Erik ten Hag - Manchester United manager
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
So the likes of Romano were guessing all along at a new 3 year contract.
New contract after the worst PL and CL season in living memory. This club is broken.So no new contract. Simply just triggering the one year option. Points to the idea that either Ineos don't have a great deal of faith in him or that they didn't want to offer him new terms if he was unwilling to give up his veto. Possibly both.
Just be happy you dodged Southgate.
It is at least clear now that he is Ashworth's choice (in terms that he is perfectly happy with Erik as a manager). Structure is set now.
Can't wait next season to start.
Can't wait next season to start.
The one year extension is actually a decent compromise as it wouldn’t really have sent out a great message to reward him with a pay rise and a 3 year deal after last year.
Just triggering the extension is telling that both parties are not united. That's not a good sign at all, but it'll get the media off our backs and to be frank, ETH needs to prove himself more than anything.
The new executives will 100% be scoping out managers behind the scenes.
In the end they couldn’t agree terms for a new contract because he was never giving up his powers over squad building.
But the club knew they had to trigger his extension because otherwise he’d be fatally undermined from the get go.
Just as I predicted. And a clear sign the Ineos and ETH relationship won’t last very long
But the club knew they had to trigger his extension because otherwise he’d be fatally undermined from the get go.
Just as I predicted. And a clear sign the Ineos and ETH relationship won’t last very long
Why?
Yeah but seriously. I think you're confused
We might do better and then people would have nothing to moan about. I get it now.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement from INEOS is it.
So you are NOT upset we are linked with former Eredivisie players? Glad we cleared that up.
Yeah its telling and I think, if the stars align, if we hit a rough patch and a desirable manager is available they will pull the plug. The timing of it all might have saved Eric now: with Berrada not yet in and Ashworth was still under contract at Newcastle when a decision needed to be made meant that a decision to stick with him was the safest under those circumstances, to him it meant another chance to prove himself worthy but its not looking good because the failure to agree on the veto means that they don't have the same vision on how things should work going forward and with Ashworth having felt sidelined at Newcastle he won't want to work with a manager who has that power for too long. It's a marriage of convenience at best which will be broken the moment the employer identifies a proper replacement, Ten Hag needs to hit the ground running from the beginning or he is done here.
It's a sensible outcome. He's come off of the back of a disappointing season, but one that was shaped by unforeseen circumstances, so a long term deal was never on the cards. A new 2 year deal makes sense for all parties
Him refusing to pass on the veto was the first thing that occurred to me I must say.
Why would there be after the season we’ve just had? This is the best outcome. Give him another season to prove he’s the man to take us forward or he’s out the door without having to pay him a fat wedge in compensation.
Agreed they are basically giving him two years to prove his worth and if things are terrible next year then the pay off won't be too bad.
Sensible decision all round
Gone from being sacked after the FA Cup regardless of the result. To winning it and having his deal extended.
These "journalists" really do get it so wrong so often.
Going to be great when he holds that PL trophy aloft.
These "journalists" really do get it so wrong so often.
Going to be great when he holds that PL trophy aloft.
Yeah I don't blame them.
The issue is more that we have (hopefully had) trouble signing players. The result is that we are often getting players who like Ten Hag and want to play for him.
Casemiro also signed because of Ten Hag btw. You can add that one to your list.
Big slant on it. I'm not upset about anything. I'm concerned that he's showing preference to signing players he already knows. Which just happen to be mostly Eredivisie players. So mentioning a bunch of Dutch players we had years ago is completely irrelevant
I literally wrote Casemiro in the post you quoted. Again, you're confused. I'm sensing a theme. But if it's easier for you to imagine that I'm the problem, then that's okay.
Really?
Did Sir Jim write to you stating Ten Hags 100% sacking or did you read it from usually Chelsea-centric journalists who were told this information from a disgruntled Chelsea after being turned down by McKenna who probably said the only top job he would want is Manchester United?
Yes, from Cashmere’s own words.
He could just sack him if he's being insubordinate or difficult to work with. Maybe it's Ashworths welcome present - a chance to hire his own manager as soon as he's in. Kinda like his own personal Antony.
Everyone that says Erik Ten Hag refused to lose his veto.
Ashworth only works with managers who have veto. His words from his mouth "there is no point in signing players the manager doesn't want, because the manager won't play them"
If the club didn't want him to have a veto and Ten Hag insisted then we would cancel negotiations and move on, INEOS have shown they can be ruthless.
Ashworth only works with managers who have veto. His words from his mouth "there is no point in signing players the manager doesn't want, because the manager won't play them"
If the club didn't want him to have a veto and Ten Hag insisted then we would cancel negotiations and move on, INEOS have shown they can be ruthless.
The new contract to me is a premature parting of ways. I can see him surviving next season, and then him leaving after that.
Seems like a sensible compromise to me.
Anyway its sorted now so hopefully we will start to see the benefits of the new set up soon.
Anyway its sorted now so hopefully we will start to see the benefits of the new set up soon.
Am I right in saying it isn't a new contract? The club just exercised the one year extension to the current contract.
He did?
Correct
Cheers. So not massively significant news then I think, in the grand scheme of things. They couldn't opt to stick with him then let his contract expire in the same season.
I wouldn’t really brag about Casemiro being ETH transfer masterpiece and how it wouldn’t happen if not for ten Hag, considering we now know Casemiro was already past his peak when we bought him, we spent insane amount, he’s our highest paid player we will struggle to sell and only delivered one good season in which all we won was the tier C EFL cup. Not the best piece of business if you ask me, incredibly desperate and shortsighted.
They will pull the plug, but the contract is manageable, rather than the sort of trick Ed Woodward would have pulled. This way they are giving him just enough leverage with the players but also telling the players they are not letting them oust another manager.
Yeah the only significance is that we haven't offered him a fresh new deal and tied ourselves up in the process by agreeing to his veto long term. If anything, it's all quite alarming for ten Hag.
I presume ineos were offering a longer new contract on their terms which has been declined .
I don't feel it shows obvious uncertainty about ETH from ineos , more the opposite. The concessions are from their side . They have extended an existing contract that they themselves would not offer .
It's the terms of their new contracts that I feel are the stumbling block .
I don't feel it shows obvious uncertainty about ETH from ineos , more the opposite. The concessions are from their side . They have extended an existing contract that they themselves would not offer .
It's the terms of their new contracts that I feel are the stumbling block .
Effectively a 1 year extension for ETH which is fair enough. No issue with him keeping the veto as I don't think that in itself was an issue, more so the structure around transfers. ETH may have really wanted Antony but it's up to the recruitment team to say no and bring other targets to the table. From what we've heard the issue wasn't ETH saying no to club targets (i.e. Martinez over Pau Torres) but the club not saying no to his requests.
Casemiro for example was a club signing that ETH agreed to
Casemiro for example was a club signing that ETH agreed to
sensible choice. let him work with the new structure. the likes of sancho won’t gamble on him going and will be more likely to leave. if he fails, it’s not costing a lot more to get rid of him, and ineos will have a better idea of who exactly we need to get in to fix us.