Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
all of them in the end and Moyes!!

Which is why I said that they are just slow and eventually agree with the Caf. Now there is no actually good reason for the slowness, so these silly arguments that try to portray a set of fans are worse than the others shouldn't be. We all want what is best for the club, we just work at different speeds.
 
Who did we sign that he didn't want?? Feel like the club actually gave him even too much power when it came to transfers, he had carte blanche to go after his targets when feasible (FDJ was not)

Did you read the actual article? Because the title/tweet is misleading. He says that he had nothing to do with the actual valuation of the transfers. He didn't said that he didn't want those players, only that he did not actually negotiated the transfer fee and the wages.

I do find this hard to believe unless Arnold and Murtogh were afraid of being accused of not getting their manager's targets, so did whatever it took to get some of these players. I'm sure that at some point they told Ten Hag that Antony would cost almost world record fee, and that they would like to make sure than he is his man 100% before committing to such a fee and taking his wages from 20k a week, to 200k a week.
 
The longer any announcement about his future is delayed, the more likely it is that he goes, imo. I have a feeling they're just waiting for the FA Cup excitement to die down to make the change. My money is on Tuchel as his replacement.
I’m on the other side - I think the longer it goes, the bigger chance he stays
 
I miss the Ten Hag that we had when first hired that shouldered a huge amount of blame himself after we started terribly the first season

It was commendable but I don't expect it to be always the case, sometimes the manager isn't responsible but in this case he can't play two tunes at the same time. He can't escape the following statement:

"I set requirements in advance about how I want to work," he told Dutch outlet Trouw.

"If they aren't granted, I won't do it. I am ultimately responsible and accounted for the results. I don't want to be the sole ruler, I stand for cooperation, but control in transfers is a condition for me."
 
It was commendable but I don't expect it to be always the case, sometimes the manager isn't responsible but in this case he can't play two tunes at the same time. He can't escape the following statement:
Which has nothing to do with negotiating transfer fees and you can’t jump to the conclusion he was asked to sign off or agree to keep targets if the fee is high. Knowing how dysfunctional the club has been (repeated by many the communication between functions was not good) I wouldn’t be suprised if some got deals done because they didn’t want to miss out on getting the manager a player but didn’t go back with the fee.

Especially Antony and Casemiro who were signed late in the window after a couple of losses and especially after we we didnt manage to sign De Jong who they likely promised the manager they would get done

Personally when ETH was hired I was against him having transfer control for this reason because ultimately it creates pressure for the recruitment team when they manager wants a specific player and they may feel they have to do whatever to get them. This was also coming of the back drop of accusations of the club not backing managers.

Hopefully we can have a better structure going forward with clear lines of responsibility.
 
Last edited:
Which has nothing to do with negotiating transfer fees and you can’t jump to the conclusion he was asked to sign off or agree to keep targets if the fee is high. Knowing how dysfunctional the club has been (repeated by many the communication between functions was not good) I wouldn’t be suprised if some got deals done because they didn’t want to miss out on getting the manager a player but didn’t go back with the fee.

Especially Antony and Casemiro who were signed late in the window after a couple of losses and especially we we didnt manage to sign De Jong who they likely promised the manager they would get done

Personally when ETH was hired I was against him having transfer control for this reason because ultimately it creates pressure for the recruitment team when they manager wants a specific player and they may feel they have to do whatever to get them

I already said that he was correct about the fees.
 
It was commendable but I don't expect it to be always the case, sometimes the manager isn't responsible but in this case he can't play two tunes at the same time. He can't escape the following statement:
Yeah was one of my biggest complaints about him even before the disaster of this season. Seemed pretty obvious he was steering the ship for transfers
 
I already said that he was correct about the fees.

You also said this

“ But he is intellectually dishonest, he stated that he had a say and that it was a condition for his signing, so he isn't responsible for the price but he is responsible for the fact that they remained targets in spite of their high fees ”

Which my post commented on
 
This goes against his own description of the style he wants which transition Football with speed and surprise. Speed and surprise are by definition a low percentage approach. And I personally have no issue with it, I like that style but his setup has been terrible, the coverage and pressing schemes have been consistently terrible and that's our issue, not the style.
I think you are looking at this upside down.

An attack into space is a high percentage approach: breaking down a block is a low percentage approach.

Again I don’t hear anyone mention injuries when discussing the ‘terrible setup’.
 
I get the impression that if ETH stays, there's quite a lot of people in here that are hoping we'll have a miserable season so they can go for the "told you so". It's bizarre.

