As you said in a previous post he had for a variety of reasons had to endure a torrid time at Utd not really a surprise he didn’t set the world alight but just like a player coming back from a serious injury it takes time but as we all know footballers are expected to perform to their potential irrespective of their mental state. Young people ( and that’s what most footballers are ) need to be nurtured not ostracised
Jadon Sancho - Chelsea (loan) watch (Dog status: missing - responds to “Sanch” or promises of FUT packs)
- Thread starter horsechoker
- Start date
Very transfer where their is a fee or a big wage is a gamble of that their is no doubt. Clubs make mistakes all the time and those mistakes are costly for every fee that is justified you can probably justifiably list three of four that haven’t worked out.
The Athletic reported that his basic at Utd was £250k a week with potential to rise to rise to £300k with bonuses the same reported he took a significant pay cut to go to Chelsea who it seems will be paying 80% of his salary
Every transfer where there is a fee or a big wage is a gamble of that there is no doubt. Clubs make mistakes all the time and those mistakes are costly for every fee that is justified you can probably justifiably list three of four that haven’t worked out.
The importance of squad costs in the round as opposed to looking at wages in isolation is something that will become more the emphasis going forward so as I say for around £15 million compared to say Mounts £25 million annual cost seems a reasonable gamble
You mean a player who can do a few tricks, slow play down, win you some set pieces and not have the end product to be a net positive? We already have a few of those.
Sancho for Dortmund (18-21 years old): 53 goals and 67 assists in 11421 minutes - a return every 95 minutes (seen as one of the most exciting young players in the world)
Grealish for Villa (-26 years old): 32 goals and 41 in 15338 minutes - a return every 210 minutes.
That's including 3 seasons in the Championship.
Why on earth would you want the 5 year older Grealish over Sancho?
Grealish's went to City for 117,5M EUR (double his transfermarkt estimated market value) - which he never was and never will be worth.
We got Sancho for what seemed to be a bargain price at the time 15M below "market value" at 85M EUR. He was also seens as one of the 3-5 best young players in the world at the time.
It's not like Jack's been ripping up trees for City either.
Grealish for City ("prime years"): 14 goals and 20 assists in 8779 minutes - a return every 258 minutes
I think we've done a crap job with Sancho while he's been here and that we didn't do enough to get the most out of the player we bought. Mindsets, motivation and confidence are not constants and we have been doing, and are still doing, an abysmal job with our squad in this area.
Last edited:
You just sound bitter about it, clearly rattled by it all. Who gives a feck what he's doing at Chelsea? If you believe he wasn't good enough for us then it doesn't matter.
Two things that I think are obvious though... 1) he was a better player at every other team he has played for, and 2) our other wingers, clearly talented players, also struggle under our last two coaches. When you put these two things together, it's reasonable to say that we/our coaches probably were part of the issue.
Last edited:
Yeah, for sure. I liked Sancho and wanted us to sign him, but I did believe that we would try to play a brand of football more suiting to him. Something like what Dortmund were playing back then.
I agree re Grealish though. I don't know if I can say he's become a better player or not at City, maybe in some aspects, but what I do know is that Pep has definitely put the brakes on his dribbling and individualism. I think we'd have seen more of the maverick player he was if he'd have come here. I just don't know if that is a good thing or not for Grealish...is he better now? I can't decide, as I loved his ability to dribble, but now he's a cog in a well functioning machine.
I stopped considering this bellend an MUFC player back when he sat on his arse refusing to play for months on end.
His attitude is everything wrong with the modern player, expects it all but not prepared to do the work. Good riddance. He can post whatever he wants on his socials, couldnt care less. We still got the better deal no matter what just getting rid of him.
He might be in a bit of a honeymoon period now, but it will only be so long before he slips back into old habits, or when Maresca has to have a go at him for something.. He's Chelseas problem then.
His attitude is everything wrong with the modern player, expects it all but not prepared to do the work. Good riddance. He can post whatever he wants on his socials, couldnt care less. We still got the better deal no matter what just getting rid of him.
He might be in a bit of a honeymoon period now, but it will only be so long before he slips back into old habits, or when Maresca has to have a go at him for something.. He's Chelseas problem then.
He didn't refuse to play. His coach decided to ignore him.
. absolute nonsense. he was in the wrong and out of order and refused to apologise. Thats the definition of refusing mate.Im not the biggest Ten Hag fan currently, but I have to admit he managed that situation best he could.
He refused to apologise.
He didn't refuse to play.
That's a difference.
It was the managers decision to demand that apology to play him again, not Sancho's.
Sancho did the work that he was requested to do, he did do the individual training sessions etc.
He just stood by his opinion.
I agree that it was most likely a stupid opinion, but still this is how it went. EtH made the call not to play Sancho, not Sancho himself. Which doesn't mean that EtH did something wrong, he decided not to play a player who made clear that he didn't trust EtH's judgement. That's perfectly fine for a manager to decide.
