Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24

[astracrazy]

I am sure that if you searched his press conferences you will hear him say it himself. In fact I am certain that control over recruitment was a prerequisite to him signing and now because it's gone tits up you want to whitewash history, no not having that mate. His calls on recruitment have failed and he takes the blame.

Pochettino took Chelsea from tenth or twelveth to 6th, that's a massive improvement whilst Ten Hag took us from 3rd to 8th that's a massive regression. Chelsea botched their rebuild resulting in an inexperienced and unbalanced squad, Tan Hag had veto power on recruitment so it could be argued Ten Hag had it easy.

It's like you don't know what veto means.

" right to reject a decision or proposal made "

i.e he can reject players put on the table for positions to be signed.

You realise we have a whole department who are responsible for finding talent and scouting players? And we have another responsible for negotiations. Just because EtH has a veto doesn't mean all this falls under his control and makes him responsible for over paying or the lack of good options on the table - far from it.

You realise it doesn't work like the football manager games?

 

[Smores]

It's like you don't know what veto means.

" right to reject a decision or proposal made "

i.e he can reject players put on the table for positions to be signed.

You realise we have a whole department who are responsible for finding talent and scouting players? And we have another responsible for negotiations. Just because EtH has a veto doesn't mean all this falls under his control and makes him responsible for over paying or the lack of good options on the table - far from it.

You realise it doesn't work like the football manager games?

Well obviously if he vetoes other options it majorly guides the other two areas you've just mentioned.

We simply don't know the ins and outs of our transfer business. From the outside it looks like he had us focus on a limited set of options, players he knew and as a result we overspent to deliver to his demands. People can choose to think otherwise of course but the evidence leans one way.

 

[Infra-red]

It will be quite something if United sack Ten Hag in the next couple of weeks - we'd be going into the summer transfer window with no manager, no Chief Executive and no Director of Football.

 

[romufc]

That's a fair last paragraph. The problem I have is that I have zero confidence that Ten Hag can get us consistent through a long period of time. So ultimately we're just wasting time and resources on a busted flush. I will say that whoever has been in charge of our Academy revival deserves praise. That's been on a steady upward trend for the past 4/5 years.

Regarding Chelsea, They did get battered by Arsenal. But that was their only loss in like 15 PL games. They also stumbled a little bit with a few draws, the one at home to Burnley in particular was very bad. It wasn't all brilliant but it was significantly better than they had been achieving and were being pulled out of their rut. I wasn't even a fan of Pochettino but I think we're past the point of being fussy, we need a Manager to come in and improve the style and consistency.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall in meetings right now as clearly there's some disagreement on where the club should be heading otherwise Ineos would have made a statement one way or the other. Stalling the decision benefits nobody as Manager replacements can move on and it disrupts any future planning for pre season. At this point a decision needs to be made.

I can understand if you have zero confidence, I'd be lying if I said, I have 100% confidence in him. He has shown major flaws in his set up. What I really struggled with, a manager, coach whatever you are, you cannot ignore when teams are smashing 20 shots on you. This is the reason why many including you have 0 confidence, the set up for alot of the games was poor.

Now the same way you dont have confidence in Ten Hag, I dont have it in Poch, we didnt really see a style of play, he changed it in the last 8/10 games with Cucurella inverting, like Ten Hag did in the last 4 games.

If there was a coach where I saw, yes the team not only dominates the ball, teams struggle playing against them, I'd be all up for sacking Ten Hag.

Apart from 1/2 seasons at Spurs, Poch hasn't really shown much, his last season at Spurs was terrible when up until he got sacked. At PSG there was never a style of play either, at Chelsea there wasnt one either.

Poch style that really made him a popular manager was high press, transitional football, this was 6/7 years ago, things have changed.

We have to look at all aspects, Ten Hag really let himself down in the last few months where he lied to us, after getting battered against teams and him coming out in pressers saying things that were not true about the game, Poch is an excuse master too, ask Chelsea fans what kind of lame excuses he has been using this season.

 

[astracrazy]

Well obviously if he vetoes other options it majorly guides the other two areas you've just mentioned.