These comments are just ridiculous. We are all Utd fans and want the club to do well.
 
There seems to be an assertion floating around in football these days that very good managers can’t have poor seasons. Even when a large percentage of their previous seasons were very good the revisonism starts as soon as they have a bad one.
 
You also said this

“ But he is intellectually dishonest, he stated that he had a say and that it was a condition for his signing, so he isn't responsible for the price but he is responsible for the fact that they remained targets in spite of their high fees ”

Which my post commented on

You didn't say anything that goes against it, if you are responsible for something, you are responsible for the communication and getting all the necessary informations. There is no way around it, yes isn't responsible for the fee or the negotiation of the fee but he is responsible for the targetting, he is also partially responsible for any lack of communication or informations that he didn't get when he simply had to ask, unless we are suggesting that the people negotiating would refuse to give him that information in which case they are 100% at fault.
 
You didn't say anything that goes against it, if you are responsible for something, you are responsible for the communication and getting all the necessary informations. There is no way around it, yes isn't responsible for the fee or the negotiation of the fee but he is responsible for the targetting, he is also partially responsible for any lack of communication or informations that he didn't get when he simply had to ask, unless we are suggesting that the people negotiating would refuse to give him that information in which case they are 100% at fault.
I said this so yes I did, its ok if you disagree with what I said but no reason to say I didnt say it

“ you can’t jump to the conclusion he was asked to sign off or agree to keep targets if the fee is high.”
 
If anything’s happening it will probably be Monday now. If nothing happens then he’s staying put, it’s still been dealt with very poorly. We need a statement whether he’s leaving or staying. I still think keeping him hanging is awful considering he’s won us 2 trophy’s and ended our 6 year trophy wait.
 
I said this so yes I did, its ok if you disagree with what I said but no reason to say I didnt say it

“ you can’t jump to the conclusion he was asked to sign off or agree to keep targets if the fee is high.”

So you are suggesting that signings were forced on him or that it was impossible for him to be informed about players' costs?
 
So you are suggesting that signings were forced on him or that it was impossible for him to be informed about players' costs?
Forced no I am saying you can’t assume he was asked about the fee / sign off the fee. That is not the same as forcing a signing

E.g “please sign me a RW and a DM here are a few names, we need these to positions filled before the window shuts”

Recruitment team go away and make 2 signings from the names on the list. The fees and wages don’t necessarily need to be discussed if they are within the previously discussed summer budget.

I am not saying that is what happened I am specifically saying you are making assumptions and jumping to conclusions and you shouldn’t because we don’t know. What we do know is that the function of the recruitment was a problem for plenty of managers at this club and we have had people go on record talking about the poor communication
 
I’m on the other side - I think the longer it goes, the bigger chance he stays
I’m now thinking the longer it takes the more chance he goes.

Would imagine if they’re genuinely reviewing the season they’ll sack him.
 
Forced no I am saying you can’t assume he was asked about the fee / sign off the fee. That is not the same as forcing a signing

E.g “please sign me a RW and a DM here are a few names, we need these to positions filled before the window shuts”

Recruitment team go away and make 2 signings from the names on the list. The fees and wages don’t necessarily need to be discussed if they are within the previously discussed summer budget.

I am not saying that is what happened I am specifically saying you are making assumptions and jumping to conclusions and you shouldn’t because we don’t know. What we do know is that the function of the recruitment was a problem for plenty of managers at this club and we have had people go on record talking about the poor communication

Which assumes that he has done an half arsed job. If I expect and demand to be in control of transfers than I have the duty to be aware of every steps, otherwise I'm not in control and I'm not acting like someone that should be in control. And to be clear I don't interpret that as solely ETH's fault, Murtough and whoever else involved are also at fault if for some reason they didn't on their own fed ETH with every consequential piece of information but it's a two way street.
 
If they let him take charge of the pre-season games starting in mid-July then I can't see them sacking him this summer.
 
Surely the assessment of the season could and should have been ongoing for a while now, nothing really changed. This dithering is showing a real lack of conviction and decisiveness.
 
Which assumes that he has done an half arsed job. If I expect and demand to be in control of transfers than I have the duty to be aware of every steps, otherwise I'm not in control and I'm not acting like someone that should be in control. And to be clear I don't interpret that as solely ETH's fault, Murtough and whoever else involved are also at fault if for some reason they didn't on their own fed ETH with every consequential piece of information but it's a two way street.
You are again making assumptions on the agreement between him and the club. What did he mean by control of transfer etc and was what agreed in the responsibilities between him and the club which no one has disclosed.

