Ivan Perisic

[Raoul]

Football is not some Shakespear poem either. Throwing ridiculous sums on average players won’t bring us closer to City, nor make us fight and take risks. Like every other successful company we need a vision and smart planning.

That's not for anyone but Mourinho to decide since only he knows what he's attempting to achieve in terms of tactics based on formations and individual skills sets.

 

[Kostov]

That's not for anyone but Mourinho to decide since only he knows what he's attempting to achieve in terms of tactics based on formations and individual skills sets.

I think by now we should all know what he tries to achieve in terms of tactics/formations etc. The thing is, we as a team lack a clear vision, and if the money man doubts Jose’s suggestions, he should not follow suit. What’s best for Mourinho right now, might not be best for Manchester United in a year time.

 

[redIndianDevil]

I think jose wants to bring a ball playing defender and perisic. So that he can field a 3-5-2 with sanchez-lukaku operating in front and perisic as a left wing back.

Great idea spending a shitload of money on an older player to ask him to play in a position he has never played in his life ever. I'm happy that Woodward wasn't stupid enough to try and buy Perisic last year.

 

[redIndianDevil]

I think by now we should all know what he tries to achieve in terms of tactics/formations etc. The thing is, we as a team lack a clear vision, and if the money man doubts Jose’s suggestions, he should not follow suit. What’s best for Mourinho right now, might not be best for Manchester United in a year time.

Exactly all this support the manager at all costs or fire him is simply not possible. Look at how other top clubs in the continent does things, all the manager has to do is coach the team, we can't simply keep spending shitloads on every manager or try and rebuild the team from scratch everytime we change manager, it's just not feasible.

 

[Cliche Guevara]

I don’t think the board should decide who we buy or don’t buy and don’t think they have the expertise to decide what a player is worth at any given point in the market.

What they can do, however, is set the budget. If Mourinho is told he has £100m then he can buy who he wants within that budget. Naturally he might argue to stretch it by ten or twenty million and the board can be persuaded or not. There is absolutely no point in the board setting a budget and not letting the manager get who he feels he needs, regardless of anyone’s opinion on the player.

Provided the manager does not exceed the budget then you back him and sack him if he gets it wrong.

There’s probably nothing wrong in the club setting a policy, either, which might require signing a player under 23 and only one over 28, if they so wish. A manager should be appointed on this understanding, however.

To say we can buy a player who’s 29 for £40m but not £50m is utterly pointless, if it’s not exceeding the budget. It’s half-arsed.

 

[pocco]

I don’t think the board should decide who we buy or don’t buy and don’t think they have the expertise to decide what a player is worth at any given point in the market.

What they can do, however, is set the budget. If Mourinho is told he has £100m then he can buy who he wants within that budget. Naturally he might argue to stretch it by ten or twenty million and the board can be persuaded or not. There is absolutely no point in the board setting a budget and not letting the manager get who he feels he needs, regardless of anyone’s opinion on the player.

Provided the manager does not exceed the budget then you back him and sack him if he gets it wrong.

There’s probably nothing wrong in the club setting a policy, either, which might require signing a player under 23 and only one over 28, if they so wish. A manager should be appointed on this understanding, however.

To say we can buy a player who’s 29 for £40m but not £50m is utterly pointless, if it’s not exceeding the budget. It’s half-arsed.

I've been saying this to those that were championing the board vetoing certain signings. They're not the guys to decide who we buy unless there were very serious reasons not to. They have to back the manager if a) they believe in them, and b) they want success.

If either of those two don't apply then you get rid of the manager and bring in somebody that they both apply to, and you back them as much as you can. Contrary to popular belief, I think our board still believe in Jose.

 

[bucky]

That's my view, but I'm just a fan. If Mourinho has something else in mind then ultimately its his call.

What if Woodward and the board agree with you that Mourinho should work with what he has in that position? I mean there are good CBs out there and I wouldn't mind signing another, but like you I don't think it should be a priority. All of our CBs, perhaps bar Rojo, due to the injury, should have their best years ahead of them. Fairly sure a lot of managers would love to be backed like United have backed Mourinho. At some point he also needs to do better in terms of coaching.

