It's quite obvious that's not true, look at hie early days at Chelsea and didn't he break the scoring record with Real who definitely don't play negative football.
LVG Out Thread | BBC: Sacked!
- Thread starter Livewire1974
- Start date
- Status
It's quite obvious that's not true, look at hie early days at Chelsea and didn't he break the scoring record with Real who definitely don't play negative football.
What happened to the good old days when you could pouch a manager from a club in the middle of a season/contract?! Why could we not rip Klopp out of Dortmond or convince Pep to betray Munich for us after SAF?
Just goes to show how much of a poisoned chalice the United job seems to be for most top managers, no matter what they publicly say right now.
Just a few days ago, Ancellotii was publicly admiring the job but was joining Munich all along. Guardiola talks about wanting the job but he's off to city. Why is it that most top managers seem to not want this job?
Too hard, or are we not as great and glamorous and we seem to think we are?
Does anyone honestly believe that Jorge Mendes was going to confirm that United had approached Mourinho BEFORE they sacked Van Gaal and days after he was sacked from Chelsea? No once the board makes the decision everything is going to move very quickly and we will have a new manager. And no I do not think that Giggs is fit for the job.
They aren't, West Ham, Newcastle, Spurs, they all think they are special as well. There are loads of clubs that think they have some unique identity and are somehow set apart from the rest of the clubs, but the fact is all of them at one point or another has had to face reality and do things that go against these misty eyed notions of uniqueness to do what is better for the long term of the club on a practical level.
What about in 1989 when 'sack SAF and sell Giggs' was all the rage? What credit did SAF have then? We were rubbish a full month before that Robins goal.
Prior to fa cup and Mark Robbins in 1989 then?
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/26590673
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/28906778
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/30758437
and those are just from mourinho's second chelsea stint.
Mark Ogden was on talkSPORT not long ago. If I remember correctly he doubts there's been official meetings today as he said Woodward and Joel Glazer talk daily and any decision is only upto those pair. He also said the players like Van Gaal as a person, but not his footballing methods. They dislike all the long video analysis and lack of freedom in playing.
He also said we want a left back in January and a striker if possible. Although the latter is seen as being difficult to pull off. We're still interested in Mane.
He also said we want a left back in January and a striker if possible. Although the latter is seen as being difficult to pull off. We're still interested in Mane.
He wasn't talking about retirement and he actually did turn it around. So far there's been no evidence LVG can turn it around given he created most of the problems himself and is unwilling to rectify them.
That is not true. C'mon man get real.
I think you have this completely wrong. Fergie had built 3 or 4? new teams that went on to win titles. There were gaps between each side and the Man Utd board would have understood this. Because he had a proven record of rebuilding he would have been given plenty of time. I dont agree with the different times different expectations either. The pressures and expectations now are no different to 10 years ago. Thats just over dramatisation.
Yeah, what a pity it is they lost 5.3 to Tottenham and he binned the more expansive game plan and went back to sitting on a one-goal lead.
My suspicion, purely speculative, would be that they know that the club is so married to it's ways it would be impossible to steer into a different direction. Look at the attacks LVG had to endure a few weeks back before this latest slump, we had people like Scholes going off like a dog off the leash tearing him apart yet, Neville was seeing warning signs all over OT after we had lost to Swansea but these things didn't happen to Moyes who was one of the boys and had tried to blend in instead of rock the boat. These top managers would be more informed on things like these and wouldn't want to fall victim to such a situation. Van Gaal is on his last job so there won't be any lasting damage to his career but to guy like Guardiola having this huge failure could start a descent into punditry, why risk thay when you could go to City, Bayern etc?
The way we are set up is all based on patient ball possession . Its not an coincidence that we get hit on the break that often. No real support for our back four which on its turn means the opponent can overrun the midfield, counter they way into our 16 and pay the net a not so welcoming visit. Possession has to be controlled. The players are stimulated to go for the safe option rather then instinctively chose that unpopular decision which can create an opening. How often do we see a huge gap between midfield and attack ? When Herrera is benched we are literally depended on Carrick or Schweinsteiger to play that connecting ball for the transition to attack, but on the brake we are vulnerable because at their respective age they can not run the same miles as they used to. In other words, the defensive transition (an important part of the system) is lacking efficiency, because we get outnumbered to often. The offensive organisation same sheite different match. The static movements and no killer pass all attribute to the dull displays of late. Its no rocket science to explain our displays if you are aware of the fact that the offensive organisation is the most important phase for the set up for the attack. We also see that a midfielder will drop a zone back to provide more space for the fullback, but when your depended on the killer pass midfielder drops back, you create a bigger gap between and you have more space to cover for the transition to attack. Thats my explanation in a nutshell.
Can't believe he's going to do a press conference tomorrow.
He was a 47 years old talented coach, it was sensible to give him time and trust because he was a long term investment. Van gaal is at 18 month of retiring, there is no long term commitment, he needs to deliver everything he promised now, so if the board feels that he won't deliver it's best to shorten the process and start a new one.
FFS from the mouths of babes.
1. my counter argument still stands
2. 5-0 vs swansea came just 2 league games after the 3-5 vs spurs
Sign him up!
It's Christmas, make a drinking game out of it.
A shot for every use if the following words:
Process
Philosophy
Fans
Time
Rhythm
Let it go, the dude has already made his mind up.
Our 'more expansive game plan' ended with 3-2 loss in Wolfsburg.
LVG is making so many folk depressed that I feel it's necessary to add a disclaimer to your point.
