Ineos and the women

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
39,000
Location
Varies
A small part of the budget maybe but it looks the club restructuring plans do include a look at the leadership of the women's team. Today's installment is on the role of Polly Bancroft. She only joined us from Brighton in autumn 2022, but it looks like she may already be on the way out.

The rumours that she might not be part of the new setup began back in October. Whether the rumours come from Ineos/United or people trying to blame her to save their own jobs or to muddy the water over budget v management - anybody's guess...

At any rate, this week's updated rumour comes from the Daily Mail:

 
Good thread start, it will be very interesting to see how much investment and interest that will go into our United ladies! '''

People have been saying that James, Russo and Battlle would not have left if Ineos had been in control back then, but I find that hard to believe until we see how the womens team will be treated going forward!
 
Has Mary Earps already agreed to join Arsenal?

A good start will be convincing her to stay. Toone needs to be tied down if not already too

I love Katie Zelem, but that has absolutely nothing to do with anything
 
Anybody have a clue as to what the difficulties regarding player aquisitions and negotiations have been about? Why would Bancroft want to leave at this early point?
 
LawCharltonBest said:
Has Mary Earps already agreed to join Arsenal?

A good start will be convincing her to stay. Toone needs to be tied down if not already too

I love Katie Zelem, but that has absolutely nothing to do with anything
Click to expand...

Toone already signed a new contract I think.
I cannot see Earps staying. She’d have signed already surely. Hope I’m wrong but if she goes I’d rather she went out of the WSL.
Keeper is a real weakness in the Arsenal team and it would be so stupid if for the second summer running United strengthened Arsenal.
 
Did anything ever come of this?



This line from an Athletic report last month suggests not as yet:

United have not prioritised a clear, long-term footballing strategy. They have a head of player recruitment, Harvey Bussell, but do not have any scouts and are hiring a head of football negotiations for the women’s and academy teams to assist Matt Hargreaves, the director of football negotiations.
Click to expand...

Probably for the best as I'd rather the new broom be the one picking there. The line about scouts there is eyebrow-raising, not sure what the norm is in women's football but you'd have to assume the very best teams have them.

With Bancroft it's hard to really gauge her responsibility, there were reports of chaos last summer which is to an extent up to her, but also possible the whole setup was such a mess that it was an impossible job. Either way, hope Ineos live up to their words on the women's team and can act with the same purpose they have with the men's.
 
Lightbringer said:
People have been saying that James, Russo and Battlle would not have left if Ineos had been in control back then, but I find that hard to believe until we see how the womens team will be treated going forward!
Click to expand...
James was always going to go - Chelsea is her "home", same with Batlle too and Barcelona. Russo is the only maybe for me but even if Ineos was in charge it'd take a while to overhaul the women's side of things in terms of investment in adequate training facilities etc that I think she still would have left. Will take a while for us to tear up the "big three"
 
Thought this was going to be historical allegations when I saw the title and thought “here we go again…”
 
Chaos is a tough thing to define and probably the wrong label to stick on any individual. I think part of the story is the idea that by hiring a WSL specialist as head of women's football - the club thought they would stay on top of changes. In effect that they shouldn't be taken by surprise.

I'm reality, they were taken by surprise when England won the Euros. Those matches had great viewing figures and not just in England. Players like Toone, Earps and Russo jumped to the front page of the newspapers. That profile didn't die as soon as the tournament was over. It's arguable all the clubs were shocked - it's also arguable that we were worst prepared and slowest to react of the big clubs.

It even looked like the marketing team spotted it faster than the playing side. The images of the women were appearing more often, Russo was literally in the shop window - of the United corporate presentation at Davos.

Could we have kept Russo? Who knows - the rumour was we didn't even seriously try until it was too late.

Batlle - she joined us as one of our lowest paid players, she left us on the same money. We didn't try to renew mid-contract, we didn't (according to her agent) even make her an offer until she was in the final weeks of her contract. We never found out if the pull of Barcelona was too strong, because we never tested it.

We've spent money on transfers - in fact, we're big spenders by women's football standards. But I'm sure there will be a lot of questions about the number of recruits who went directly to the bench and the players we've had but couldn't keep.
 