We simply don't know the ins and outs of our transfer business. From the outside it looks like he had us focus on a limited set of options, players he knew and as a result we overspent to deliver to his demands. People can choose to think otherwise of course but the evidence leans one way.

That's a fair point.

I get that perspective, although I don't believe the piss would be taken to such a degree that we only ever end up with one name on the list because he vetos everyone else, but I don't get the position its his fault that's been spent. And even if the piss is taken to such a degree, finance isn't his responsibility.

 

[NLunited]

Well obviously if he vetoes other options it majorly guides the other two areas you've just mentioned.

We simply don't know the ins and outs of our transfer business. From the outside it looks like he had us focus on a limited set of options, players he knew and as a result we overspent to deliver to his demands. People can choose to think otherwise of course but the evidence leans one way.

We know a lot about our transfer business actually. We know about which players were to be sold and weren’t, we know about many targets and we know about FFP limits.

All these factors determined who is coming in in the end. The reason we got Evans is because we could not afford a class cb, Amrabat was not the preferred target, we did not sell Martial so we did not get a second striker, and so on.

The one big mistake was Antony. Once the price went up too high we should have aborted, even if there wasn’t another good target we could get at that time. Keep Elanga and fix the issue in the next window.

It was a total panic signing by the club, they ok’d the expenditure. A manager should not be in a position where has to veto a signing he wants to protect the club from overpaying.

 

[AneRu]

It feels like you have trouble reading. Who wants to re-write history, look on my previous post to you.. Yes, Ten Hag is not very good at talent ID. I have agreed that he is bad at transfers, never claimed he is amazing.

Its funny you look at Poch taking 12th to 6th = making them competitive.. you forget Ten Hag also took us from 6th to 3rd?

Chelsea have an unbalanced squad? They have 2/3 players in each position, what area of Chelsea's squad do you think is unbalanced?

Also, taking about inexperience, why is it that we have the most minutes for U21 this season?

If you agree that he is bad at transfers then why try to whitewash his culpability on the fact that we have largely wasted £400m on his targets?

Pochettino did improve Chelsea but it seems he got right when it was too late to save his job or maybe it is true that philosophical contradictions did indeed play a part in the decision to let him go.

Chelsea lack a clinical striker and have inexperienced in defense and midfield. With a proper striker they could have finished higher.

In my view decisions made in the summer on key additions contribute heavily to the team's performances. Tactics, training and day to day management also play a part but if you go into a season unprepared and without strengthening your weaker areas you are bound to struggle.

So when ETH chose to spend £110m on Onana and Mount and those signings did nothing to address our key weakness; lack of credible back up at CB, DM and a prolific striker he cost us the season. What followed next was just an exposure of the weaknesses he had failed to plug - Casemiro and Martinez got injured and we had no one to step in with the needed quality. His awful tactics became the coup De grace but we had already failed in the season before a ball had been kicked.

 

[Tom Van Persie]

It will be quite something if United sack Ten Hag in the next couple of weeks - we'd be going into the summer transfer window with no manager, no Chief Executive and no Director of Football.

What makes you think we won't appoint a head coach after sacking ten Hag? I reckon the appointment will be made within a week of the sacking. And we do have a chief executive. Blanc is the chief executive until Berrada officially arrives in July.

 

[tomaldinho1]

It will be quite something if United sack Ten Hag in the next couple of weeks - we'd be going into the summer transfer window with no manager, no Chief Executive and no Director of Football.

Jim the Rat's master plan unfolding, he wants the job!

 

[astracrazy]

So when ETH chose to spend £110m on Onana and Mount

This is just nonsense. EtH may have wanted Onana and Mount and vetoed some other options. He didn't choose how much was spent. It's just ridiculous all this EtH spent this, EtH spent that. He didn't spend a thing.

You're suggesting EtH has to veto a signing to stop the club overpaying, which is just a ridiculous perspective to take.

 

[AneRu]

It's like you don't know what veto means.

" right to reject a decision or proposal made "

i.e he can reject players put on the table for positions to be signed.

You realise we have a whole department who are responsible for finding talent and scouting players? And we have another responsible for negotiations. Just because EtH has a veto doesn't mean all this falls under his control and makes him responsible for over paying or the lack of good options on the table - far from it.

You realise it doesn't work like the football manager games?

