LVG Out Thread | BBC: Sacked!

Do you want LVG sacked?

  • Total voters
    1,419
Status
Not open for further replies.
A little game..

Guess the date LvG will leave United?

I am torn between January 19th (2 days after we lose to Liverpool away)

Or April 11, 2 days after 4th will become a mathematical impossibility if LvG stays that long.
 
Feed Me said:
What about all the online subscriptions?

Nah, I've been following his articles and he's made the same snide point time and again, drawing a distinction between match goers and non-match goers.

He's conveniently forgetting all the boos and dissent heard at OT this season.
Click to expand...

Agree with you.

Not all match goers endorse or agree with his views, as I wrote earlier. Quite a lot of us openly criticise him and his views mostly because he tries to be the loyal opposition rather than the noisy rabble. He peddles the same agenda that hasn't changed since the 90s, and his clique protects a bygone culture.

The club is global and online is the future of mass support during and after games. The overseas perspective has widened viewpoints and raised the debates about running the club. There is a much more lively debate among Cafetards than in UWS, a lesson Mitten has failed to grasp. The likes of FulltimeDevils are replacing the fanzine by combining the comment from the terraces with the online community. There was a time when the likes of Red Issue filled an important space but those days have gone.
 
Rednotdead said:
We didn't hire Moyes knowing we'd have to fire him after 10 months.
Click to expand...

Of course.

We hired him in the misplaced faith that he'd stay here for the long haul.

Notwithstanding the trend that managers tend to do much shorter stints these days, a long stay has to be earned.

As a club, we are still obsessed with having a Ferguson-like figure, which I can understand, because it's an alluring prospect.

But we need to get real. I'd rather have two years of winning than three years of the complete drift we have experienced. We've got this sense of snobbery as a club and it's seeing us fall further and further behind.
 
Stretford End Phil said:
Agree with you.

Not all match goers endorse or agree with his views, as I wrote earlier. Quite a lot of us openly criticise him and his views mostly because he tries to be the loyal opposition rather than the noisy rabble. He peddles the same agenda that hasn't changed since the 90s, and his clique protects a bygone culture.

The club is global and online is the future of mass support during and after games. The overseas perspective has widened viewpoints and raised the debates about running the club. There is a much more lively debate among Cafetards than in UWS, a lesson Mitten has failed to grasp. The likes of FulltimeDevils are replacing the fanzine by combining the comment from the terraces with the online community. There was a time when the likes of Red Issue filled an important space but those days have gone.
Click to expand...

...and that is exactly why RI is no longer. The Ed has his beliefs and he's stuck to it - that gap that RI filled for years is long gone as you say and I think he felt there just wasn't any point trying to go against the grain any longer.
 
Stretford End Phil said:
Agree with you.

Not all match goers endorse or agree with his views, as I wrote earlier. Quite a lot of us openly criticise him and his views mostly because he tries to be the loyal opposition rather than the noisy rabble. He peddles the same agenda that hasn't changed since the 90s, and his clique protects a bygone culture.

The club is global and online is the future of mass support during and after games. The overseas perspective has widened viewpoints and raised the debates about running the club. There is a much more lively debate among Cafetards than in UWS, a lesson Mitten has failed to grasp. The likes of FulltimeDevils are replacing the fanzine by combining the comment from the terraces with the online community. There was a time when the likes of Red Issue filled an important space but those days have gone.
Click to expand...

Good post, that.

Thanks for the insights.
 
Judas said:
How many top quality managers stay anywhere more than 3 seasons apart from the obvious exceptions? Hardly any. People are living in the past.
Click to expand...

Even in the past managers staying 3-5 years was the norm. you will see a lot of managers being sacked after 1 or 2 years. Between Sir Matt Busby first spell and Fergie's, United appointed 6 managers in 17 years.
 
Last edited:
JPRouve said:
Even in the past, managers staying 3-5 years was the norm. you will see a lot of managers being sacked after 1 or 2 years. Between Sir Matt Busby first spell and Fergie's, United appointed 6 managers in 17 years.
Click to expand...

Great and important stats.

Longevity at a club has to be earned.

A lot of our fans seem to think a manager should be afforded swathes of time before they have built any credit in the bank.
 
Arytonblue said:
Credit to Burley for what he said, one of the few pundits that have actually seriously questioned this idea that Van Gaal has somehow turned it around with a drab 0-0 draw against an utterly rubbish Chelsea team. I can only think that the club were never even considering sacking him at this stage, even after the run of defeats and our relegation form. I'm thinking this because I'd rather believe they were just clueless instead of having the lowest standards of what constitutes 'progress', because if THAT is what has 'saved' his job then I despair. Actually scratch that, I despair anyway, the fact he's still here is absolutely baffling.