 

[Cliche Guevara]

I also think the board need to take responsibility for who they hire as manager. If they get it wrong then it’s them who pays for it.

There’s no point in saying we better not back this guy as we might have got it wrong and have to sack him at some point.

 

[haram]

I know its MEN, but if the story yesterday that Ed rejected signing Perisic last summer because he felt he had insufficient "brand value" is true then that's absolutely infuriating.

Complete joke.

 

[haram]

No, it's just accepting reality, right now we just have to see out the Mourinho storm, I'd rather keep the powder dry for the next manager, not saddle him with £120M worth of 30 year olds on huge wages that he can't shift to bring in his own players.

So then sack Mourinho now then. What’s the point if you’re not going to back him. Also, Mourinho wanted Perisic last season after we had won two trophies and got back into the CL, so I dont see why you wouldn’t back the transfer at that point.

 

[DannyCAFC]

Perisic was pretty mediocre for Milan last season. Bullet dodged imo.

If his season last year with Inter was mediocre, I'd hate to think what you thought of most of your players performances last season.

 

[Andersons Dietician]

I know its MEN, but if the story yesterday that Ed rejected signing Perisic last summer because he felt he had insufficient "brand value" is true then that's absolutely infuriating.

There was a version of this story last year, I tried to find it, can’t, but the reason ED didn’t want Peresic is because the board and he wanted Martial to succeed and didn’t want to limit his minutes. However depending on where Jose told them Sanchez was going to play something must have changed in that agreement.

 

[Raoul]

What if Woodward and the board agree with you that Mourinho should work with what he has in that position? I mean there are good CBs out there and I wouldn't mind signing another, but like you I don't think it should be a priority. All of our CBs, perhaps bar Rojo, due to the injury, should have their best years ahead of them. Fairly sure a lot of managers would love to be backed like United have backed Mourinho. At some point he also needs to do better in terms of coaching.

They wouldn't be agreeing with me since I believe Mourinho should be allowed to get the players he wants. If the board are attempting to block Jose from buying players in order to force him to use Martial more then that's a problem.

 

[Cliche Guevara]

What if Woodward and the board agree with you that Mourinho should work with what he has in that position? I mean there are good CBs out there and I wouldn't mind signing another, but like you I don't think it should be a priority. All of our CBs, perhaps bar Rojo, due to the injury, should have their best years ahead of them. Fairly sure a lot of managers would love to be backed like United have backed Mourinho. At some point he also needs to do better in terms of coaching.

It could get over-complicated but there’s probably a way to do that. Having a one-in one-out system and giving the manager a net-spend of, say, £30m for that position. He can then top that up with whatever you can bring in on sales.

I still disagree with you can get that guy but not at that price, or you can have this much but not for that guy.

 

[Ace of Spades]

So then sack Mourinho now then. What’s the point if you’re not going to back him. Also, Mourinho wanted Perisic last season after we had won two trophies and got back into the CL, so I dont see why you wouldn’t back the transfer at that point.

He has been backed, no amount of repeatedly saying he was not will change the fact that he was. He wanted Perisic, but got Sanchez as an alternative, and he said at that point that he was happy with our attack and that we were not going to sign another attacker. He even said that were looking for 3 to 4 signings depending on whether Fellaini stayed or not. He has stayed, we have signed 2 players so far and are looking to sign another. Seems to me he is getting what he wanted, at least according to his own comments.

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

I know its MEN, but if the story yesterday that Ed rejected signing Perisic last summer because he felt he had insufficient "brand value" is true then that's absolutely infuriating.

That can't be true.

We've signed plenty of players without brand value, unless Ed is strictly focused on brand value for attackers.

Either way, if it is true, it's absolutely moronic.

 

[Ace of Spades]

That can't be true.

We've signed plenty of players without brand value, unless Ed is strictly focused on brand value for attackers.

Either way, if it is true, it's absolutely moronic.

It isn't, as you say we have signed many players who don't have much brand value, even in attack. Mata, Martial and Mkhitaryan are hardly household names.

