Not the Glazers’.

All that to say, I’d love everyone to laugh at me in three years as we look at a stadium build, a trophy or two, and competitive attacking football. Ashworth might unstill that culture, because those two won’t.
Click to expand...

Good post. This is what is starting to worry me particularly with their inaction on ETH. The only saving grace so far is that they’ve gone for solid appointments for the top positions in the club. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt for now because I really hope they can get us back to the top.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
Team Sky? Leaving aside the fact they never became a top cycling team and only focused on the Grand Tours… that was all about money too. They were like The City of pro cycling. Spending money across the whole year to focus 70% on France and less so on Italy/Spain. It’s not like it was a new idea. Discovery/Postal had done it. Between Brunyeel and Brailsford, cycling got worse. It used to be a unique sport with an unwritten code. That pair kind of tore up the non existent rules and applied laser focus on single races. Cycling has far less magic now than it did. Plus, he cheated too.
Click to expand...
Not to derail the thread but cycling has regained some of it's magic these last few years with the top cyclists performing both in the classics as in the tours. Can't say whether that has to do with the focus of the topteams shifting to performing in all the races or the quality of the riders improving. The answer probably lays in between.
 
Woziak said:
Solid honest post that most fans will be outraged as you dare to question INEOS footballing achievements, Like I said 5th, 9th, 5th, 9th, 5th Yo Yo club with Nice and since they’ve taken over officially p10 in PL W2 D4 L4 10 points Relegation form.

Here”s my prediction we finish on 54 Points and 9th place I see Brighton beating us last game to get 54points and go 8th on GD then we might see the Nice yo you transferred to United, there’s a reason INEOS have no footballing successes, org charts and tidy offices with KPI’s measured for how neatly your tie your shoelaces and tick your shirt in, don’t really transfer to on the field football success!
Click to expand...
Hang on. They have very little to do with our form in games so far really.
Theyve been focused on auditing and trying to get the likes of Berrada, Wilcox and Ashworth in place for the summer transfer window. It’s unfair to judge them until then.
Yes, I would have liked Ashworth to be done by now but Newcastle are being dicks.
Yes, they have decided to leave Ten Hag in place for the cup final which is a mistake in my opinion but it’s unlikely we win it no matter what due to injuries and an average squad compared to 115.

Im not saying they’re perfect, and they will make mistakes, but judging them based on our form in the last 3rd of the season is unfair.
 
Woziak said:
Solid honest post that most fans will be outraged as you dare to question INEOS footballing achievements, Like I said 5th, 9th, 5th, 9th, 5th Yo Yo club with Nice and since they’ve taken over officially p10 in PL W2 D4 L4 10 points Relegation form.

Here”s my prediction we finish on 54 Points and 9th place I see Brighton beating us last game to get 54points and go 8th on GD then we might see the Nice yo you transferred to United, there’s a reason INEOS have no footballing successes, org charts and tidy offices with KPI’s measured for how neatly your tie your shoelaces and tick your shirt in, don’t really transfer to on the field football success!
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that’s reflecting in any way on Ineos and not the Glazers? :lol: They literally got one person into a senior role a month ago. I’d be far more concerned if someone came in and started swinging their dick around, they are definitely doing the right thing and working top down.

Sure, they’ve turned Nice into a top half club instead of being a top half club. Don’t give me that bullshit about them finishing twice in a Champions League qualifying spot, that’s a complete outlier to their previous history. It’s like saying Leicester should be a be a Champions League club because they competed in it once. Nice have featured in the Champions League/European cup 3 times in their whole history, 2 of those times were in the 50s. It’s not their level.
 
AlexiV said:
Not to derail the thread but cycling has regained some of it's magic these last few years with the top cyclists performing both in the classics as in the tours. Can't say whether that has to do with the focus of the topteams shifting to performing in all the races or the quality of the riders improving. The answer probably lays in between.
Click to expand...

It’s certainly got better of late. I think Sagan kind of acted as (a slightly prickish) example of a rider just being a bike rider again. The likes of Wout, Pogacar, Allaphilipe, seem to have the same spirit of bike racing that Sagan exposed people too. Get on, ride the feck out of every race.

The Tour races are obviously great. Brailsford coming in and making them EVERYTHING fecked up a lot.