Pexbo said:
Thought this was going to be historical allegations when I saw the title and thought “here we go again…”
Click to expand...
Same. Just got Masons ugly face poppin up in my head for some odd reason. Pheew.
Need to watch another Kobbie highlight reel to wash it out.
 
I apologise for such a long post, but most of it is data.

I am not sure what goes on behind the scenes, but is anything but stable. Chaotic could well be appropriate. This suggests that leadership and management needs a complete overhaul - familiar story!

Last season we pushed Chelsea close in both the WSL and the FA Cup. Okay, we lost two key players, but our transfer record suggests that nobody really has a vision or strategy:

Manchester United
In:

  • Hinata Miyazawa (transfer from MyNavi Sendai)
  • Evie Rabjohn (transfer from Aston Villa)
  • Gemma Evans (transfer from Reading)
  • Geyse Da Silva Ferreira (transfer from Barcelona)
  • Keira Barry (Academy to professional)
  • Emma Watson (transfer from Rangers for first professional contract)
  • Melvine Malard (loan from Lyon for the 2023/24 season)
  • Phallon Tullis-Joyce (transfer from OL Reign)
  • Gabby George (transfer from Everton)
  • Irene Guerrero (transfer from Atletico Madrid)
Out:

  • Alessia Russo (heading to Arsenal)
  • Ona Batlle (heading to Barcelona)
  • Emily Ramsey (heading to Everton)
  • Tara Bourne (heading to Sheffield United)
  • Jade Moore
  • Estelle Cascarino (heading to Paris Saint-Germain)
  • Aissatou Tounkara (heading to Paris Saint-Germain)
  • Estelle Cascarino (was on loan from Paris Saint-Germain)
  • Grace Clinton (loaned to Tottenham for 2023/24 season)
  • Maria Thorisdottir (heading to Brighton & Hove Albion)
  • Carrie Jones (heading to Bristol City)
  • Adriana Leon (heading to Aston Villa)
  • Vilde Boe Risa (heading to Atletico Madrid)
  • Alyssa Aherne (loaned to Everton for 2023/24 season)
  • Sophie Baggaley (heading to Brighton & Hove Albion)
  • Jess Simpson (loaned to Bristol City)
  • Martha Thomas (heading to Tottenham)
  • Ivana Fuso (transfer to Birmingham City)
  • Bella Reidford (dual registration with Burnley)
  • Keira Barry (loaned to Crystal Palace)
  • Kirsty Hanson (heading to Aston Villa)
  • Niamh Murphy (heading to Blackburn Rovers)
  • Chloe Williams (heading to Blackburn Rovers)
By contrast, City, who finished fourth last year, only made ONE signing and sold ONE ( with one more as a dual registration)

Chelsea Women are following in the men's footsteps and hoovering up talent - they bought twelve players and immediately loaned ten of them out. They have also loaned out four that they already had.

Arsenal bought five (from United, PSG, Barcelona, Benfica and Hammarby) They sold two and loaned three.

I'd suggest from all this that things are not great behind the scenes at United and that we lack the joined-up thinking of the other three teams, both on and off the pitch.

Apologies once again for the length of this post.

Edit: I realise that contracts are much shorter in the women's game, so transferred does not necessarily mean any fee was involved.
 
Last edited:
I was always a bit frustrated that there was no women's team for so many years.

Glad we have one now but we're obviously a little behind the more established clubs.

Any investment would be great
 
Unless it's about Alex Greenwood coming back it's not a topic for here.

On the SJR comments front we do have:
- OT as a potential home for the women's team if his United's "Wembley of the north" vision happens. As a "smaller venue in the same footprint"
- and on the team more generally:

 
From the Daily Mail reporter who said Polly Bancroft was looking for a new job.

 
jojojo said:
Unless it's about Alex Greenwood coming back it's not a topic for here.

On the SJR comments front we do have:
- OT as a potential home for the women's team if his United's "Wembley of the north" vision happens. As a "smaller venue in the same footprint"
- and on the team more generally:

Click to expand...

Makes sense, like City women playing in the academy stadium right by the Etihad. Not sure how much smaller it would be but 20-30k for the academy and women's, keeping the club museum and some other features might be doable.
 