 

[Devil may care]

So then sack Mourinho now then. What’s the point if you’re not going to back him. Also, Mourinho wanted Perisic last season after we had won two trophies and got back into the CL, so I dont see why you wouldn’t back the transfer at that point.

If only....As for the rest, Perisic wasn't any better or any more marketable last summer and still too close to 30 from a business perspective, and Mourinho has been backed, Pogba, Bailly, Matic, Lindelof, Sanchez. Mkhi, his only real complaint can be in regards to the fullback situation where it does feel like Shaw is being forced on him and in his usual petty way he's responbded by using Young as our LB.

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

It isn't, as you say we have signed many players who don't have much brand value, even in attack. Mata, Martial and Mkhitaryan are hardly household names.

Yeah I refuse to believe it's true.

 

[bucky]

They wouldn't be agreeing with me since I believe Mourinho should be allowed to get the players he wants. If the board are attempting to block Jose from buying players in order to force him to use Martial more then that's a problem.

Nobody is forcing him to use Martial. After all they did get him Alexis. It would have been the same with Perisic, if we had signed him. Some clubs also don't want to part ways with their own players and we can't pay over the odds for every single target to make our manager happy. Other managers miss out on players all the time or don't get what they want. The prices that are being quoted for Perisic, Willian, Alderweireld, Boateng and Maguie are absolutely ridiculous. If that's the extent of Mourinho's list, it's no wonder he's not as good as he used to be.

 

[redIndianDevil]

So then sack Mourinho now then. What’s the point if you’re not going to back him. Also, Mourinho wanted Perisic last season after we had won two trophies and got back into the CL, so I dont see why you wouldn’t back the transfer at that point.

Because Inter were beyond difficult to deal with. No manager gets all the players they need, managers should have multiple options, are Perisic, Willian and Bale the only wingers left in the world?

 

[Fergie's Man]

I know its MEN, but if the story yesterday that Ed rejected signing Perisic last summer because he felt he had insufficient "brand value" is true then that's absolutely infuriating.

He is a tad ugly. :-)

I don't believe a word of it.

 

[redIndianDevil]

It isn't, as you say we have signed many players who don't have much brand value, even in attack. Mata, Martial and Mkhitaryan are hardly household names.

Even Lukaku is hardly a brand signing, apart from Pogba and Sanchez, no players that we signed have star or brand values.

Moyes tried to sign Fabregas, Kroos and bale and got absolutely nothing. These are established world class players and are very difficult to buy and we struggled for signings that window.

Under LvG, we bought a bunch of players relatively easily because those players wanted the United move. Yes most of them turned out to be duds but still Woodward was praised for making things happen then.

Under Mourinho we are again back to trying to sign marquee names and in case of Perisic, a club desperate to hold onto to its star player while their City rivals were buying anything and everything. And movement between top clubs is extremely difficult in the PL. So signing PL experienced top players is even more difficult.

 

[Revan]

I don’t think the board should decide who we buy or don’t buy and don’t think they have the expertise to decide what a player is worth at any given point in the market.

What they can do, however, is set the budget. If Mourinho is told he has £100m then he can buy who he wants within that budget. Naturally he might argue to stretch it by ten or twenty million and the board can be persuaded or not. There is absolutely no point in the board setting a budget and not letting the manager get who he feels he needs, regardless of anyone’s opinion on the player.

Provided the manager does not exceed the budget then you back him and sack him if he gets it wrong.

There’s probably nothing wrong in the club setting a policy, either, which might require signing a player under 23 and only one over 28, if they so wish. A manager should be appointed on this understanding, however.

To say we can buy a player who’s 29 for £40m but not £50m is utterly pointless, if it’s not exceeding the budget. It’s half-arsed.

The problem with this logic is that when the manager gets sacked, you might be in the same situation as we were when LVG was sacked. Despite spending all that money in LVG, we needed to immediately do an another rebuild. It is very expensive and on long term not sustainable.

While I don't think that we (considering that we don't have a DoF/football board) tell the manager what player we need to buy, it is alright giving some directions, like we don't want too many old players who will be here just for 3-4 years, or ask him why he wants another CB after he just signed 2 of them.