Im not the biggest Ten Hag fan currently, but I have to admit he managed that situation best he could.
You don't know if he was in the wrong. That aside, it is completely ridiculous to turn a disciplinary sanction into something personal. If you think his behaviour was sanction worthy, sanction him and be done with it. Insisting that he swallows his pride and says something everybody knows he doesn't mean is toxic strong man fuss. It is so funny a when you think about it. Ten Hag has burned tens of millions of asset value with this vane ego trip and United fans think he was right to do so because they long for somebody who finally shows all the spoilt little brats their places.
Ten Hag wanted to set an example and miscalculated Sancho's reaction. He could have just suspended him for a set amount of time and moved on. But he wanted Sancho to submit to him with his tail between his legs. Worked out brillantly.
Last edited:
yeah i get that, but at the end of the day, he knew admitting he was in the wrong and apologising would have had him back in the squad and on the pitch pretty quickly. As we were riddled with injuries at the same time. But he chose not to. he was happy where he was,
He literally only decided to try make amends after it was clear in the summer not as many clubs wanted him as he may have thought. Although they both claimed it was all behind them, it clearly wasnt. Too little too late.
Bet he was heart broken
Now we get to see who is the bigger plonker between the two.
Quite amusing if not painful.
Quite amusing if not painful.
I doubt he was happy. But clearly he thought he was right and was willing to stand his ground. As was EtH. So it ended in this disaster.
From Sancho's point of view: Yes, had he apologized he would likely have been available for selection again. But would he really have believed that EtH would give him a fair chance after all this, when he felt mistreated before? I am quite sure that for him it looked like the following two options:
- apologize to EtH, be allowed back in team training, but going to be ignored because EtH dislikes him anyway and doesn't give him a fair chance
- stand his ground, stay away from that manager prick and at least be able to continue respecting yourself
Again, that whole situation was stupid and shouldn't have happened, and it was Sancho's initial reaction that caused it. I just don't think that it would have been reasonable to assume he would return to the pitch quickly, maybe not even to the matchday squad.
Seriously?! This isn't a kindergarden quarrel. This is management of a 85M+ investment that your owners pay 300k+ a week, that you know has a world class ceiling and you let it all down to an apology from the asset for disagreeing with you. This is chapter one stuff in how not to manage.
Im not the biggest Ten Hag fan currently, but I have to admit he managed that situation best he could.
Your goal as a manager should obviously be to get the best and most out of every player you have at your disposal and get your whole group to perform as well as possible. As I mentioned earlier here: Mindset, motivation and confidence are not constants, and it's the managements responsibility to make sure every player is on the same page, pulls in the same direction, have a common understanding of what our goal is, what is expected of them and make sure the invironment surrounding each player is the best possible. It's seems ETH has no clue when it comes to this.
true, but you cant fault a manager for taking a stand on discipline issues also to achieve this. If a player isnt pulling in that same direction and and being openly defiant, no manager is going to just say - 'fair enough, as long as your happy yourself.'
If the same situation happened under the likes of the top guys in Pep, Klopp , Fergie, Ancelotti etc, they would be getting praised for taking no crap from players and putting down a marker to fall in line.
i think some forget EtH and MUFC went out of their way earlier in the season too with Sancho to try and get him back to his best. i havnt seen that elsewhere where an uninjured player has been given time abroad during a season just to clear their head.
At the end of the day, neither sides could care less about the other now. As i said I have not considered him a Man Utd player now in ages, so couldnt care about any social posts form other clubs
I don't disagree with you, but the manager demanding a public apology and then forcing the player to eat a bagged lunch instead of in the canteen strikes me as just as petulant.
I reckon that all of those other managers you mentioned would have handled it in-house. Let the player show contrition and bring him back into the fold behind closed doors - drawing a line in the sand that it should be done publicly is crazy.
Except 5 goals and 9 assists is good enough for us. Its likely to be more than any of our wingers manage this season, only Rashford playing well has done more than that
Yep seems like a Dutch thing
Didn’t he lie about Sancho being injured? He said he was physically and mentally unfit to play. Sancho said he was fine to play.
Im not the biggest Ten Hag fan currently, but I have to admit he managed that situation best he could.
If he just didn’t want to select him fine, but you never lie about a players fitness.
But now Sancho is back to playing, and Ten Hag is back to finding different people to blame for why he can’t coach.
It really isn't, because it's not about numbers as we've seen with Pogba, Rashford, Lukaku, Ronaldo and now Bruno is looking like the next in line. He wouldn't get those numbers for us, any way, and even if he did, it's not good enough unless our ambition is mid table. It didn't help Nottingham Forest who wound up 17th, so why is it good enough for us who want to fight for titles?
He was reintegrated - without apology afaik - by the new ownership and still they decided to just get rid in the end
Clearly, he did not want to be Manchester United
Clearly, he did not want to be Manchester United
No, EtH said it was based on training performances, Sancho answered that this was a lie and there must have been other reasons. Basically Sancho disagreed on how EtH rated his (and the other players) training performances.