Damien said:
Makes sense, like City women playing in the academy stadium right by the Etihad. Not sure how much smaller it would be but 20-30k for the academy and women's, keeping the club museum and some other features might be doable.
Click to expand...
City's Joie Stadium holds just 7000, more or less the same as LSV. Neither venue generally sells out. The large crowds in women's football are more for the hyped occasion - visiting Old Trafford, the Emirates, Wembley etc.
 
18 months with us obviously did Polly Bancroft's cv no harm. Off to pastures fresh.

 
I feel like she was here for less time than we spent on the process of hiring her.

Fingers crossed the next appointment (or appointments) has a more obvious positive impact.
 
Demon Barber said:
I apologise for such a long post, but most of it is data.

I am not sure what goes on behind the scenes, but is anything but stable. Chaotic could well be appropriate. This suggests that leadership and management needs a complete overhaul - familiar story!

Last season we pushed Chelsea close in both the WSL and the FA Cup. Okay, we lost two key players, but our transfer record suggests that nobody really has a vision or strategy:

Manchester United
In:

  • Hinata Miyazawa (transfer from MyNavi Sendai)
  • Evie Rabjohn (transfer from Aston Villa)
  • Gemma Evans (transfer from Reading)
  • Geyse Da Silva Ferreira (transfer from Barcelona)
  • Keira Barry (Academy to professional)
  • Emma Watson (transfer from Rangers for first professional contract)
  • Melvine Malard (loan from Lyon for the 2023/24 season)
  • Phallon Tullis-Joyce (transfer from OL Reign)
  • Gabby George (transfer from Everton)
  • Irene Guerrero (transfer from Atletico Madrid)
Out:

  • Alessia Russo (heading to Arsenal)
  • Ona Batlle (heading to Barcelona)
  • Emily Ramsey (heading to Everton)
  • Tara Bourne (heading to Sheffield United)
  • Jade Moore
  • Estelle Cascarino (heading to Paris Saint-Germain)
  • Aissatou Tounkara (heading to Paris Saint-Germain)
  • Estelle Cascarino (was on loan from Paris Saint-Germain)
  • Grace Clinton (loaned to Tottenham for 2023/24 season)
  • Maria Thorisdottir (heading to Brighton & Hove Albion)
  • Carrie Jones (heading to Bristol City)
  • Adriana Leon (heading to Aston Villa)
  • Vilde Boe Risa (heading to Atletico Madrid)
  • Alyssa Aherne (loaned to Everton for 2023/24 season)
  • Sophie Baggaley (heading to Brighton & Hove Albion)
  • Jess Simpson (loaned to Bristol City)
  • Martha Thomas (heading to Tottenham)
  • Ivana Fuso (transfer to Birmingham City)
  • Bella Reidford (dual registration with Burnley)
  • Keira Barry (loaned to Crystal Palace)
  • Kirsty Hanson (heading to Aston Villa)
  • Niamh Murphy (heading to Blackburn Rovers)
  • Chloe Williams (heading to Blackburn Rovers)
By contrast, City, who finished fourth last year, only made ONE signing and sold ONE ( with one more as a dual registration)

Chelsea Women are following in the men's footsteps and hoovering up talent - they bought twelve players and immediately loaned ten of them out. They have also loaned out four that they already had.

Arsenal bought five (from United, PSG, Barcelona, Benfica and Hammarby) They sold two and loaned three.

I'd suggest from all this that things are not great behind the scenes at United and that we lack the joined-up thinking of the other three teams, both on and off the pitch.

Apologies once again for the length of this post.

Edit: I realise that contracts are much shorter in the women's game, so transferred does not necessarily mean any fee was involved.
Click to expand...

That is a ridiculous amount of comings and goings. No wonder we havent played like a cohesive team this season.
 
LSV's full configuration: all stands open, terracing open, no segregation, full VIP section etc is around 12k. In competition mode with security, press seats, advertising hoardings etc it still holds more than 10k. Leigh (rugby league) had 10308 there last year.

I think United's biggest crowd there so far was against Arsenal in October, 8302. What's nice about the place is that once you get past the 5k mark it feels like a big event there. Those 5k+ days are pretty common now.

Though I admit it's about to lose some of its magic for me. They've switched ticketing from "sit where you like in your section" to numbered seats. I liked that it was a place where you could move around from match to match and seek out your own tribe depending on temperament and mood. Not quite a return to the terraces of my youth but not a bad approximation.