'Final say' and 'veto' yet to choose to focus on one aspect. So if the recruitment brought him names and alternatives and he declined them insisting on Antony isn't he to blame? We have a department set up to identify targets but they can only recommend and is it a coincidence that almost 75% of our signings are players he has worked with before or seen in the Erediviste?

 

[DJ_21]

This is just nonsense. EtH may have wanted Onana and Mount and vetoed some other options. He didn't choose how much was spent. It's just ridiculous all this EtH spent this, EtH spent that. He didn't spend a thing.

You're suggesting EtH has to veto a signing to stop the club overpaying, which is just a ridiculous perspective to take.

Exactly. He would have given them targets but he certainly has no say on how much is payed for them. What should have happened though is the people at the time signing the players should have turned away and looked elsewhere but they wanted to show they back the manager by signing his first targets.

 

[astracrazy]

'Final say' and 'veto' yet to choose to focus on one aspect. So if the recruitment brought him names and alternatives and he declined them insisting on Antony isn't he to blame? We have a department set up to identify targets but they can only recommend and is it a coincidence that almost 75% of our signings are players he has worked with before or seen in the Erediviste?

He would be to blame that Antony was the only option presented to those in charge of negations, if he really was the only option. He isn't to blame the club decided to overspend to get him, how would he be.

 

[astracrazy]

Exactly. He would have given them targets but he certainly has no say on how much is payed for them. What should have happened though is the people at the time signing the players should have turned away and looked elsewhere but they wanted to show they back the manager by signing his first targets.

Well that's there fault, its not his is it.

 

[AneRu]

That's a fair point.

I get that perspective, although I don't believe the piss would be taken to such a degree that we only ever end up with one name on the list because he vetos everyone else, but I don't get the position its his fault that's been spent. And even if the piss is taken to such a degree, finance isn't his responsibility.

On Mount and Antony it was certainly his responsibility because he didn't entertain alternatives so by insisting he weakened our hand in the said negotiations. Obviously Anorld and Murtough also take the blame for indulging him and thats why they lost their jobs. He was a major part of the failure so he, too, should follow them on the way out.

 

[tomaldinho1]

He would be to blame that Antony was the only option presented to those in charge of negations, if he really was the only option. He isn't to blame the club decided to overspend to get him, how would he be.

Surely the opposite? Particularly given the news we had Antony lined up for a cheaper fee but they wanted to look at other options, then ended up paying more for him last minute.

ETH doesn't escape blame for Antony from a talent identification standpoint but the price + lack of other options isn't on him.

 

[astracrazy]

On Mount and Antony it was certainly his responsibility because he didn't entertain alternatives so by insisting he weakened our hand in the said negotiations. Obviously Anorld and Murtough also take the blame for indulging him and thats why they lost their jobs. He was a major part of the failure so he, too, should follow them on the way out.

You don't know that to be fair.

They don't also take the blame, they take the blame.

Surely the opposite? Particularly given the news we had Antony lined up for a cheaper fee but they wanted to look at other options, then ended up paying more for him last minute.

ETH doesn't escape blame for Antony from a talent identification standpoint but the price + lack of other options isn't on him.

No you're correct, you just explained it better.

 

[romufc]

If you agree that he is bad at transfers then why try to whitewash his culpability on the fact that we have largely wasted £400m on his targets?

Pochettino did improve Chelsea but it seems he got right when it was too late to save his job or maybe it is true that philosophical contradictions did indeed play a part in the decision to let him go.

Chelsea lack a clinical striker and have inexperienced in defense and midfield. With a proper striker they could have finished higher.

In my view decisions made in the summer on key additions contribute heavily to the team's performances. Tactics, training and day to day management also play a part but if you go into a season unprepared and without strengthening your weaker areas you are bound to struggle.

So when ETH chose to spend £110m on Onana and Mount and those signings did nothing to address our key weakness; lack of credible back up at CB, DM and a prolific striker he cost us the season. What followed next was just an exposure of the weaknesses he had failed to plug - Casemiro and Martinez got injured and we had no one to step in with the needed quality. His awful tactics became the coup De grace but we had already failed in the season before a ball had been kicked.

It is clear to me that you did not see what went on or chose to ignore it based on your agenda.

