Club Ownership | INEOS responsible for the football side

Status
Not open for further replies.
MancunianAngels said:
It's the whatabboutery I find odd. "If this was another man with questionable attitude towards women, he'd be criticised more" when the current man with those questionable attitudes is getting slated by almost everyone.

The people criticising Ratcliffe would ultimately be the same ones criticising Qatar/Jassim if they'd made similar decisions.

Not every United fan is so desperate for success that they'll s1mp for all billionaires and ignore their obvious issues.
Click to expand...

The whole idea of bringing in Qatar to the discussion is irrelevant.
I saw a few posters even bringing up that PSG and Newcastle where using their womens teams for sportswashing, as a way to excuse Jim.

Why are we talking about Qatar and Jassim again. He is not our owner.
I am happy we are not state owned and to me, Ineos was the lesser of two evils. But it was still a owner I would have largely prefered not to get due to how Nice and Lausanne have been run. And the womens team was a large part of my worry.
 
MancunianAngels said:
It's mad that people still don't understand that many fans have a more romantic view of the club and that things are (sometimes) more important than winning the title every season and spending hundreds of millions of players they have zero attachment to that will probably be sold in 2/3 years.

Yeah, we could have been bought by the Qatari state and won everything. But we'd have been at the mercy of a government who's values are completely at odds with the history of our wonderful city.

FYI - You can also think that Ratcliffe is a twat but that this is indefinitely better than Qatar.

We could increase ticket prices by £20 per game and sell all hospitality packages across the ground to tourists to help us pass FFP but no ordinary people will be able to go more than a few times a season and all the communities that have developed across the ground will dissappear overnight. Who cares if the team is successful though?

We could build a soulless 92,000 capacity ground to replace the iconic OT then have a people on here moaning that the atmosphere is rubbish and that the passive fans that have replaced all the more active ones are to blame for the erosion of standards. Who cares though as we'll have a bigger ground than Wembley. It would be something to boast about on the Internet.

We could just get rid of the women's team because they don't make that much money. To hell with all the young female reds who look up to their female icons and have a dream that they now can represent Manchester United. What do they matter?
Click to expand...
In other words, local reds are the only true supporters.
 
I thought the whole point of Brexit FC is that we’ll be in for players like KDH and Gray but instead it looks exactly like where we were last season, chasing Eredevisie alumni and going nowhere.
 
We haven’t even had a season or even finished a transfer window and posters on here are arguing random shit how this isn’t working or we should have had a sheik in. Absolutely barmy. Let’s at least give it a full season eh?
 
Wednesday at Stoke said:
I thought the whole point of Brexit FC is that we’ll be in for players like KDH and Gray but instead it looks exactly like where we were last season, chasing Eredevisie alumni and going nowhere.
Click to expand...

It's peculiar from the outside looking on. It seems they've gone from the precipice of sacking ETH, to building the whole club around him and continuing along the same path. If they get it wrong and Ten Hag isn't up to scratch, we're going to be left in an even bigger hole really. But like I said when they were carrying out their review, if they decided to stick with him then they have to back him and live or die on their sword. It's got the ingredients for a real shit show if it doesn't go to plan, as the same fans who changed their mind on Ten Hag after the final will be out in droves asking why they didn't sack him at the end of the season.

It's definitely not the approach I thought we'd take.
 
wolvored said:
We haven’t even had a season or even finished a transfer window and posters on here are arguing random shit how this isn’t working or we should have had a sheik in. Absolutely barmy. Let’s at least give it a full season eh?
Click to expand...

Sadly some never had patience with them from start
 
MancunianAngels said:
It's the whatabboutery I find odd. "If this was another man with questionable attitude towards women, he'd be criticised more" when the current man with those questionable attitudes is getting slated by almost everyone.

The people criticising Ratcliffe would ultimately be the same ones criticising Qatar/Jassim if they'd made similar decisions.

Not every United fan is so desperate for success that they'll s1mp for all billionaires and ignore their obvious issues.
Click to expand...
It’s not whatabboutery, although I’d love to see you get a £500 speeding fine while someone else gets £50 for the exact same offence and not use it as a comparison.

It’s more about the language and tone of the criticism. For Ratcliffe/ INEOS it’s been relatively light and professional. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence who saw the language used against Jassim can figure out how the papers and some in the fan base would be written if this happened under his watch.
 
JediSith said:
Much stronger and harsher criticism is key point you seemed to have ignored.
Click to expand...

He's getting slated by pretty much every matchgoing red I can see on Twitter.

The editor of one of our remaining fanzines has criticised him.

He's appears to be getting pelters in the media aswell.

What else do you want?
 