Isn't that just a matter of opinions? Ten Hag could have felt that Sancho was physically not up to it (because the lazy waster usually wasn't) whereas Sancho could have felt that he was more than fit enough to adequately perform his usual disappearing act.
Because he did it in a team that conceeded 67 goals, so even though his productivity was good going forward it, Forest had a -18 goal difference and that isnt his fault
So yes, if he did that here it would be good enough. We need more players with those kinds of end product and although Amad started the season well he's probably not going to deliver that.
Garnacho might on natural progression from last season. But other than that and/or Rashford getting back to the form he's shown for 3 seasons, we lack players with an end product. Someone other than Bruno and Rashford giving us 14 goal involvements this season would be great
Wingers/attackers that have 14 goal contributions in a PL season is not enough if we want to win the title. Salah had 42 alone in his debut season and they came 4th, he had 36 contributions in 22/23 and came 5th. Our own Rashford had 22 in 22/23 season when we came 3rd, but it wasn't good enough because he was terrible outside of that goal scoring period. We need consistent performers who can deliver almost every game, not mediocre attackers who can maybe contribute just over double digits.
If the matter is as reported then you have to question the competence of ETH when it comes to managing assts that cost tens of millions or come to that even being allowed to public statements which in effect hung the player out to dry not really surprising if the story being spun by the manager is claimed by the player to be false. Of course the ultimate power lies with the manager but there are ways of dealing with this sort of juvenile spat.
I tried to explain this several times in here but the loonies overtook the asylum pretty quickly and all I got was rants.... so obvious at the time
How Ten Hag's treatment of Sancho has turned out painting an uncontrasted black and white picture where Ten Hag is the bad guy is a fascinating example of people deciding on a narrative and ignoring every piece of reality that doesn't fit into this narrative.
We'll be lucky to get top 4 in the next couple of seasons, worrying about winning the title is silly because we have only a couple of players who wouldnt be the weakest member of a title winning team
Whatever his wage at United is/was it needs to be considered he only has less than two years remaining of that contract. It's not like he's shown anything to justify his United wages. You know that, I know that, all clubs know that and probably Sancho himself knows that too.
With United stil paying a portion of his wages for the ongoing loan season, he'll only have one year of that monster contract when the permanent move to Chelsea kicks in next summer. Rather than hold on to the salary level he'd have for just one more year, surely he'll have realized it's more beneficial for him to accept slightly less money if it guarantees him a (still rather sizeable) contract for another 6-7 years.
According to some reports Felix and Neto are on around £160-170K a week salaries at Chelsea and I would expect Sancho to get around the same.
I mean I'm not even that far on the Sancho train yet (although I have been impressed so far) but it is really a surprise he felt a bit put out by that given what Ten Hag has let other players get away with?
What has Ten Hag let other players get away with?
It’s been sad seeing him at City. I also felt he has United player written all over him, wanted to go out there and be a hero.
Well, except that ETH’s story kept changing. Micheal Owen released a tweet of quotes from Ten Hag a week before the comments about how Sancho trained meant to “debunk” the media driven stories that there was an issue. It very specifically implied Sancho was working his way back from something like an injury.
ETH probably realized that was a bad road to go down (the United legal team had to get involved as it was). So he came out and said Sancho wasn’t doing well enough in training.
This is where Sancho responded, but it wasnt just a case of them disagreeing about how well,or not well he trained. Sancho implied there was a completely unrelated and personal issue involved. And that lying about things like his performance and fitness, and treating him like a “scaoegoat” was a regular occurrence.
News outlets like Forbes wrote articles like “Sancho isn’t the problem” where they had sources from within the team suggesting extreme bias for and against particular players was normal for Ten Hag .
Culminating in the just … very weird move of demanding a public apology from Sancho to be let back in the team. Which in its petulance basically proved Sancho was telling the truth.
The thing is, ETH is still blaming everyone else. You could have bought 3 more players with the funds spent on extra buses to back over people with.
Naming an unchanged lineup after that history defining loss at Anfield.
Given his reasoning for Sancho was performance based, that alone was heavily contradictory.
It is impressive how Chelsea fans have become experts on the Sancho - ten Hag case, and have all the facts on the table the moment he signed for them. You'd wonder why they would even have the slight interest in that being Chelsea fans, and that was a United problem.
But I guess anyone that signs for them can't possibly have done anything wrong in their previous club. It's not like he was always late to training or anything, right? Great attitude.
But I guess anyone that signs for them can't possibly have done anything wrong in their previous club. It's not like he was always late to training or anything, right? Great attitude.
Not atall, I'm well aware Sancho has got his flaws and I'll remain wary unless he shows what he's showing so far for a sustained period.
However Ten Hag says it was performances based. If that was me and I was seeing teammates who lost 7-0 to Liverpool still to this day being constantly selected and praised by the same guy, I'd be pretty miffed aswell.
Why are you deflecting? Arguments matter, not the background of the one who makes them.