But I will explain it and hopefully you can understand this is not a issue just on Ten Hag. Unless you keep choosing to ignore what I say.

No one is whitewashing his culpability, what you are doing is putting all the blame on the manager as if there is no one above the manager. Go check over the last 12 years how much money Manchester United have spent on football players, its a recurring theme.

There is a reason why the first thing SJR did was to get rid of the existing structure and replace with footballing people. Go read/ listen to SJR interviews where he has said when the institution keeps failing, its time to look past the manager.

I also find it funny you give excuses on Chelsea lacking midfield / ST when they have spent more money than us in the last 2 seasons, they have a £100m ST on loan. They spent £60m on Nkunku, £30m on Jackson. They spent £250m on midfield in the last 18 months. But ofcourse you will ignore that

OKay so DDG left, so you wanted us to what not spend money on a keeper and play Heaton? I disagree with hat but each to their own.

It was widely reported that Ten Hag wanted another CB, unless again you ignore that too, we were in for Kim but he couldn't buy one unless the club sold one. Ofcourse according to you its Ten Hag's fault that the club couldn't sell.

Ten Hag wanted a ST, according to you its his job to scout players and sign them, so I guess Ten Hag is to blame that we got Hojlund late in the window.

In DM Casemiro has a good season last season and him introducing Mainoo into the team he thought Mainoo, McT, Casemiro, Eriksen, Ambrabat can do the job, unfortunately, both were injured.

You talk about me whitewashing his culpability but you are here saying Ten HAg is the reason we signed players for over inflated prices, his fault we didnt sell, his fault we didnt replace.

How deluded must you be to think Ten Hag scouts, negotiates and signs players.

 

[Leftback99]

This is just nonsense. EtH may have wanted Onana and Mount and vetoed some other options. He didn't choose how much was spent. It's just ridiculous all this EtH spent this, EtH spent that. He didn't spend a thing.

You're suggesting EtH has to veto a signing to stop the club overpaying, which is just a ridiculous perspective to take.

So he takes no consideration to how much players cost when deciding whether to go for them or not? And we pay him £8m a year for this level of input. Some job if you can get it.

 

[AneRu]

This is just nonsense. EtH may have wanted Onana and Mount and vetoed some other options. He didn't choose how much was spent. It's just ridiculous all this EtH spent this, EtH spent that. He didn't spend a thing.

You're suggesting EtH has to veto a signing to stop the club overpaying, which is just a ridiculous perspective to take.

So if he boxed the club in on the particular signings, declined alternatives and the club wanted to back him he shouldnt be blamed for railroading us into disaster? What are you smoking - he signed a deal where he had the final say on incomings and outgoings he then proceeds to force us into overspending and you say its not his fault?

There is no hiding on this one. He insisted on a final say on recruitment as a precondition to taking the job. We then overspend on his specific targets because he didn't entertain alternatives. They flop, the CEO and DOF pay with their jobs for indulging him but he should remain blameless. No he has a big share of the blame, big enough to get the sack for it.

 

[romufc]

So he takes no consideration to how much players cost when deciding whether to go for them or not? And we pay him £8m a year for this level of input. Some job if you can get it.

I dont understand all you guys who think that Ten Hag is the one who negotiates transfers. Look at Klopp when he came he wanted certain players but the hierarchy said no and got him other players.

That is the job of sporting directors.

Ten Hag is paid 8m a year to coach the team, not to scout and negotiate transfers.

If you feel Ten Hag is the one who decides how much to pay, why have Manutd overpaid for players for 11 years?

 

[Tincanalley]

Its interesting to me that a team that finished 3 points ahead of us and not winning anything is being labelled as competitive. I thought competitive meant winning trophies, challenging for titles, PL, CL. '

You are talking about limiting us under Ten Hag but saying Poch can stabilise and be competitive finishing 6th with no trophy. I rather finish 8th and win a trophy all day long over being competitive and finishing 6th with nothing to show for.

Yes, Ten Hag is not very good at talent ID. The point is I can understand what he can't do. Its funny that fans like you blame the manager everytime. If you look back at out last 12 years, which signing has worked out? We spent money on loads of players, I didnt realise it was Ten Hag, Ole, Jose, LVG who went into negotiations for players.

