SparkedIntoLife
Full Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2013
- Messages
- 1,256
I've long admired the regular match goers at United for their steadfastness in supporting the team despite tough circumstances. That stoicism seems to be eroding at a faster rate at the moment. The booing of Zirkzee highlighted that. It feels like there's a rise of toxicity at Old Trafford. The Glazers have seemingly been replaced by INEOS as the evil overlord villains as initial optimism about their partial takeover has been quelled by price hikes, job cuts, some poor footballing decisions and rhetoric that doesn't jive with the socialist, working class culture of Manchester.
Ralf Rangnick's interim spell at United was a disaster on the pitch. Yet he tickled the ears of dissatisfied fans with words of revolution such as 'open heart surgery'. The players were totally zapped of belief but it didn't matter to many fans; they were shite anyway and would be replaced in the revolution. Anthony Elanga was an early face of the revolution - hard working, humble but actually quite average. Rashford (and Ronaldo to a lesser extent) was an early scapegoat.
ETH came in and sent Ralf packing. He established a lot of control in terms of transfer choices, the footballing structure, oversight of the Under 21s etc. Yet his tone was different. He reminded us that these players had finished second only a year before. He claimed that Rashford was world class. He spoke positively about evolution and not revolution. What happened that season? We finished third and won the Carabao Cup. Rashford scored 30 goals. He didn't commit to the Ajax free flowing style he was recruited for. He played a slightly more possession based version of the counter attack that suited us under Ole.
Many of us suspected that season's success was a veneer and that major cracks were being covered up. The bold thing to do would've been to sell Rashford, Fernandes and Casemiro for decent money and commit to the style that got ETH to the job. He did make big changes in that second season but they were weird compromised ones, still trying to shore horn in players that didn't suit his overall philosophy. The writing was on the wall from there but negativity was muted somewhat by the emergence of Mainoo and development of Garnacho.
Ruben Amorim came in with charm, conviction and charisma. He aligned with what I consider the real aspects of United DNA - giving youth a chance and attacking football, not systems or formations.
He's come in to find a club that's probably further away from where he wants us to be than he expected. Media noise, INEOS fuelling negativity in their financial decisions and the busy Christmas period haven't helped Ruben. Yet two months later, he is coming off more and more negative. The results have been poor but most of us excuse them because we like the manager, like his vision and know that the club is in a mess and reaping the consequences of years of bad decisions from the top down. It would be disingenuous for Ruben to be super positive, ignoring the bad results/performances and I'm certainly not wanting him to abandon his principles or system.
I just wonder whether the negativity has gone too far. Do we not need our figurehead to talk up the club's potential a bit more? Sporting fans have said that Amorim can look very pained on the sidelines, even when things were going great. But is the morose body language hurting us a bit when the club feels so negative already? And why hasn't any of our youngsters gotten involved when the current lot have been performing so badly and there's huge gaps in the squad? Are they far from ready, not good enough or being protected? Protected from what?
I think we're better than we're showing. Do we need a revolution? Of course but we're in freefall atm, players already low resale values are crashing and the mood at OT is poor. Surely there's got to be more positivity beyond 'Amorim is the saviour'.
For the record, I think we have the right guy at the wrong time. I am concerned, though, at the power he wields, the 'saviour' narrative that's forming and the leadership vacuum from top. We kept Andreas Georgsen who is allegedly one of the best set pieces coaches in the world (he preceded Joper at both Brentford and Arsenal and only left Arsenal for a managerial opportunity). For me, his marginalisation is a bigger, more worrying story than it's being made out to be. Wilcox seemingly insisted he stays. Wilcox got his wishes. But if he's being marginalised, then Wilcox didn't get his wishes. While we definitely need a strong Head Coach who will stick to his convictions, I'm wary of the Head Coach who is overly parochial in his mindset and doesn't work well within the footballing structure, especially when so young and relatively inexperienced.