The most serious problem there at the moment is really the lack of good public transport. Parking is an issue on big crowd days. Most Leigh rugby fans live in Leigh, so they don't really hit the travel problem.

For the not too distant future - a 20/30k ground at OT would be great. I suspect it's cheaper to knock down and start again than to remove the upper tiers and give it a new roof though :lol:
 
Demon Barber said:
I apologise for such a long post, but most of it is data.

I am not sure what goes on behind the scenes, but is anything but stable. Chaotic could well be appropriate. This suggests that leadership and management needs a complete overhaul - familiar story!

Last season we pushed Chelsea close in both the WSL and the FA Cup. Okay, we lost two key players, but our transfer record suggests that nobody really has a vision or strategy:

Manchester United
In:

  • Hinata Miyazawa (transfer from MyNavi Sendai)
  • Evie Rabjohn (transfer from Aston Villa)
  • Gemma Evans (transfer from Reading)
  • Geyse Da Silva Ferreira (transfer from Barcelona)
  • Keira Barry (Academy to professional)
  • Emma Watson (transfer from Rangers for first professional contract)
  • Melvine Malard (loan from Lyon for the 2023/24 season)
  • Phallon Tullis-Joyce (transfer from OL Reign)
  • Gabby George (transfer from Everton)
  • Irene Guerrero (transfer from Atletico Madrid)
Out:

  • Alessia Russo (heading to Arsenal)
  • Ona Batlle (heading to Barcelona)
  • Emily Ramsey (heading to Everton)
  • Tara Bourne (heading to Sheffield United)
  • Jade Moore
  • Estelle Cascarino (heading to Paris Saint-Germain)
  • Aissatou Tounkara (heading to Paris Saint-Germain)
  • Estelle Cascarino (was on loan from Paris Saint-Germain)
  • Grace Clinton (loaned to Tottenham for 2023/24 season)
  • Maria Thorisdottir (heading to Brighton & Hove Albion)
  • Carrie Jones (heading to Bristol City)
  • Adriana Leon (heading to Aston Villa)
  • Vilde Boe Risa (heading to Atletico Madrid)
  • Alyssa Aherne (loaned to Everton for 2023/24 season)
  • Sophie Baggaley (heading to Brighton & Hove Albion)
  • Jess Simpson (loaned to Bristol City)
  • Martha Thomas (heading to Tottenham)
  • Ivana Fuso (transfer to Birmingham City)
  • Bella Reidford (dual registration with Burnley)
  • Keira Barry (loaned to Crystal Palace)
  • Kirsty Hanson (heading to Aston Villa)
  • Niamh Murphy (heading to Blackburn Rovers)
  • Chloe Williams (heading to Blackburn Rovers)
By contrast, City, who finished fourth last year, only made ONE signing and sold ONE ( with one more as a dual registration)

Chelsea Women are following in the men's footsteps and hoovering up talent - they bought twelve players and immediately loaned ten of them out. They have also loaned out four that they already had.

Arsenal bought five (from United, PSG, Barcelona, Benfica and Hammarby) They sold two and loaned three.

I'd suggest from all this that things are not great behind the scenes at United and that we lack the joined-up thinking of the other three teams, both on and off the pitch.

Apologies once again for the length of this post.

Edit: I realise that contracts are much shorter in the women's game, so transferred does not necessarily mean any fee was involved.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the long post - I appreciate your research efforts. It does take it from a vague uneasy feeling that we're going through players at an unusual rate to something more solid.

One of the things that comes up a lot is on the issue of injuries - but none of the big clubs have great records there. On the face of it the only players who might have been regular starters (or part of the core 14/15 who are in the starting rotation - if we rotated) would be Gabby George and Hinata Miyazawa.

I don't quite include Jayde Rivière amongst unforeseen injuries there as we bought her as she was recovering from injury and we should have expected a few shortterm stutters as she adjusted i to a full-time schedule again.

Hard to create a cohesive squad on the back of that kind of turnover though. The number of leavers who came and went without making a mark, combined with the ones we wanted to retain and lost - not a great picture for us.
 