Here you have 150m, do what you want with them is something that exists only in football manager.

 

[Cliche Guevara]

The problem with this logic is that when the manager gets sacked, you might be in the same situation as we were when LVG was sacked. Despite spending all that money in LVG, we needed to immediately do an another rebuild. It is very expensive and on long term not sustainable.

While I don't think that we (considering that we don't have a DoF/football board) tell the manager what player we need to buy, it is alright giving some directions, like we don't want too many old players who will be here just for 3-4 years, or ask him why he wants another CB after he just signed 2 of them.

Here you have 150m, do what you want with them is something that exists only in football manager.

It’s not something that only exists in football manager at all. Don’t be silly.

As for the rest of your post, I have suggested that could be the case. The manager needs to be appointed on that basis, however.

We need to forget about anticipating the manager getting sacked. It’s the same at any club, managers buy players and end up getting sacked. Look at Everton under Allardyce or West Ham under Bilic. There are loads of examples.

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

The problem with this logic is that when the manager gets sacked, you might be in the same situation as we were when LVG was sacked. Despite spending all that money in LVG, we needed to immediately do an another rebuild. It is very expensive and on long term not sustainable.

While I don't think that we (considering that we don't have a DoF/football board) tell the manager what player we need to buy, it is alright giving some directions, like we don't want too many old players who will be here just for 3-4 years, or ask him why he wants another CB after he just signed 2 of them.

Here you have 150m, do what you want with them is something that exists only in football manager.

Just another reason why we need to establish a clear direction with the club and ease our managerial successions. We need to appoint a DOF.

It's very likely that after Jose, the next manager's ideals and way of playing will be entirely different to Jose, making it potentially hard on himself and the club.

Though you could argue(validly) that we've simply just appointed the wrong managers each time.

 

[Moonwalker]

The problem with this logic is that when the manager gets sacked, you might be in the same situation as we were when LVG was sacked. Despite spending all that money in LVG, we needed to immediately do an another rebuild. It is very expensive and on long term not sustainable.

While I don't think that we (considering that we don't have a DoF/football board) tell the manager what player we need to buy, it is alright giving some directions, like we don't want too many old players who will be here just for 3-4 years, or ask him why he wants another CB after he just signed 2 of them.

Here you have 150m, do what you want with them is something that exists only in football manager.

Actually, that's exactly how Fergie describes things working under the PLC in Managing My Life. The problem here is that we have no evidence of Mourinho demanding that sort of control over the financial side of things, at all.

From the little we know, he writes down a list, and then it's up to the powers at be to wave their magic wand, or have a whole lot of misery and gloom on their hands.

 

[Revan]

Actually, that's exactly how Fergie describes things working under the PLC in Managing My Life. The problem here is that we have no evidence of Mourinho demanding that sort of control over the financial side of things, at all.

From the little we know, he writes down a list, and then it's up to the powers at be to wave their magic wand, or have a whole lot of misery and gloom on their hands.

Actually it is not. Fergie was more I want this player, and then Gill tried to sign him if the fee wasn't that high (see Sneijder, Hazard etc which failed cause of money).

Additionally, Mourinho has done feck all to get the same degree of control Fergie had.

 

[Dion]

Actually it is not. Fergie was more I want this player, and then Gill tried to sign him if the fee wasn't that high (see Sneijder, Hazard etc which failed cause of money).

I have to agree with Moonwalker here, that's how SAF described it in his autobiography back in 1999 before Gill was promoted.

 

[Revan]

I have to agree with Moonwalker here, that's how SAF described it in his autobiography back in 1999 before Gill was promoted.

Oh, that might be, I thought it is about his latest book which I've read.

No idea how things went in the nineties, and transfer fees were much smaller and transfers in general far less important (improvement happened mostly from players within the club).

Anyway, if Mourinho didn't get backed cause of Perisic, we can say the same that Pep wasn't backed cause of Mahrez and Sanchez last season too. Don't remember people mentioning it. Neither remember City playing shit on the stick football. But here we see people giving total amnesty to Mourinho despite that he got 7/8 targets and then the next one in January. Almost make you wonder that they are more fans of him than United, which isn't surprising considering that he had a similar effect on Chelsea when a part of their fans turned on Hazard cause of him.

