It's been 4 months, they didn't get in officially until the back end of February.
The negativity is because the caf generally has the patience of a toddler.
Club Ownership | INEOS responsible for the football side
- Thread starter Solius
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
- Status
It's been 4 months, they didn't get in officially until the back end of February.
The negativity is because the caf generally has the patience of a toddler.
He doesn't want to let go the veto. He doesnt want to come into training and find a player that he has no idea about.
If you think the manager has all control about the fees, do you think in the first meeting when he was told you have X to spend this summer, he decided no, I dont want to spend £40m on Antony early, I will wait till end of the window and spend double?
Was it Ten Hag who said no, McTominay and Maguire cant leave as the fee isnt high enough?
So far I’m very pleased to hear what Ratcliffe has been saying. I’m sharing the same sentiment. Sacking the manager won’t make a difference, signing superstars won’t make a difference, we have to lay the necessary foundation for the future, the hard work.
In other news, the sky is blue, the sun is hot and water is wet
It seems obvious now, but a few months ago it wasn’t such a popular opinion. I’m glad the fanbase is more united now.
It's not that we don't want to sign a player like Mbappe. It's that no Mbappe level player will want to join us and play in the Europa league.
This is a feck up at every level, from Ten Haag to the other idiots who left us in this mess, they are all to be blamed. Even ignoring the incoming players, they fecked up on outgoings as well.
Not sure what over-analysing this achieves.
I can't think of any transfer that has worked out in recent years except for Bruno, Martinez & to an extent Malacia - who I consider as a backup LB.
So consider this scenario:
- player x is £10m and player y is £70m, same position
- Ten Hag thinks player y is only slightly better than player x
You think Ten Hag will go for player y every time and have no consideration for the fee?
Why is everything with this guys slow?
What is slow?
The opposite of fast.
Thats a nice scenario but its wrong. Name me one player we were linked to at RW that was 10m? Even Dan James was 15m.
Do you think Ten Hag thought no I wont pay £40m for Antony in June where I can have him for pre season, I will wait till mid August and pay 80m.
Having no CEO and no DoF at the start of their first transfer window, that's being slow.
Yes I know that Berrada and Ashworth will be these guys, and that at least Berrada will start soon, but still that's disappointing.
We went a decade of Woodward, we can wait a few months to get the new guys in.
The impatience and lack of perspective is crazy right now.
But can you really? I do believe that this situation will have a negative impact on the summer activities and therefore make life for the team much harder next season.
It's a different question if this is worth it in the long run, but it surely isn't a great start.
Nice swerve (because you realise the answer)
They're on gardening leave. Bit of patience.
In Ashworth's case, Newcastle are holding out for a ridiculous fee. Berrada was always going to be joining us in July. I don't how you can say INEOS have been slow in their moves I mean the media didn't even get a sniff of us hiring Berrada until about two hours before the club officially announced it. He was hired before INEOS had even officially taken control of the sporting side too. Ashworth was identified pretty quickly as their number one target.
I understand the Berrada situation completely, but find it very hard to believe that the Ashworth situation couldn't have been handled better at various stages.
Chelsea went all gung-ho last year and royally messed up. Doing it with speed is no guarantee of success.
We don't have the luxury of wasting money like Chelsea, so we have to do things slower. It's been a perfectly fine start, it's only unrealistic people who think otherwise. The only issue so far is Ashworth, but that's not really on INEOS, and he's prob involved in some way anyway.
They came into a club with poor structure and low summer budget due to years of wastage, what are you really expecting?
What can we do? Newcastle are demanding an unrealistic fee. They're clearly bitter that we poached him under their noses.
Look how we handled the negotiations for Wilcox. We manged to negotiate with Southampton a respectable fee to release Wilcox from his contract but it takes two to tango. Southampton weren't being unrealistic both sides got what they wanted.
They were fast to decide on Berrada and Ashworth, that's true, but they were slow in the sense that they didn't get it over the line earlier. Berrada might be somewhat acceptable - he does start reasonably soon and let's be honest, as the CEO he is more or less the chief accountant, but he isn't the one needed to set the direction on the sports side. That's why I can live with that.
But I believe that Ashworth was a mistake. Identifying someone quickly is nice, but what does it help if he can't start working? I think INEOS should have thougt about an alternative, I don't think it's the right move to just wait for him this long.
It's true that speed doesn't guarantee success, but neither does being too slow. And arguably INEOS went gung-ho by deciding "Ashworth is going to be DoF" without being sure that he can join and without having an alternative ready in case it doesn't work out.
Ashworth being involved much is difficult. He is still under contract at Newcastle, so he contractually isn't allowed to work against Newcastle's interests. Everything he does for Manchester United would improve Manchester's situation against Newcastle, so he can't really do that. If he does and Newcastle can prove it, he will get into a lot of legal trouble with them. On top it would open the question if you really want someone to work for United who actively works against the interests of his employer. Would he do the same while being at United? I am also sure that there are some talks, but it's a fine line and I am sure that he is less involved currently than most people here hope.
So what did I expect? INEOS going for people who can set the club moving in the right direction quickly. They started talking about a (partial) takeover already during last year, so they should have had time enough to have some quality candidates that can slot into the club as soon as the takeover is done (or reasonably soon afterwards).