Demon Barber said:
City's Joie Stadium holds just 7000, more or less the same as LSV. Neither venue generally sells out. The large crowds in women's football are more for the hyped occasion - visiting Old Trafford, the Emirates, Wembley etc.
Click to expand...
I think a ground below 10k would be too small, especially if the game continues to grow. 20-30k would future-proof things a bit as well as be a place to potentially host smaller outdoor events that need more seats than the Joie Stadium but not enough for the Etihad or "New Old Trafford".

jojojo said:
For the not too distant future - a 20/30k ground at OT would be great. I suspect it's cheaper to knock down and start again than to remove the upper tiers and give it a new roof though :lol:
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is true.
 
jojojo said:
Hard to create a cohesive squad on the back of that kind of turnover though. The number of leavers who came and went without making a mark, combined with the ones we wanted to retain and lost - not a great picture for us.
Click to expand...

Yep, and this summarises what I was trying to say in the Skinner thread - it took a while to look cohesive and when we do it seems pretty one dimensional. But he has had plenty of talent to pick from!
Any playing at Old Trafford, main stadium or academy stadium in the future is so much easier to get to. I wonder what that could do to attendance figures if we make that move?
 
jojojo said:
Unless it's about Alex Greenwood coming back it's not a topic for here.
Click to expand...
Well said. There’s enough of that stuff elsewhere on the forum. In this thread I want to read about what benefits the women’s team can ‘net’ from the involvement of Trawlers Ltd. :D
I wonder if and hope that the strategic review conducted by Brailsford includes the ladies set up, and that they aren’t an after thought once the men are dealt with.
 
Officially official



Looks like it's Grimsby she's off to, all the best to her there.
 
Plant0x84 said:
I wonder if and hope that the strategic review conducted by Brailsford includes the ladies set up, and that they aren’t an after thought once the men are dealt with.
Click to expand...
I think it's inevitable that they're not the top of the to do file. The men's team structure is bigger, the money involved is massively bigger. The men's structure is an old one and has been through multiple re-shuffles. There will be history and personal connections to consider as well as business ones.

I hope though that means they'll act fast on the women's team structure just so it doesn't keep bubbling up under AOB.

It's the lack of history that makes the women's team structure a suitable case for rapid action! If you can get the right people in place, give them the right reporting structure and initial budget they can be up and running fast. No rusty valves to open because it hasn't existed for long enough to have any. Easier said that done of course - all they have to do is hire the right person to do the hiring :D
 
jojojo said:
I think it's inevitable that they're not the top of the to do file. The men's team structure is bigger, the money involved is massively bigger. The men's structure is an old one and has been through multiple re-shuffles. There will be history and personal connections to consider as well as business ones.

I hope though that means they'll act fast on the women's team structure just so it doesn't keep bubbling up under AOB.

It's the lack of history that makes the women's team structure a suitable case for rapid action! If you can get the right people in place, give them the right reporting structure and initial budget they can be up and running fast. No rusty valves to open because it hasn't existed for long enough to have any. Easier said that done of course - all they have to do is hire the right person to do the hiring :D
Click to expand...
You are right of course, but I meant more along the lines of giving the girls proper decent training facilities that cost us Casey, having somewhere to play in Manchester and not LSV, and I guess being more ambitious and push for the WSL title. Obviously all the points you make will play into those decisions though. Apologies if my initial reply wasn’t clear!
 
jojojo said:
LSV's full configuration: all stands open, terracing open, no segregation, full VIP section etc is around 12k. In competition mode with security, press seats, advertising hoardings etc it still holds more than 10k. Leigh (rugby league) had 10308 there last year.

I think United's biggest crowd there so far was against Arsenal in October, 8302. What's nice about the place is that once you get past the 5k mark it feels like a big event there. Those 5k+ days are pretty common now.

Though I admit it's about to lose some of its magic for me. They've switched ticketing from "sit where you like in your section" to numbered seats. I liked that it was a place where you could move around from match to match and seek out your own tribe depending on temperament and mood. Not quite a return to the terraces of my youth but not a bad approximation.

The most serious problem there at the moment is really the lack of good public transport. Parking is an issue on big crowd days. Most Leigh rugby fans live in Leigh, so they don't really hit the travel problem.