Particularly with Mourinho available, it would seem the club would rather suffer mediocrity with such a 'classy' guy like Van Gaal instead of actually achieving success with Mourinho because of all his much talked about 'baggage'. You only have to look at how some people talk about Mourinho's character on here, the man's literally worse than Pol Pot last I heard. The best thing the club could do would be bringing in an elite manager to instill a winning mentality and actually start performing to our potential, seriously challenge for some trophies and start setting high standards for a club that likes to think itself similar to Barca and Bayern. Having a winning habit can transcend any new manager (as long as they arent utterly useless) and wouldn't allow expectations to drop so drastically like they have in the last two years. But of course that would be showing ambition and would require some fecking balls.

But no, instead we're going to stick with a lame duck manager on his last gig, talk about setting a so-called 'philosophy' and work on 'behind the scenes' stuff and aim for top 4 finishes while we piss away millions on overpaid transfer targets with no real standards or expectations befitting a club of our stature. And if all of this is leading to having Giggs succeed because of 'reasons' then the club is basically doing a 90's Liverpool job that will just set us back even further.
Click to expand...

This is why this clubs board seem more like the English FA, are going to make such idiotic appointments, or stand by people like VG who is so out of touch with the modern football, they are hedging their bets with a senile old man past his best. They are also like the FA spineless suits looking to make the next profit than hard decisions that benefits the club. Take Woodward, if it's true he wants to save face by keeping VG because of his job, no wonder we are in the mess we are in
 
Feed Me said:
Of course.

We hired him in the misplaced faith that he'd stay here for the long haul.

Notwithstanding the trend that managers tend to do much shorter stints these days, a long stay has to be earned.

As a club, we are still obsessed with having a Ferguson-like figure, which I can understand, because it's an alluring prospect.

But we need to get real. I'd rather have two years of winning than three years of the complete drift we have experienced. We've got this sense of snobbery as a club and it's seeing us fall further and further behind.
Click to expand...

It's the arrogance that comes with a long period of success and the complacency generated by a winning formula that ended on a high. If Fergie had retired in 1999 or 2008 it might have been different. But he didn't and nobody really criticised him during the 1999-2008 or especially the post 2008 periods when ironically the damage was being done. Those periods didn't lead to follow up success on the level they should have, whether through the Glazers, lack of investment of simple complacency. What we are going through now directly relates to events after 2008 which culminated in the cavalier final championship in 2013.

We have contracted Liverpool's disease from 1990 and it's now beginning to generate problems. One solution is to follow Bayern, to run short contracts with performance targets and regular reviews. We need a shakedown and a bit of modernity.
 
Feed Me said:
Great and important stats.

Longevity at a club has to be earned.

A lot of our fans seem to think a manager should be afforded swathes of time before they have built any credit in the bank.
Click to expand...

About longevity as the miracle potion to success, Liverpool look a lot like us and they tend to be faithful with their managers. And when you look at Souness, Evans, Houiller and Benitez they all have been given a lot of time particularly Houiller and Benitez with 12 years between them, this blind loyalty has not created success or stability.

In my opinion you can't force longevity, since longevity is good you have to create the best environment for it, but you also need to find the right person for you and often you have to try several times before finding the right one.
 
Oneunited26 said:
This is why this clubs board seem more like the English FA, are going to make such idiotic appointments, or stand by people like VG who is so out of touch with the modern football, they are hedging their bets with a senile old man past his best. They are also like the FA spineless suits looking to make the next profit than hard decisions that benefits the club. Take Woodward, if it's true he wants to save face by keeping VG because of his job, no wonder we are in the mess we are in
Click to expand...

If that last part about Woodward is even a fraction true, then no wonder we are in such trouble. "Let's stick with a failure of a manager as sacking him will make me look stupid". Great to see you putting the club before personal gain Ed, top stuff!
 
JPRouve said:
About longevity as the miracle potion to success, Liverpool look a lot like us and they tend to be faithful with their managers. And when you look at Souness, Evans, Houiller and Benitez they all have been given a lot of time particularly Houiller and Benitez with 12 years between them, this blind loyalty has not created success or stability.

In my opinion you can't force longevity, since longevity is good you have to create the best environment for it, but you also need to find the right person for you and often you have to try several times before finding the right one.
Click to expand...