I disagree with that. Ashworth was obviously somebody not just INEOS wanted but also Berrada (going by the emails) You don't compromise on someone like that. The football director is too important. We should be able to manage until he arrives. I would rather they wait and hire the right man they unanimously agree on than a second rate candidate that they aren't entirely sold on. "We have to walk to the right solution not run to the wrong one."
I think the crux of it for me is that I'm surprised at the idea that there are no other viable candidates and that this is worth the extremely convoluted process of getting him in, even if we have to wait until well into 2025.
It's also a little surprising to me that we didn't anticipate Newcastle's reaction in any way. Or is it that we did but miscalculated how much they'd dig in?
And did Ashworth not also make a few mistakes along the way, I think I remember something about Newcastle catching wind of this in a way that was accidental? I believe there were also emails more recently where someone at Newcastle was accidentally cc'd, or Ashworth used an email address that made the emails viewable by someone at Newcastle?
I think I also read that we believed the arbitration process would sort this out pretty handily, is that still the case?
It's all speculation and we can't fully know what's going on, but it just seems like its going to really stunt us.
That's a fair opinion. Ultimately it comes down to if you believe that Ashworth is so far ahead of any other choice that he is worth the wait. I doubt that, that's why I'm critical of the whole saga.I disagree with that. Ashworth was obviously somebody not just INEOS wanted but also Berrada (going by the emails) You don't compromise on someone like that. The football director is too important. We should be able to manage until he arrives. I would rather they wait and hire the right man they unanimously agree on than a second rate candidate that they aren't entirely sold on. "We have to walk to the right solution not run to the wrong one."
(Patton's Law of Program Planning) A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan next week.
In this case I'd paraphrase that as "a good candidate hired now is better than the perfect candidate hired next year"
Yeah he messed up saving an email sent by Berrada to his work email. Ashworth's side will have a different story to the one Newcastle put out there, he claims he was sacked and didn't resign from his role. The arbitration meeting seems to have been delayed, I still wouldn't surprised if we end up coming to an agreement with Newcastle at some point. It's going to take them lowering their £20M fee as that is just ridiculous.
Why should that sum be ridiculous for someone who is so good, that you are willing to wait a year for him, to take a job where he will decide on how to use several hundred millions annually? He is going to be a key figure at the club, in theory more important than any player. Why should he be cheaper?
You do realise good people leave their jobs resign all the time? Its fine, I would rather wait now, they are paying his wages and will have to hire another DOF, so they can pay him double wage.
Its not like he will be here for this window, so we may as well wait, Newcastle end up losing a key staff member whilst paying him £2m a year.
Of course people resign all the time. And have to respect the terms of their contracts. Changing those to leave earlier is up to discussion and might involve money - that would be the case here.
All I could find online re Ashworth is that Newcastle are demanding "in excess of 20m", which could be 200m but I seriously doubt it's higher than 30m. But assuming it's 25m tops, just pay the fukking fee and be done with it. Time is money and for a club of United's statute and professed desire to return to being a perennial PL and CL contender this is a modest sum for an executed of his reported acumen.
Seriously? £25m for a Sporting Director? Why should we pay that right now? What good will that do to Manutd?
He wont be useful for this window anyway, it will all but 1/2 our transfer budget because reportedly we have 50m to spend.
Why give Newcastle money that will help them out with their PSR.
If Ashworth is useless this transfer window, it makes no difference having him now or in November.
And what if they believe that the best option is Ashworth and Berrada having unofficial input until they are released, rather than someone else?That's a fair opinion. Ultimately it comes down to if you believe that Ashworth is so far ahead of any other choice that he is worth the wait. I doubt that, that's why I'm critical of the whole saga.
(Patton's Law of Program Planning) A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan next week.
In this case I'd paraphrase that as "a good candidate hired now is better than the perfect candidate hired next year"
You don't think they're just sitting on their hands do you?
You want us to pay what is likely the highest ever compensation fee for manager/backroom staff why? One that blows others completely out of the water that have been previously done.
Then 6 months down the line... "INEOS should be sacked for paying that money for DoF"
Dont bother with those permanent moaners
I don't agree with that amount but if they are holding out for £20 m + and we're at £3 m surely we can and should compromise and meet around half way. That's why I said before offer something like £8/£9 m and be done with it.
Football doesn't wait for anyone to catch up so the quicker this is sorted surely it would be worth the extra few million to get him in now because like L'Oréal Paris say he's worth it!
If they get too much involved they act against the interests of their current employers and risk being taken to court for a breach of their existing contracts. So I'm sure they are less involved than you think and everybody here would like.
A few problems with your question:
First, it is not "us" (we) who are paying the fee -- INEOS would pay the fee, and as far as I know the fee would not undermine the ability of INEOS to pay the transfer fees necessary to bring in new players (the transfer budget allotted to United per FFP rules). Second, the role Ashworth would serve would not be a mere backroom staff. Lastly, who the fukk cares whether the fee blows the others out of the water?
If in the end INEOS decide Ashworth is not worth, so it be it. But what I would not see happen is that we bring in second class executives -- as we have done since the beginning of the Glazer era -- to run the club. I have no idea if Ashworth would be a transformational executive, but if we accept that he is a payment to Newcastle of 25m is money well spent.
INEOS wouldn't pay the fee, the club would. He'd be a club employee, not an INEOS employee.
I'm sure I read recently that club are still looking to appoint Head of Recruitment too, can't remember who it was that said it though
- Status