You have opened my eyes today, managers lead negotiations and being 6th with no trophy is competitive.

Sarky but kind of good.

 

[roonster09]

I dont understand all you guys who think that Ten Hag is the one who negotiates transfers. Look at Klopp when he came he wanted certain players but the hierarchy said no and got him other players.

That is the job of sporting directors.

Ten Hag is paid 8m a year to coach the team, not to scout and negotiate transfers.

If you feel Ten Hag is the one who decides how much to pay, why have Manutd overpaid for players for 11 years?

Pay and sign the player manager wanted, club's fault for blindly backing manager.

Fail to sign the player manager wanted, club's fault for not backing manager.

Ten hag himself said he signed when he got assurance that he will be control of transfers.

 

[romufc]

Pay and sign the player manager wanted, club's fault for blindly backing manager.

Fail to sign the player manager wanted, club's fault for not backing manager.

Ten hag himself said he signed when he got assurance that he will be control of transfers.

I can agree with all of that but we are not talking about a league 2 team here, this is Manchester United.

A club that has a vast scouting network, sporting directors, technical directors, you are telling me that we rely on the manager?

Antony was available for £40m earlier in the window, Ten Hag must have said no no dont get him in early, wait till the end of the window when pre season is complete, then buy him for 80m? Right?

Ten Hag said we need a striker, he wanted Kane but we didnt get him, is that Ten Hag's fault cause he didnt negotiate well? Instead he got Hojlund again was touted around £40m, Ten Hag must have called his agent and Atalanta saying, no we prefer to pay £70m for him?

He must have called Maguire, McTominay saying dont go to West Ham, Manutd paying you big wages stay here..

 

[el_loco_bielsa]

So are you guys sacking him and replacing him with a best-in-class alternative, or what?

 

[AneRu]

It is clear to me that you did not see what went on or chose to ignore it based on your agenda.

But I will explain it and hopefully you can understand this is not a issue just on Ten Hag. Unless you keep choosing to ignore what I say.

No one is whitewashing his culpability, what you are doing is putting all the blame on the manager as if there is no one above the manager. Go check over the last 12 years how much money Manchester United have spent on football players, its a recurring theme.

There is a reason why the first thing SJR did was to get rid of the existing structure and replace with footballing people. Go read/ listen to SJR interviews where he has said when the institution keeps failing, its time to look past the manager.

I also find it funny you give excuses on Chelsea lacking midfield / ST when they have spent more money than us in the last 2 seasons, they have a £100m ST on loan. They spent £60m on Nkunku, £30m on Jackson. They spent £250m on midfield in the last 18 months. But ofcourse you will ignore that

OKay so DDG left, so you wanted us to what not spend money on a keeper and play Heaton? I disagree with hat but each to their own.

It was widely reported that Ten Hag wanted another CB, unless again you ignore that too, we were in for Kim but he couldn't buy one unless the club sold one. Ofcourse according to you its Ten Hag's fault that the club couldn't sell.

Ten Hag wanted a ST, according to you its his job to scout players and sign them, so I guess Ten Hag is to blame that we got Hojlund late in the window.

In DM Casemiro has a good season last season and him introducing Mainoo into the team he thought Mainoo, McT, Casemiro, Eriksen, Ambrabat can do the job, unfortunately, both were injured.

You talk about me whitewashing his culpability but you are here saying Ten HAg is the reason we signed players for over inflated prices, his fault we didnt sell, his fault we didnt replace.

How deluded must you be to think Ten Hag scouts, negotiates and signs players.

DDG left but did he have to leave after agreeing a new deal on reduced terms? Him leaving meant that we had to spend £50m on Onana and if he hadn't we would have £50m to sign Kim without having to sell a CB. So remind me again who made DDG leave and brought forward the signing of a replacement when funds were tight due to overspending on his other targets the previous summer?

Casemiro had a great season in the first one but it was clear we needed a DM to understudy and be his cover. It work out early on with Amrabat and who again made us sign him? But that's understandable, I won't hold it against him because signings do take time bed in and it seems like, at the end of the season, Amrabat had begun to settle.