I find VG's environment poisen and miserable, working for VG can make one of the best jobs in the world feel like one of the worst jobs in the world
 
Garethw said:
If that last part about Woodward is even a fraction true, then no wonder we are in such trouble. "Let's stick with a failure of a manager as sacking him will make me look stupid". Great to see you putting the club before personal gain Ed, top stuff!
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that's an accusation that's easy to throw around and nearly impossible to base.
 
JPRouve said:
About longevity as the miracle potion to success, Liverpool look a lot like us and they tend to be faithful with their managers. And when you look at Souness, Evans, Houiller and Benitez they all have been given a lot of time particularly Houiller and Benitez with 12 years between them, this blind loyalty has not created success or stability.

In my opinion you can't force longevity, since longevity is good you have to create the best environment for it, but you also need to find the right person for you and often you have to try several times before finding the right one.
Click to expand...

But they had massive instability at boardroom level, plus both Houllier and Benitez were up against the greatest manager of all time in SAF.
 
Rory 7 said:
But they had massive instability at boardroom level, plus both Houllier and Benitez were up against the greatest manager of all time in SAF.
Click to expand...

Mancini, Ancelotti, Mourinho and Wenger were also up against the greatest manager of all time.
 
Can't believe he's still here. If the club allows Guardiola and Mourinho to slip through its fingers, we're gonna need to get rid of more than LVG before things get any better than this.
 
Mourinho or Guardiola aren't coming here, people need to face facts. It's clear the board are sticking with the longivity narrative so why would they give a job to nomadic managers like them who would stay here three years maximum? Put your mortgage on it being Giggs and buy some Kleenex in bulk, I've already accepted it.
 
dwd said:
Mourinho or Guardiola aren't coming here, people need to face facts. It's clear the board are sticking with the longivity narrative so why would they give a job to nomadic managers like them who would stay here three years maximum? Put your mortgage on it being Giggs and buy some Kleenex in bulk, I've already accepted it.
Click to expand...
Better prepare a United version of liverpool's YAWN 'it's okay nex year is our year' theme song then. We'll be singing it for the next 30 years.
 
dwd said:
Mourinho or Guardiola aren't coming here, people need to face facts. It's clear the board are sticking with the longivity narrative so why would they give a job to nomadic managers like them who would stay here three years maximum? Put your mortgage on it being Giggs and buy some Kleenex in bulk, I've already accepted it.
Click to expand...

If it's true and the club is definitely going with Giggs, then they are going to have to put together the most tactically astute and experienced coaching staff and assistant that's ever been seen.

None of this Scholes and Butt as assistant rubbish. He'll need proven coaches that can aid and even mentor him through the role.

It's a farcical situation as he just isn't ready. It's debatable if he's ready for management itself yet let alone one of the biggest jobs in football for Christ's sake!
 
Garethw said:
If it's true and the club is definitely going with Giggs, then they are going to have to put together the most tactically astute and experienced coaching staff and assistant that's ever been seen.

None of this Scholes and Butt as assistant rubbish. He'll need proven coaches that can aid and even mentor him through the role.

It's a farcical situation as he just isn't ready. It's debatable if he's ready for management itself yet let alone one of the biggest jobs in football for Christ's sake!
Click to expand...
I don't mind Butt actually. However along with Giggs you could call them The Lack of Brains Trust.
 
Steven Seagull said:
Honestly torn between letting Giggs have the job to see the meltdown on this site and just hiring a sensible manager.
Click to expand...
Hope for you we do get Giggs so you can get off on caf reactions with a giggly wank and then enjoy United as a midtable club or worse during the rest of your life time. More misery and outcry, more giggly masturbation sessions for you. Win win.

Yeah you dont need to tell us in your reply how you wouldn't care and how die hard you are. Save it for when your dream becomes reality and we are knocked off our perch.
 
dwd said:
Mourinho or Guardiola aren't coming here, people need to face facts. It's clear the board are sticking with the longivity narrative so why would they give a job to nomadic managers like them who would stay here three years maximum? Put your mortgage on it being Giggs and buy some Kleenex in bulk, I've already accepted it.
Click to expand...

It's just the kind of move the English FA do, clearly we can see there is possibly better alternatives, but like the outdated institution that United are, will stick to a dinosaur like VG, and then appoint someone like giggs because of some moral superiority this club wants, and we want to know why this club was underachieving for so long before Fergie. It's what got Liverpool in the mediocre period they have been in for years, and it's what could happen to us
 
Steven Seagull said:
Honestly torn between letting Giggs have the job to see the meltdown on this site and just hiring a sensible manager.
Click to expand...
I seen a couple of posts like this. Don't get how people will enjoy seeing a meltdown over a decision that could have serious consequences for the club.
 