 

[Amir]

I have to agree with Moonwalker here, that's how SAF described it in his autobiography back in 1999 before Gill was promoted.

True, but things have moved on since the PLC days. I don't even remember who said it and when - possibly even Fergie during his Glazer years - but it was more about the Glazers saying yes to individual transfer deals rather than giving a sum of money and allowing him to do what he wants with it.

 

[Moonwalker]

Actually it is not. Fergie was more I want this player, and then Gill tried to sign him if the fee wasn't that high (see Sneijder, Hazard etc which failed cause of money).

Additionally, Mourinho has done feck all to get the same degree of control Fergie had.

Well, read the book. Or, if that's too taxing, you can just read some of the posts you're quoting instead, specifically the part where I wrote "PLC".

 

[sherrinford]

They wouldn't be agreeing with me since I believe Mourinho should be allowed to get the players he wants. If the board are attempting to block Jose from buying players in order to force him to use Martial more then that's a problem.

Is there any hint that that’s the case? I would say there is nothing to suggest that Woodward does anything other than attempt to fulfill Mourinho’s wishes in the market, while considering financial constraints. The article yesterday cited a ‘refusal to sanction additional funds’ in the attempt to sign Perisic. I find it acceptable that Woodward would not go over budget to land him, but perhaps would have done for a player who was ‘more marketable’ or with higher ‘resale value’, and don’t think that equates to not backing the manager.

 

[Raoul]

Is there any hint that that’s the case? I would say there is nothing to suggest that Woodward does anything other than attempt to fulfill Mourinho’s wishes in the market, while considering financial constraints. The article yesterday cited a ‘refusal to sanction additional funds’ in the attempt to sign Perisic. I find it acceptable that Woodward would not go over budget to land him, but perhaps would have done for a player who was ‘more marketable’ or with higher ‘resale value’, and don’t think that equates to not backing the manager.

From here: https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...r-news/man-utd-ivan-perisic-transfer-14994361

Club sources indicated last year Inter 'just did not want to sell' Perisic but it is understood United refused to sanction additional funds for the Croat since they did not believe he was a marketable enough player to merit a £50m transfer. Perisic shone at this year's World Cup, scoring in the semi-final and final.

 

[bucky]

From here: https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...r-news/man-utd-ivan-perisic-transfer-14994361

It's utter nonsense. Perisic is a good player. Any good attacking player is marketable. If that was true Jones and Fellaini wouldn't be at the club or in Fellaini's case not signed at all.

 

[Nirv]

I would happily swap Martial for Perisic. That’s what Inter wanted last season?

While Martial may potentially end up being world class one day, he will never reach it with the attitude he is showing with us currently.
Keeping an unhappy player who does not perform even when given the chances does not make any financial sense anyway.

Just bite the bullet and get it done.
While Perisic alone may not win us the epl or cl, at least we have a player making an effort to.

 

[mitchmouse]

Complete joke.

I heard it was simply they couldn't agree a fee (£5m more than we wanted pay)

 

[Siorac]

Actually, that's exactly how Fergie describes things working under the PLC in Managing My Life. The problem here is that we have no evidence of Mourinho demanding that sort of control over the financial side of things, at all.

From the little we know, he writes down a list, and then it's up to the powers at be to wave their magic wand, or have a whole lot of misery and gloom on their hands.

I have to agree with Moonwalker here, that's how SAF described it in his autobiography back in 1999 before Gill was promoted.

No he didn't? He specifically wrote in that book that he had been keen on the likes of Desailly, Batistuta and Ronaldo but the club would not pay the kind of wages required to get superstars like that.

 

[Dion]

No he didn't? He specifically wrote in that book that he had been keen on the likes of Desailly, Batistuta and Ronaldo but the club would not pay the kind of wages required to get superstars like that.

You're conflating wages structures with transfer budgets.

 

[Siorac]

You're conflating wages structures with transfer budgets.

The point is that Fergie didn't just get whoever he wanted.