"A shot* for every use of the following words:"
*a shot of alcohol, not to the face.
Wonder if he'll break out the wine like last year. Unless there is some serious embargoes regarding questions it could be quite grimCan you imagine LVG dropping his trousers and saying : ''Well guys, we are in a bad period, but if this can get up and stand, i think, no i believe, we can all stand up to fight and envision a better period for all''.
Such an motivator he is.
Such an motivator he is.
We might also need to add the disclaimer "caution, you might die from alcohol poisoning".
good idea.
I wish he'd get smashed before games, he might mix things up a little.
Plus then we were a sleeping giant, more like what AC Milan are morphing into or what Liverpool have been over the last two decades. In that position it is easier to stand by a man who is showing some promise but the mere fact that Bobbins' goal saved Fergie's United career shows that even the the hierarchy was close to having enough of him. In coaching you simply need to meet the set targets or fail with an acceptable margin. LVG is simply dragging us downwards because of things that he could control in the summer. The decisions he made in the summer and his insistence of stifling players are causing his downfall.
Not believing that there's one specific way United should play and it is only possible through employing someone who has been at the club for at least 10 years and is a club legend is not equal to not caring about traditions. There's one team in Europe who has a distinct way of playing and you could hardly ever imagine that team playing anything different: Barcelona. It's difficult to imagine Barcelona parking the bus, even during their worst period in 2000s they still at least attempted to play offensive football with lots of passing. And even in their case the style was implemented slightly over 20 years ago by Cruyff from what I remember, it wasn't there from early 60s or anything.
Attacking football with young players is such condescending nonsense though. Which big clubs are persistently defensive? Aside from Italian clubs who are renowned for their cattenacio (and even they have become way more offensive), all top clubs in the world are mostly offensive. We haven't been ultra attacking during all our time under Ferguson, it's just load of crap. Were we offensive against Real Madrid when we set out to contain them twice (and almost succeeded)? Were we offensive against City when we lost the title? Were we offensive when we scrapped all those 1-0 wins away from home in Europe? Of course not because Ferguson clearly recognized the demands of football and was flexible enough tactically to approach games in a different manner. As I've said, we went through so many styles under Ferguson - from ultra attacking gung ho approach through counter attacking balanced football to a defensively sound side that set the record for consecutive games without conceded goal in 2009 (was that ultra attacking football too?), to even passing side in his final seasons.
Young players is also another thing that bothers me. We pretend to be Barcelona here again, pretend that we've built our success purely on youth products, only blending a few bought players here and there, when the fact is that since class of 1992, which funnily was 23 years ago, we haven't really produced world class players through our academy. A few talented youngsters here and there went on to become squad players here (O'Shea, Welbeck, Cleverley, Fletcher) but none of them ultimately went on to be one of the best in the world in their positions. Which is yet another reason why it'd be good to use fresh approach and maybe modernize our academy a little so we don't need to look at our opponents and see that they produce more complete players through their acadamies. Not saying there's necessarily something wrong with the way we work with youth as it's clearly very difficult to embed a youngster into a team in this day and age, but let's not pretend that our last 10 years were based on promoting from within the ranks - they weren't.
It's a special club with tradition, with amazing stadium that oozes atmosphere, with incredible history with ups and downs, with the most iconic manager in the history of football that we've all had the luck to support. A club with great local support and worldwide recognition. It's truly one of a kind football club, which is why it's not necessary to rewrite history and pretend to be something that we don't even need to be in order to be better than everyone else. If a top class manager comes here with his own ideas (not necessarily Mourinho as I don't believe he'd bring much to the table in that aspect, more like Pep who's more into revolutionizing football) and they bring something fresh and positive, then we should not at all cost defend ourselves by saying it's not United way. It's not United way to have DoF and it's quite evident we need one. There are a lot of things that are not necessarily United way from historical point of view but would actually make us better as a team and better as a club.
The question asked was the teams under-performance for the first 3 years of Sir Alex's managerial career.
I've seen enough of Mourinho's football to know how he likes to set up. You point to games that support the idea he plays exciting football, while most Chelsea fans will remember the catenaccio being dragged out for every big game, even at home against a PSV side with 10 men. He famously had 29% possession against us at the Bridge and gloated about his tactics after the game, saying it was easy to stop our players from crossing on their strongest foot. I do not want this style of management at my club.
Did you despise Ferguson and wanted him gone when we played defensive football in Champions League away from home? Because we did, for quite a while, it wasn't exciting, it wasn't gung ho but it got us results.
I know, I know. I'm just so frustrated and pointlessly ranting.
I'm mainly still pissed that the club screwed the SAF handover as badly as they did.
The Glazers had access to JP Morgan, PWC, McKinsey, Harvard .... And then executed a succession plan virtually 100% against what any of the learned organisations would have recommended. For God sake, they should have just asked me to manage the process and I'd have done a better job at it.
It was a simple task: appoint Jose Mourinho or Carlo Ancellotii. Instead we got Moyes.
The handover from SAF should be documented as one of the most high profile monumental cock-ups for corporate senior management succession planning. It's virtaully unforgivable.
Last edited:
Mourinho is going to Madrid. No need to worry about him.
Pretty sure everybody shed a tear when we manmarked Ronaldo/Bale with Welbeck and Jones as well.
Fergie was never as bad as Mourinho in that regard. We often played at a slower tempo away from home, but we didn't often concede possession and sit deep. We did against Barcelona away from home, but that is of course forgivable.
- Status