Going into the season with a 20 year old striker as your only option is bonkers but we had no money because we had spent it on Mount and Onana. Now, we all don't know how things work at United, but can you honestly tell us that we spent 80m on Antony, 60m on Mount and 50m on Onana without the management explaining to to ETH how much we were being charged and the future implications of this expenditure on the club's ability to fund the purchases of a CB and back up striker?

If he identified Antony, knew that the fee had got to 80m and still approved the signing at that fee then he shares the blame, it should be simple to comprehend, really.

 

[roonster09]

I can agree with all of that but we are not talking about a league 2 team here, this is Manchester United.

A club that has a vast scouting network, sporting directors, technical directors, you are telling me that we rely on the manager?

Antony was available for £40m earlier in the window, Ten Hag must have said no no dont get him in early, wait till the end of the window when pre season is complete, then buy him for 80m? Right?

Ten Hag said we need a striker, he wanted Kane but we didnt get him, is that Ten Hag's fault cause he didnt negotiate well? Instead he got Hojlund again was touted around £40m, Ten Hag must have called his agent and Atalanta saying, no we prefer to pay £70m for him?

He must have called Maguire, McTominay saying dont go to West Ham, Manutd paying you big wages stay here..

Going by your post that EtH was paid to coach, not scout, why the feck did he mention all the players?

Why did he insist on signing FdJ and waste all the time when the player he worked with for years didn't have any intention to sign.

Dude thought Dutch league was some elite league and loaded only Dutch league.

Why didn't EtH ask management not to sign Antony when we were paying huge sum? Didn't he knows how good or bad the player was?

Why did he even ask for such a shit RW when we have Amad who is at least twice as talented as Antony.

Ofcourse he didn't negotiate prices, didn't stop him from asking for those players. Club did what they always do, blindly back manager.

Manager himself said he would have signed without the control of transfers. Not sure why he is getting excuses now.

 

[Leftback99]

I dont understand all you guys who think that Ten Hag is the one who negotiates transfers. Look at Klopp when he came he wanted certain players but the hierarchy said no and got him other players.

That is the job of sporting directors.

Ten Hag is paid 8m a year to coach the team, not to scout and negotiate transfers.

If you feel Ten Hag is the one who decides how much to pay, why have Manutd overpaid for players for 11 years?

Maybe just me but I'd expect a guy that has a so called 'veto' to consider the fee when making the decision on a player.

If one player is £10m and he thinks the alternative is slightly better but costs £90m are you saying he should choose the £90m option every time? Or just not even ask what the cost is?

 

[AneRu]

I can agree with all of that but we are not talking about a league 2 team here, this is Manchester United.

A club that has a vast scouting network, sporting directors, technical directors, you are telling me that we rely on the manager?

Antony was available for £40m earlier in the window, Ten Hag must have said no no dont get him in early, wait till the end of the window when pre season is complete, then buy him for 80m? Right?

Ten Hag said we need a striker, he wanted Kane but we didnt get him, is that Ten Hag's fault cause he didnt negotiate well? Instead he got Hojlund again was touted around £40m, Ten Hag must have called his agent and Atalanta saying, no we prefer to pay £70m for him?

He must have called Maguire, McTominay saying dont go to West Ham, Manutd paying you big wages stay here..

This is getting pedantic and childish. Do you know there is a thing called walking away from a deal? Things that clubs all over do when the price gets out of their budgeted range? Do you know City walked off from the Maguire and Sanchez deals the moment we made those deals financially crazy?

 

[romufc]

DDG left but did he have to leave after agreeing a new deal on reduced terms? Him leaving meant that we had to spend £50m on Onana and if he hadn't we would have £50m to sign Kim without having to sell a CB. So remind me again who made DDG leave and brought forward the signing of a replacement when funds were tight due to overspending on his other targets the previous summer?

Casemiro had a great season in the first one but it was clear we needed a DM to understudy and be his cover. It work out early on with Amrabat and who again made us sign him? But that's understandable, I won't hold it against him because signings do take time bed in and it seems like, at the end of the season, Amrabat had begun to settle.