Ultimately, it’ll never be what it was without deleting power meters and radios everywhere. Theres way too much tech in it. The riders hate it, and they just become cogs in a machine rather than racers.
 
The Irish Connection said:
Hang on. They have very little to do with our form in games so far really.
Theyve been focused on auditing and trying to get the likes of Berrada, Wilcox and Ashworth in place for the summer transfer window. It’s unfair to judge them until then.
Yes, I would have liked Ashworth to be done by now but Newcastle are being dicks.
Yes, they have decided to leave Ten Hag in place for the cup final which is a mistake in my opinion but it’s unlikely we win it no matter what due to injuries and an average squad compared to 115.

Im not saying they’re perfect, and they will make mistakes, but judging them based on our form in the last 3rd of the season is unfair.
Click to expand...

Well said.
It is far too early to pass judgement on how Ineos are doing.
The majority of problems affecting United have nothing to do with Ineos.
To be fair to them, they seem to be recruiting more capable people into key positions, Ten Hag excepted.

The time to judge them should be the end of next season at the earliest.
 
Red in STL said:
That's certain;y true for some but generally I'm not so sure about that

In my company during the pandemic virtually everyone worked from home, when that ended they asked people what their preferences were going forward, the majority wanted fully WFH or Hybrid, so everyone was told they could choose, and so it remains that way, my local office has 213 employees associated with it, the average daily attendance is less than 30 and that is apparently reflected in other offices as well

According to the annual results both productivity and efficiency are up across the board, even compared to pre-pandemic levels, I work for a large multi-national company with around 35K employees in over 60 countries, pay and benefits are round about middle ranking, not the best and not the worst.
Click to expand...
I understand what your saying and in your company that may work.

However I did notice you use a hybrid model. And that is the model most are using right now or full BTW. People imo need a level of supervision or liberties will be taken and standards will start to slip. If you dont agree, i do understand as that may be your experience. It takes times and is slow at first, but once that rot sets in its hard to change that culture.

So while it might work for you and your company, most have found that to not be the case and are now implementing a wfh or hybrid model. Here is just a small list of companys that have ended wfh and have adopted hybrid or full back to work.



[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.6)]
  • Starbucks
  • General Motors
  • Disney
  • Walmart
  • Dell
  • Amazon
  • Activision Blizzard
  • United Parcel Service
  • Meta
  • Grindr
  • IBM
  • Ubisoft
  • Roblox
  • Infosys
  • Rockstar
[/COLOR]
 
Kelly15 said:
I understand what your saying and in your company that may work.

However I did notice you use a hybrid model. And that is the model most are using right now or full BTW. People imo need a level of supervision or liberties will be taken and standards will start to slip. If you dont agree, i do understand as that may be your experience. It takes times and is slow at first, but once that rot sets in its hard to change that culture.

So while it might work for you and your company, most have found that to not be the case and are now implementing a wfh or hybrid model. Here is just a small list of companys that have ended wfh and have adopted hybrid or full back to work.



[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.6)]
  • Starbucks
  • General Motors
  • Disney
  • Walmart
  • Dell
  • Amazon
  • Activision Blizzard
  • United Parcel Service
  • Meta
  • Grindr
  • IBM
  • Ubisoft
  • Roblox
  • Infosys
  • Rockstar
[/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Naming Acti Blizz as any kind of competently run company is...quite generous
 
Andy_Cole said:
Seems like Liverpool are making moves.

What’s INEOS doing?
Click to expand...

Sir Dave Brailsford
Jean Claude-blanc -
Roger bell - CFO
Omar Barrada- CEO
Dan ashworth (incoming)
Jason Wilcox
Mags Mernagh
The guy from Arsenal hired to look at injury record. (Dunno his name).

They’re also plotting a new stadium already and have conducted meetings and boards around it.

they need to get the management team right and so far they’re making moves to do this.
 
What would the Qatari bid have done better? I'm not sticking up for Ineos, as I wanted Qatar, but if the club had have been sold in it's entirity, both said they were going to get shut of the debt from the Utd books. Both said they were going to put best in class in charge, that were available. So far the club is still mainly in the parasites hands, but Ineos are starting a structure off with best in class. Early days, but steps in the right direction.
 
Kelly15 said:
I understand what your saying and in your company that may work.