Also I am not even saying he didnt make mistakes. He is clearly part of the recruitment and so takes some blame.

However Im pointing out that you taking what he said and extrapolating what it means in the its wider context and down to finer details is leading you to jump to multiple conclusions

Hopefully INEOS have got down to the facts of the matter and make the correct decisions to resolve the issues.
 
Ten Hag said the review was done. There are reports the club has talked to other managers and that the club is still being reviewed.

Maybe they are different reviews assessing different aspects.

Anyway, things aren’t looking good. Bruno’s agent is busy talking to other clubs.
 
You are again making assumptions on the agreement between him and the club. What did he mean by control of transfer etc and was what agreed in the responsibilities between him and the club which no one has disclosed.

Also I am not even saying he didnt make mistakes. He is clearly part of the recruitment and so takes some blame.

However Im pointing out that you taking what he said and extrapolating what it means in the its wider context and down to finer details is leading you to jump to multiple conclusions

Hopefully INEOS have got down to the facts of the matter and make the correct decisions to resolve the issues.

No I am questioning the idea of control. If you do not have important informations and can't take decisions based on these important information then how are you in control? What exactly are you controlling?
 
Ten Hag said the review was done. There are reports the club has talked to other managers and that the club is still being reviewed.

Maybe they are different reviews assessing different aspects.

Anyway, things aren’t looking good. Bruno’s agent is busy talking to other clubs.
If Bruno wants another deal and improved terms (which is what is reported) I think the right choice is to sell him personally
 
No I am question the idea of control. If you do not have important informations and can't take decisions based on these important information then how are you in control? What exactly are you controlling?

I gave you an example where the control is speaking about the targets and priorities. What he meant by control is what I am saying you are assuming when you start talking about fees.

In any case hopefully the club has learned its lesson and hopefully he has too if he goes elsewhere

I have control of somethings at work when it comes to vendors. I don’t negotiate the contracts though thats up to procurement and my business sponsor. I don’t get involved in the numbers thats their job I see the numbers and have views on them but mostly thats after the deal is sealed
 
If Bruno wants another deal and improved terms (which is what is reported) I think the right choice is to sell him personally

No doubt, he's too old for any sort of significant payrise.
 
I gave you an example where the control is speaking about the targets and priorities. What he meant by control is what I am saying you are assuming when you start talking about fees.

In any case hopefully the club has learned its lesson and hopefully he has too if he goes elsewhere

I have control of somethings at work when it comes to vendors. I don’t negotiate the contracts though thats up to procurement and my business sponsor. I don’t get involved in the numbers thats their job I see the numbers and have views on them but mostly thats after the deal is sealed

How do you know that it is what he meant by control when speaking about targets and priorities has nothing to do with having controls in transfers?

Maybe you are right but surely you see that your interpretation requires to take some liberties with the definition of control?
 
Should run a competition, INEOS announcement… date/time/stay/sack

Monday 3rd - 11am - sack
 
How do you know that it is what he meant by control when speaking about targets and priorities has nothing to do with having controls in transfers?

Maybe you are right but surely you see that your interpretation requires to take some liberties with the definition of control?
I didnt say that is what he meant. I gave you an example which contradicted your view and said you should not assume.

And no I don’t think it requires taking liberties with the definition esepcially when I know we had John Murtough he also had control in transfers and Arnold was also involved.

Also we know that part of his control was a veto on agreed targets because they told us this. We have no idea if this included the fee or not what we do know if targets are agreed at the start of the widow
 
I didnt say that is what he meant. I gave you an example which contradicted your view and said you should not assume.

And no I don’t think it requires taking liberties with the definition esepcially when I know we have John Murtough he also had control in transfers.

Yeah maybe he meant something totally different than control. I see your point.
 
We changed tactics frequently this season in big games. The strategy has been the same: utilizing our fast wingers, playing out the back and through the press. We have played long balls in behind all season, as well as played through the middle.

But we hardly ever played counter attack. That's Oleball.
 
But we hardly ever played counter attack. That's Oleball.
Ole didn't want to play a high line and progress the ball through the back. Ten hag did. I agree that the system didn't work though, because we failed to beat high presses/were nervous and poorly executing our progression up the pitch. However that does not mean the system itself was Ole ball.

We also press a lot higher than we did under Ole, by design. Calling Ole ball is a bit of a lazy interpretation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.