Ultimately, in hindsight, should we have just gone full Vibes FC with Ruud til the end of the season and then bring in Amorim in a position of strength with some resale value on players he wanted to ditch, some PSR wiggle room and more of a clean slate? Is this yet another terrible miscalculation from INEOS? Have we sucked Amorim into the negativity vortex? Does he need to be a little more flexible? And a bit more 'fake it to you make it' with some positive affirmation before then really kicking ass and clearing house? I'm not talking formation/style compromise but at least general discourse and demeanour?
Ralf Rangnick's interim spell at United was a disaster on the pitch. Yet he tickled the ears of dissatisfied fans with words of revolution such as 'open heart surgery'. The players were totally zapped of belief but it didn't matter to many fans; they were shite anyway and would be replaced in the revolution. Anthony Elanga was an early face of the revolution - hard working, humble but actually quite average. Rashford (and Ronaldo to a lesser extent) was an early scapegoat.
ETH came in and sent Ralf packing. He established a lot of control in terms of transfer choices, the footballing structure, oversight of the Under 21s etc. Yet his tone was different. He reminded us that these players had finished second only a year before. He claimed that Rashford was world class. He spoke positively about evolution and not revolution. What happened that season? We finished third and won the Carabao Cup. Rashford scored 30 goals. He didn't commit to the Ajax free flowing style he was recruited for. He played a slightly more possession based version of the counter attack that suited us under Ole.
Many of us suspected that season's success was a veneer and that major cracks were being covered up. The bold thing to do would've been to sell Rashford, Fernandes and Casemiro for decent money and commit to the style that got ETH to the job. He did make big changes in that second season but they were weird compromised ones, still trying to shore horn in players that didn't suit his overall philosophy. The writing was on the wall from there but negativity was muted somewhat by the emergence of Mainoo and development of Garnacho.
Ruben Amorim came in with charm, conviction and charisma. He aligned with what I consider the real aspects of United DNA - giving youth a chance and attacking football, not systems or formations.
He's come in to find a club that's probably further away from where he wants us to be than he expected. Media noise, INEOS fuelling negativity in their financial decisions and the busy Christmas period haven't helped Ruben. Yet two months later, he is coming off more and more negative. The results have been poor but most of us excuse them because we like the manager, like his vision and know that the club is in a mess and reaping the consequences of years of bad decisions from the top down. It would be disingenuous for Ruben to be super positive, ignoring the bad results/performances and I'm certainly not wanting him to abandon his principles or system.
I just wonder whether the negativity has gone too far. Do we not need our figurehead to talk up the club's potential a bit more? Sporting fans have said that Amorim can look very pained on the sidelines, even when things were going great. But is the morose body language hurting us a bit when the club feels so negative already? And why hasn't any of our youngsters gotten involved when the current lot have been performing so badly and there's huge gaps in the squad? Are they far from ready, not good enough or being protected? Protected from what?
I think we're better than we're showing. Do we need a revolution? Of course but we're in freefall atm, players already low resale values are crashing and the mood at OT is poor. Surely there's got to be more positivity beyond 'Amorim is the saviour'.
For the record, I think we have the right guy at the wrong time. I am concerned, though, at the power he wields, the 'saviour' narrative that's forming and the leadership vacuum from top. We kept Andreas Georgsen who is allegedly one of the best set pieces coaches in the world (he preceded Joper at both Brentford and Arsenal and only left Arsenal for a managerial opportunity). For me, his marginalisation is a bigger, more worrying story than it's being made out to be. Wilcox seemingly insisted he stays. Wilcox got his wishes. But if he's being marginalised, then Wilcox didn't get his wishes. While we definitely need a strong Head Coach who will stick to his convictions, I'm wary of the Head Coach who is overly parochial in his mindset and doesn't work well within the footballing structure, especially when so young and relatively inexperienced.
Ultimately, in hindsight, should we have just gone full Vibes FC with Ruud til the end of the season and then bring in Amorim in a position of strength with some resale value on players he wanted to ditch, some PSR wiggle room and more of a clean slate? Is this yet another terrible miscalculation from INEOS? Have we sucked Amorim into the negativity vortex? Does he need to be a little more flexible? And a bit more 'fake it to you make it' with some positive affirmation before then really kicking ass and clearing house? I'm not talking formation/style compromise but at least general discourse and demeanour?