For the not too distant future - a 20/30k ground at OT would be great. I suspect it's cheaper to knock down and start again than to remove the upper tiers and give it a new roof though :lol:
Click to expand...
Thanks for that. I had a bit of a brain fart and thought the LSV capacity was much lower for some reason. I have not been there often and when I have they were always smallish crowds.

I agree that we should be ambitious, and a 20k/30k stadium would be ideal. Rebuild it on the old site as a museum piece - The Stretford End could be terraced standing with some wooden seats at the back. White picket fencing all around. The tunnel back in the middle of the South Stand. Sod it - save a bit of money and don't have a roof on the Scoreboard End.
 
jojojo said:
I think it's inevitable that they're not the top of the to do file. The men's team structure is bigger, the money involved is massively bigger. The men's structure is an old one and has been through multiple re-shuffles. There will be history and personal connections to consider as well as business ones.

I hope though that means they'll act fast on the women's team structure just so it doesn't keep bubbling up under AOB.

It's the lack of history that makes the women's team structure a suitable case for rapid action! If you can get the right people in place, give them the right reporting structure and initial budget they can be up and running fast. No rusty valves to open because it hasn't existed for long enough to have any. Easier said that done of course - all they have to do is hire the right person to do the hiring :D
Click to expand...
Was it Forbes that put the women's team second only to Barcelona in terms of income? (£6.5m compared to about £11m) That is 1% of the men's income. There is so much to build on here and I am sure Sir Jim et al realise that. I think it was also stated that in the US the income is about 10 times more. Yes I know the population is larger, but it is an indicator of how lucrative the women's game can be.
 
Plant0x84 said:
You are right of course, but I meant more along the lines of giving the girls proper decent training facilities that cost us Casey, having somewhere to play in Manchester and not LSV, and I guess being more ambitious and push for the WSL title. Obviously all the points you make will play into those decisions though. Apologies if my initial reply wasn’t clear!
Click to expand...
Sorry if I sounded like I was complaining - I do get what you're saying :D

I think the club did a half hearted job of integration into the main management structure and a half hearted job of giving it a structure of its own. In the beginning I think Casey tried to make it work but she assumed good faith and competence from the club and the disarray in there men's team meant that never did get high enough up the agenda.

In the end we had a game that was rapidly developing from semipro to pro, COVID came crashing through, then England won the Euros. It all required people paying attention and making things happen fast but the people with the power to make things happen (and the money!) all had bigger (more expensive and more headline catching) problems to deal with.

Like I say - on the bright side, clean slate available and at a relatively low financial hit.
 
Probably worth a bump at this point.

This stood out to me earlier:

INEOS has notably never set up a full women’s cycling team to match its big-budget men’s outfit, while Nice, the French club it also owns, only compete in the second tier of women’s football in the country.
Click to expand...
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/54...ester-united-women-first-major-honour-fa-cup/

I know you can't necessarily read things directly across from Nice, but still, there's a pattern here.

Hopefully whenever Ashworth arrives he recognises the importance.
 
Payrise for the admin! Having to put the slide in of the men's league table must be awkward.
 
Ubik said:
Probably worth a bump at this point.

This stood out to me earlier:


https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/54...ester-united-women-first-major-honour-fa-cup/

I know you can't necessarily read things directly across from Nice, but still, there's a pattern here.

Hopefully whenever Ashworth arrives he recognises the importance.
Click to expand...
They do support the New Zealand women’s NT in rugby, as far as I know. But if they don’t push up from Glazer’s sludgelike investment in our women’s team, it’s a sackable offence. We’ll be conceding half of Manchester to City!
 
There's a difficult balance to be struck. Personally I want a whole club approach, but I also know that the women's team needs leaders who can actually take decisions.

Borrowing expertise from the men's setup is great, but when the women's team needs attention at the same time as the men's it's always going to lose the battle. A £10m player negotiation will always beat a £100k one on a priorities list. Now throw in some multipliers for transfer fees and stadium work and the women will never get to the top of the intray.

That probably means giving it dedicated management personnel who are "men's team quality" and who don't see the women's team as a career dead end or a demotion. It also means they have to know/learn about the women's game.

There's a development taking place in women's football that means some women's teams are becoming separate business entities with their own investors and sister clubs. Lyon is the biggest one to do it so far. Chelsea are talking about it (though that may be just a FFP magic trick). City already effectively have a structure for it through the City group setup.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.