However I did notice you use a hybrid model. And that is the model most are using right now or full BTW. People imo need a level of supervision or liberties will be taken and standards will start to slip. If you dont agree, i do understand as that may be your experience. It takes times and is slow at first, but once that rot sets in its hard to change that culture.

So while it might work for you and your company, most have found that to not be the case and are now implementing a wfh or hybrid model. Here is just a small list of companys that have ended wfh and have adopted hybrid or full back to work.



[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.6)]
  • Starbucks
  • General Motors
  • Disney
  • Walmart
  • Dell
  • Amazon
  • Activision Blizzard
  • United Parcel Service
  • Meta
  • Grindr
  • IBM
  • Ubisoft
  • Roblox
  • Infosys
  • Rockstar
[/COLOR], that
Click to expand...
I definitely disagree with the bolded, you're basically saying virtually anyone who works in an office cannot be trusted to do their job properly and require supervision, if this is your experience I would think that says more about the employers than the employees

The WFH or Hybrid we have is a choice for the employee, the employer doesn't choose for you, unless the job requires being at an office, like the receptionist for example
 
LawCharltonBest said:
Thank you Joel Glazer @glacierman and Ed Woodward @Woodzy for always sacking managers when they failed to get CL football.

You showed your ambition and set down a marker that anything less was unacceptable and below standard

Unfortunately @jim Ratcliffe and Omar Berrada @OmarUnited4ever lack the ambition you had and are happy to accept mediocrity
Click to expand...

Bit harsh to blame me
 
Absolutely insane to me that some are criticising INEOS for their strategies already.

Over a decade of no standards, the tail wagging the dog and they come in and crack a few eggs to start to instill their vision of what standards should be and we already have moaning from people that think they know better about business based on I'm not sure what really. Their own ego I presume because it's certainly not acumen of the level of Ratcliffe and INEOS.

Nothing unexpected has even happened yet. He's instilled a few working practices, appointed a few senior people to key positions. All routine stuff that was always going to happen. You do not get a billionaire strolling into a failing club and he doesn't say or do anything, and the things he's said and done are not that extreme. He's shaped up a few departments and instilled a working practice, routine stuff when ownership changes.

Until they've had time to do anything significant it's very much a watching brief as a fan. Next season you will start to see the fruits of some decisions they've made because some of their appointments will have had time to work, transfers will happen, a managerial decision will happen. There's some things to go on but probably the following season will be a real litmus test for INEOS because this summer is not going to be ideal.
 
Dan_F said:
Are you suggesting that’s reflecting in any way on Ineos and not the Glazers? :lol: They literally got one person into a senior role a month ago. I’d be far more concerned if someone came in and started swinging their dick around, they are definitely doing the right thing and working top down.

Sure, they’ve turned Nice into a top half club instead of being a top half club. Don’t give me that bullshit about them finishing twice in a Champions League qualifying spot, that’s a complete outlier to their previous history. It’s like saying Leicester should be a be a Champions League club because they competed in it once. Nice have featured in the Champions League/European cup 3 times in their whole history, 2 of those times were in the 50s. It’s not their level.
Click to expand...
Let’s hope United don’t become their level!
 
wolvored said:
What would the Qatari bid have done better? I'm not sticking up for Ineos, as I wanted Qatar, but if the club had have been sold in it's entirity, both said they were going to get shut of the debt from the Utd books. Both said they were going to put best in class in charge, that were available. So far the club is still mainly in the parasites hands, but Ineos are starting a structure off with best in class. Early days, but steps in the right direction.
Click to expand...
I was a huge Qatar fan too. But hands up, they wouldn't have done better except pumped some money in Jan window. We would have spent it on some random players with no plan. Ex players would probably make the board room .

My preference to Qatar was due to their commitment to improve infrastructure. Ineos didn't mention about it all and so I was reluctant. But looks like they have a plan ans I am so happy that I have been proved wrong. Early days, but very promising.
 
bond19821982 said:
I was a huge Qatar fan too. But hands up, they wouldn't have done better except pumped some money in Jan window. We would have spent it on some random players with no plan. Ex players would probably make the board room .

My preference to Qatar was due to their commitment to improve infrastructure. Ineos didn't mention about it all and so I was reluctant. But looks like they have a plan ans I am so happy that I have been proved wrong. Early days, but very promising.
Click to expand...
Yes agree
 
Status
Not open for further replies.