Going into the season with a 20 year old striker as your only option is bonkers but we had no money because we had spent it on Mount and Onana. Now, we all don't know how things work at United, but can you honestly tell us that we spent 80m on Antony, 60m on Mount and 50m on Onana without the management explaining to to ETH how much we were being charged and the future implications of this expenditure on the club's ability to fund the purchases of a CB and back up striker?

If he identified Antony, knew that the fee had got to 80m and still approved the signing at that fee then he shares the blame, it should be simple to comprehend, really.

Oh yes, because DDG is such a good keeper where all the top clubs were waiting to sign him... oh wait. People are out here making it as if DDG was saving us points, mate he was costing us goals, couldnt play out the back. So your solution was to give him 350k a week and a 5 year deal?

Ambrabat was on loan, the club were not convinced with him, rightly so loaned him.

It is the clubs fault for giving the manager so much power, they dont care about clubs finances, they care about themselves. Its up to the people above him to have the balls to say no to the manager.

Oh yeah its Ten Hag's fault that Martial is always injured, he also said he wanted Kane because he is experienced but was happy with Hojlund. Again its Ten HAgs fault we paid so much for a striker... what is your solution? Not to sign a ST and go into a season with no striker?

Yes, Ten Hag made a massive massive mistake with Antony which he should answer for.

 

[bosnian_red]

Given all the managerial churn around right now, you'd think we would be pushing to get clarity on this asap?

 

[romufc]

This is getting pedantic and childish. Do you know there is a thing called walking away from a deal? Things that clubs all over do when the price gets out of their budgeted range? Do you know City walked off from the Maguire and Sanchez deals the moment we made those deals financially crazy?

Let me ask you 1 question. Who's job is it to walk away from a deal? The manager?

 

[Infra-red]

So are you guys sacking him and replacing him with a best-in-class alternative, or what?

We don't know. Ineos are conducting a performance review, which will reportedly take approximately a week (and will therefore presumably be concluded sometime early next week). My guess is that they were all set to sack him, but the cup final (and potential backlash) have led them to reconsider their options. 50-50 now, I reckon.

 

[AneRu]

Pay and sign the player manager wanted, club's fault for blindly backing manager.

Fail to sign the player manager wanted, club's fault for not backing manager.

Ten hag himself said he signed when he got assurance that he will be control of transfers.

This,Murtough and Arnold were naive and negligent in trusting him but he doesn't escape blame. Both of them constituted a triumvirate of mediocrity that failed and blew nearly half a billion on shit. The other two paid with their jobs and he too must follow if we are a serious football operation.

 

[AneRu]

Oh yes, because DDG is such a good keeper where all the top clubs were waiting to sign him... oh wait. People are out here making it as if DDG was saving us points, mate he was costing us goals, couldnt play out the back. So your solution was to give him 350k a week and a 5 year deal?

Ambrabat was on loan, the club were not convinced with him, rightly so loaned him.

It is the clubs fault for giving the manager so much power, they dont care about clubs finances, they care about themselves. Its up to the people above him to have the balls to say no to the manager.

Oh yeah its Ten Hag's fault that Martial is always injured, he also said he wanted Kane because he is experienced but was happy with Hojlund. Again its Ten HAgs fault we paid so much for a striker... what is your solution? Not to sign a ST and go into a season with no striker?

Yes, Ten Hag made a massive massive mistake with Antony which he should answer for.

DDG had his issues but he was far from the biggest problem to justify getting rid and spending 50m on a keeper who is a worse shot stopper with good passing that we don't even utilise because we planned on playing hoofball. Have you ever had of a thing called opportunity cost? We spent big on Onana when we could have kept DDG and brought in the much needed reinforcements at CB. Replacing DDG wasn't critical at all.

 

[Ubik]

Given all the managerial churn around right now, you'd think we would be pushing to get clarity on this asap?

Fairly sure we're keeping him at this point, but Poch and Tuchel don't seem to be going elsewhere yet and they seem to be the alternatives.

 

[romufc]

DDG had his issues but he was far from the biggest problem to justify getting rid and spending 50m on a keeper who is a worse shot stopper with good passing that we don't even utilise because we planned on playing hoofball. Have you ever had of a thing called opportunity cost? We spent big on Onana when we could have kept DDG and brought in the much needed reinforcements at CB. Replacing DDG wasn't critical at all.

