TsuWave
Full Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2013
- Messages
- 15,524
Are you high? Murtough and Arnold weren't even properly in place with the other managers. They worked for Woodward and he was around indefinitely along with the Glazers as far as they were concerned (at least until the bitter end of Ole).
Please stop having conversations with yourself and read what’s being said to you.
You said you could objectively argue that any manager would fail under this structure - to which I replied we’ve seen managers perform better under this structure - and you corroborated this with your subsequent reply adding that we’ve also seen managers fail.
When I asked you what are you using to substantiate your argument that any manager would fail under this structure - you pivoted to “its not the same structure” and Ten Hag is dealing with a very specific set of circumstances - to which I replied I’m happy to concede it’s not the same structure, but again - how do you objectively substantiate your previous assertions then?
You replied with “Both structures were bad, but the one ten Hag has been given is worse. Head scouts were sacked and the DoF and CEO faced job uncertainty from the getgo as the club was put on for sale” - which prompted me to say your understanding of structure differs to mine since you segued into employment uncertainty. Do you understand this now? Read it as many times as you need, slowly.
And you're asking for actual references as proof as to why a structure like this where the head scouts are sacked and where the DoF has literally no clue, all whilst not knowing who will own the club in a few months is worse for a manager? I can use your same daft logic against you and say there's no proof alternative managers can do much better.
Mate you are struggling, it's not worth my time.
This would be comical because you’d be asking me to prove a negative, do you understand this? Making an argument out of thin-air without foundation and/or reference points - is the opposite of being objective. Ten Hag is nowhere near being at the pinnacle of his profession - both in current and past performances - so the assumption that any other manager would fail, is baseless.
And just because you reply in a hostile manner and with barbs it doesn’t substantiate your posts. I assure you I’m not the one struggling here. If you opt to run, it’s on you - again, you quoted me.
Again, Ten Hag’s tenure coinciding with ownership changes and organisational restructuring doesn’t absolve him of on-pitch results and performances, thus my position that he should go is easily explainable and justifiable.