Stats aligning with Ashworth about to be freed from the Saudis and Southgate about to become jobless when the Swiss defeat England in the quarters. :drool:;)
 
LordSpud said:
Someone explain the new way to embed X please and thankyou
Click to expand...

Manually change the copied link addresses to the original app name, so twitter.com in this case instead of x.com

It will still automatically embed the post under the original link address
 
Rolaholic said:
Manually change the copied link addresses to the original app name, so twitter.com in this case instead of x.com

It will still automatically embed the post under the original link address
Click to expand...

Top guy cheers
 
'Expected to start immediately'

I like the sound of that :lol:

Tbf though, I somewhat expect him to have already begun work at a distance in some capacity during his 'gardening leave'.
 
RedRocket9908 said:
According to Shiekh Jassims camp he did infact produce proof of funds and their is no way he would of refused to provide proof and killed off his own bid.
Click to expand...
Great we don’t end up like City or Newcastle, though, isn’t it? Owned by an oil state to improve their image.
 
Rolaholic said:
Manually change the copied link addresses to the original app name, so twitter.com in this case instead of x.com

It will still automatically embed the post under the original link address
Click to expand...

Thank you. This was bugging me . Will give it a try .
 
RedRocket9908 said:
Yes, like I said though there is zero evidence that it was a state bid and plenty of evidence that it wasnt
Click to expand...
The problem is either it was a state bid or it was very unclear where the money was coming from. I don't understand how someone could support an option that was either a front for a state bid or was so murky in terms of the origin/extent of the funding.
 
RORY65 said:
The problem is either it was a state bid or it was very unclear where the money was coming from. I don't understand how someone could support an option that was either a front for a state bid or was so murky in terms of the origin/extent of the funding.
Click to expand...

After 18 years of campaigning I would have only supported a bid that would have seen the Glazers either leave the club or at the very least sell 51% of the club so they would no longer be in control providing it wasnt a state bid, there was zero evidence that this was a state bid abd plenty of evidence it wasnt so I would rather us have accepted that than a bid that kept the Glazers in and pulling the strings.
 
RedRocket9908 said:
After 18 years of campaigning I would have only supported a bid that would have seen the Glazers either leave the club or at the very least sell 51% of the club so they would no longer be in control providing it wasnt a state bid, there was zero evidence that this was a state bid abd plenty of evidence it wasnt so I would rather us have accepted that than a bid that kept the Glazers in and pulling the strings.
Click to expand...
There wasn't plenty of evidence of anything, it was a completely murky offer with no evidence of where the funding was come from (United have filed that they never had proof of funds never mind where they were coming from). I'm completely with you that it was incredibly disappointing when it emerged that the Ratcliffe deal was only for a minority stake and it's shit that the Glazer's are still there but I couldn't support a bid that was so nebulous.
 
Rolaholic said:
'Expected to start immediately'

I like the sound of that :lol:

Tbf though, I somewhat expect him to have already begun work at a distance in some capacity during his 'gardening leave'.
Click to expand...
Obviously I would imagine. Who can monitor phone calls
 
Considering that we were supposedly expecting a 2025 start wether compensation was paid or not, I think this looks pretty good on the old INEOS track record with regards to Ashworth having an immediate start.
 
I am putting out a challenge to help educate me. Could someone explain to me like I'm a 6 year old, what the 3 new guys will be doing? Not their job titles, but what will they actually be doing.

Berrada

Wilcox

Ashworth

Also, are they all at the same level? Or will Wilcox (for example) be reporting to Ashworth who will be reporting to Berrada who will be reporting to Sir Jim/INEOS/The Board.
 
duffer said:
I am putting out a challenge to help educate me. Could someone explain to me like I'm a 6 year old, what the 3 new guys will be doing? Not their job titles, but what will they actually be doing.

Berrada

Wilcox

Ashworth

Also, are they all at the same level? Or will Wilcox (for example) be reporting to Ashworth who will be reporting to Berrada who will be reporting to Sir Jim/INEOS/The Board.
Click to expand...

In terms of levels it's

Berrada
Ashworth
Wilcox


Berrada will be CEO

Ashworth will be doing DoF style things I think like sorting out all the depts, having them all report to him, having a say on transfers possibly? I don't know for sure.

Wilcox looks to be more in charge of ensuring the same style of play between youth and senior, managing those transitions and generally assisting with a game model.
 
"not their job titles" :lol: :mad:

Solius said:
Berrada will be CEO

Ashworth will be doing DoF style things I think like sorting out all the depts, having them all report to him, having a say on transfers possibly? I don't know for sure.

Wilcox looks to be more in charge of ensuring the same style of play between youth and senior, managing those transitions and generally assisting with a game model.
Click to expand...

But thank you for the levels!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.