I guess with the way you are going we should give Martial, Maguire, McTominay, AWB new contracts because it might cost £50m to replace them.

 

[NLunited]

Going by your post that EtH was paid to coach, not scout, why the feck did he mention all the players?

Why did he insist on signing FdJ and waste all the time when the player he worked with for years didn't have any intention to sign.

Dude thought Dutch league was some elite league and loaded only Dutch league.

Why didn't EtH ask management not to sign Antony when we were paying huge sum? Didn't he knows how good or bad the player was?

Why did he even ask for such a shit RW when we have Amad who is at least twice as talented as Antony.

Ofcourse he didn't negotiate prices, didn't stop him from asking for those players. Club did what they always do, blindly back manager.

Manager himself said he would have signed without the control of transfers. Not sure why he is getting excuses now.

Yeah the Dutch league is awful: no good players come from there ever.

The club has an abysmal record with transfers. We all know what the issues are: older players, huge contracts, a lack of efficiency in acquiring targets, missing out on young potential world class players even if they were offered to us for peanuts.

The manager can’t sign players, what are you drinking?

 

[essao]

It is clear to me that you did not see what went on or chose to ignore it based on your agenda.

But I will explain it and hopefully you can understand this is not a issue just on Ten Hag. Unless you keep choosing to ignore what I say.

No one is whitewashing his culpability, what you are doing is putting all the blame on the manager as if there is no one above the manager. Go check over the last 12 years how much money Manchester United have spent on football players, its a recurring theme.

There is a reason why the first thing SJR did was to get rid of the existing structure and replace with footballing people. Go read/ listen to SJR interviews where he has said when the institution keeps failing, its time to look past the manager.

I also find it funny you give excuses on Chelsea lacking midfield / ST when they have spent more money than us in the last 2 seasons, they have a £100m ST on loan. They spent £60m on Nkunku, £30m on Jackson. They spent £250m on midfield in the last 18 months. But ofcourse you will ignore that

OKay so DDG left, so you wanted us to what not spend money on a keeper and play Heaton? I disagree with hat but each to their own.

It was widely reported that Ten Hag wanted another CB, unless again you ignore that too, we were in for Kim but he couldn't buy one unless the club sold one. Ofcourse according to you its Ten Hag's fault that the club couldn't sell.

Ten Hag wanted a ST, according to you its his job to scout players and sign them, so I guess Ten Hag is to blame that we got Hojlund late in the window.

In DM Casemiro has a good season last season and him introducing Mainoo into the team he thought Mainoo, McT, Casemiro, Eriksen, Ambrabat can do the job, unfortunately, both were injured.

You talk about me whitewashing his culpability but you are here saying Ten HAg is the reason we signed players for over inflated prices, his fault we didnt sell, his fault we didnt replace.

How deluded must you be to think Ten Hag scouts, negotiates and signs players.

By Ten Hag insisting that he gets control of transfers when he was being hired, the club was (mistakenly) forced to rely on his judgement in transfer matters. It therefore follows that as Murtough and the rest are being blamed for poor player purchases, he cannot escape culpability for recommending the signing of duds like Anthony for crazy figures(relative to his talent) .To add insult to injury, he then went on to insist that Anthony is 'unplayable' when the whole world can see his lack of talent.The Anthony transfer alone should be enough to get sacked for. In any organization all employees are supposed to use proper judgement that leads to prudent use of available resources. Murtough, eager to show that he was backing the manager, relied on Ten Hag's judgement and the club lost money(Anthony is not worth more than 20 million pounds). It also lost the chance to strengthen in other important areas. He needs to be booted for criminal misuse of the club's money and for fraud for claiming he could be relied on when it came to transfers.

 

[roonster09]

Yeah the Dutch league is awful: no good players come from there ever.

The club has an abysmal record with transfers. We all know what the issues are: older players, huge contracts, a lack of efficiency in acquiring targets, missing out on young potential world class players even if they were offered to us for peanuts.

The manager can’t sign players, what are you drinking?

Manager can't sign players, can't coach, can't talk. Wtf we even hired.

Is it by some magical coincidence that we targetted players who worked under EtH or players who somehow had links with EtH one way or the other?