Judge Red said:
Can't believe he's still here. If the club allows Guardiola and Mourinho to slip through its fingers, we're gonna need to get rid of more than LVG before things get any better than this.
Click to expand...

Also the fact he's only here for another 18 months maximum makes that even worse.

Were very unlikely to get top 4 this year if we carry on like we are it won't help us attract the players we will be chasing and with shit on a stick football who could blame them.

Even if he was tearing up the league next year by some miracle he'd probably want to finish on a high and wouldn't extend his contract anyway which is yet another reason not to keep him, which would be highly unlikely with pep at city etc.

We could have Mourinho for 3 years, possibly more going by what he's said, and I'd bet we'd win cups or leagues with him but we'd sooner stick with this fraud who's showing absolutely no progression or stability in the team playing crap football and not getting results plus he's leaving soon anyway so it's diabolical that he's being backed by the board.

Obviously this could all be hanging on what pep is doing but if he's coming in the summer I'd still get rid of lvg and either try Ancellotti for the remainder or give it Giggs until he comes, it's not rocket science it's football ffs!
 
Adisa said:
I seen a couple of posts like this. Don't get how people will enjoy seeing a meltdown over a decision that could have serious consequences for the club.
Click to expand...
The Caf has a meltdown over anything these days. I reckon wait and see is the approach here.
 
Garethw said:
If it's true and the club is definitely going with Giggs, then they are going to have to put together the most tactically astute and experienced coaching staff and assistant that's ever been seen.
Click to expand...

If that turns out to be the case then there's no point in appointing Ryan anyway (if he needs such extreme guidance - hand-holding, really - and if others are superior in talent to him). Even if we're truly going the way of politics (i.e. having a PR-constructed frontman as the club's focus while others do the real work), then that model fails too, because Giggs' reputation has suffered so badly in recent times. Added to that, even United fans are wary of Ryan being manager, so it's not even a populist notion. Unless he has such incredible managerial potential that the board can't resist making him boss, it's difficult to understand the board's motive, seeing as "Giggs as manager" seems to fail as a good idea in virtually every aspect.
 
I'm not buying that they're making Giggs ready to take over. Surely the board realises that appointing Giggs is a huge risk?
 
VorZakone said:
I'm not buying that they're making Giggs ready to take over. Surely the board realises that appointing Giggs is a huge risk?
Click to expand...

Does anything this board do surprise you anymore though? A good board would of got rid of the current coach a long time ago.
 
JPRouve said:
Mancini, Ancelotti, Mourinho and Wenger were also up against the greatest manager of all time.
Click to expand...

Yep. Three of them bought league titles through their sugar daddy owners and Wenger has been with Arsenal for twenty years, overseeing massive change at that club. The two Liverpool managers you mention did OK despite, in Rafas time, significant boardroom upheaval; he won a CL and was one rant away from winning the PL.

All clubs have different approaches, different circumstances and different competitive environments. United have always been a club that tried to keep things stable at managerial level, I don't see anything wrong with that; provided you find the right manager.

I don't agree with this theory that success in modern a football club needs a change of manager every three years. Clubs like Inter have been at that for all of my adult life and only hit it lucky the odd time. In my opinion sustained long-term success in England comes from stability; look no further than Ferguson, Busby, Paisley and Shankly for the proof.
 
I seriously cannot fathom how he is still in employment after not winning in eight successive matches.
 
Rory 7 said:
Yep. Three of them bought league titles through their sugar daddy owners and Wenger has been with Arsenal for twenty years, overseeing massive change at that club. The two Liverpool managers you mention did OK despite, in Rafas time, significant boardroom upheaval; he won a CL and was one rant away from winning the PL.

All clubs have different approaches, different circumstances and different competitive environments. United have always been a club that tried to keep things stable at managerial level, I don't see anything wrong with that; provided you find the right manager.

I don't agree with this theory that success in modern a football club needs a change of manager every three years. Clubs like Inter have been at that for all of my adult life and only hit it lucky the odd time. In my opinion sustained long-term success in England comes from stability; look no further than Ferguson, Busby, Paisley and Shankly for the proof.
Click to expand...

You are the only one believing that it's theory. In reality there is no theory, managers are good enough or they are not, if they are successful they will stay, if they are not they will be sacked. The only exception is Real Madrid, they have their own definition of success.
Time has never been a recipe for success and sacking too.
 
It doesn't need it but that's what happens, are we supposed to turn pep down if he doesn't want a 15 year contract?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.