Fergie had a good first full season (1987-88) and got United up to second, only for the team to slump into mid-table the following year and be even worse in 1989-90. Many Utd fans wanted him sacked. Others saw that this was the wrong idea. They saw there were deeper issues then, as now - the inadequate youth system, bad elements in the players' culture and all sorts of uncertainty over the future ownership of the club. Fergie came under huge pressure in so many ways Ten Hag will be familiar with now. The team lacked any style (it wasn't fashionable to talk about 'identity' back then because hipsters hadn't been invented yet). Terrible results included losing 5-1 to City when they were the real city, not some Arab toy, and going 11 games without a league win. Team selections were often heavily criticized and it turned toxic when Fergie left Mark Hughes on the bench and United surrendered a 1-0 lead to lose 2-1 at home to a Crystal Palace team who had just lost 9-0 at Anfield. The atmosphere got even worse that day when someone pulled out a big banner saying "three years of excuses and we're still crap. Ta ra Fergie". He got dragged out by stewards and it got really ugly. In the midst of all this, there were no early trophies like Ten Hag, no cup finals. But there was plenty of speculation. Press criticism was relentless. Every pundit and ex-player opened their mouths and turned on the verbal sewer pipes, just like now. Many argued just because Fergie had done it in a 'lesser' league with Aberdeen was no reason to think he could cut it in England. Sound familiar? Yet amid all that, United persisted with him. It was the bravest decision. They could have just been totally reactionary, just as the club has been the last few years, and fired him. The parallels are all there. The lessons are all there. The question is, does anyone in the club hierarchy have the brains to see this? Will Sir Jim bring in someone with such brains?
