Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the PL we almost always play our strongest team possible. Even with 2 or 3 key players out injured, we'll still have a stronger team than 16 out of 20 teams.

I removed this part from the quote to misrepresent your point.
Look where we get, if we start that stuff.

Shortening quotes is fine, but in the middle of the sentence it seems suspicious to me. Also I understand, that you come to the conclusion that these conditions dont mean anything. I guess you misunderstood my points and I acknowledge, that this is partly due to me not describing it better. I tried in my response to anant. I think, we would be better off if we wouldn't be as eager to view someones statements as wrong and blunt. But on the other hand, internet forums are probably not the best places to train that mindset ^^

And by the way: I also consider form and context for my judgement. Which then means, that if we are flying and in great form, then a match against an injury-ridden Liverpool side in bad form can become somewhat of a more expected win and us drawing the match while not really going for it becomes a bit of a disappointment.
 
Fair enough, I didn't want to falsely accuse you of something. My apologies.

About the bolded part, I agree with you. It is kinda difficult to discuss some issues, for example not making a sub, when these discussion often dissolve into OleIn or OleOut. Both sides invested a lot of time in fighting for their side, it is natural that the tensity becomes apparent pretty fast. But, for what it is worth, I would confirm that the number of real knuckleheads on the Out-side to be more numerous than the real knuckleheads on the other side. I don't know about you but there are a few people around, you would think Ole could slap them in the head while stealing their phone and fumbling their girlfriend and they would still be the first to find reasons, why that is a good thing ("Good that he shows who is the real alpha"). Hopefully us being as positive and successful as we are, will keep both extremes at bay. I think it did in the last months.

No need to apologise.

Yes I certainly hope so with regards to Ole. The only people here who don't benefit if Ole is successful are those who are so wedded to the idea of hating him that they won't allow themselves to enjoy it. I've given up hope that this place will ever be somewhere to go for measured and reasonable analysis - (as a general tone. Some great posters here, but their stuff is getting harder to find) - but at least if it gets to being a forum you don't have to avoid for 4 days after a match I'll take that.
 
Neither did Liverpool
Exactly! Liverpool did it a few years ago. Fergie beat Chelsea in 07, Leicester won it in 15-16 etc. PSG have Neymar and Mbappe and they STILL didn't win their league. It's tough, of course it is but it's not impossible and there's no point in being defeatist and not having expectations or making excuses. This HAS to be a good season with a proper challenge.
 
I learned since Ole was here to not be Ole in or Ole out and not too look at him as a legend and just a manager.
I think he has done very well steadying the ship and has bought right while getting rid of deadwood all while bringing us closer to where we want to be.

The thing I have is I’m not sure he can take us too the next level and challenge and I feel that’s fair as he has no history of doing so. We make SF/F under him but can’t get over the line so it’s a fair opinion but most think I’m just criticising him
My sentiments too, good post.
 
Taking over in October when the team is in a mess isn't a full season,
Here we go again.. Strange that people seems to find excuses much easier for Kloop than for Ole.


Ole didn't have to spend £50 million on AWB either, that was a very overpriced deal. He could have gone for a more economical alternative,
£50m for AWB was too much, but we have to remember the 2019 market was all time high. I’m not sure that your “economical alternatives” was a lot cheaper that time.
 
Ole didn't have to spend £50 million on AWB either, that was a very overpriced deal. He could have gone for a more economical alternative, AWB is no world beater and hasn't justified the massive fee. Ole could have got Tripper for half the fee, who he has now decided he does want 2 years later!
Trippier was 29, AWB was 21. AWB had just played his first season in the PL and performed better than Trippier, who had only just managed to establish himself as a starter at Tottenham. And do you honestly think Levy would have allowed their starting RB go to a rival for £20m, or even £25m? Of course he wouldn't. He was comfortable letting him go for that kind of money to another league, though. And there's a big difference between not wanting him as a starter, and wanting him as a squad player. Because I don't think he'd ever be intended to replace AWB, just to provide competition and rotate with him. Our interest has reportedly cooled as well, which suggests that he's not that much of a priority anyway.

Was AWB expensive? Yeah, a bit. Is that on Ole? Not really. He's not the one negotiating deals, and he shouldn't have to babysit the people who does to ensure that they don't overspend on any one player. He should be able to trust them to make the necessary judgement calls to ensure that the available budget is spent in a way that ensures that the positions that are deemed a priority are strengthened.
 
Was AWB expensive? Yeah, a bit. Is that on Ole? Not really. He's not the one negotiating deals, and he shouldn't have to babysit the people who does to ensure that they don't overspend on any one player. He should be able to trust them to make the necessary judgement calls to ensure that the available budget is spent in a way that ensures that the positions that are deemed a priority are strengthened.
Is there some sort of role description published? Or is it just your assumption what the manager should be responsible for and what not? And to what degree? And don't we agree, that Ole might not be included in the numbers negotiations but probably will be contacted, if the outlay for one players dangers potential outlays for other acquisitions?

But nevermind, Ole certainly has been included in the decision to get AWB. What should this decision be based on? Scouting, a tad experience to estimate the potential that the player has and fitting financial factors. Proper scouting certainly has revealed, that AWB is pretty limited on the ball, that he isn't very productive going forward. So it must have been the potential because the other factors make for a potential issue in modern football where fullbacks play a significant role not only at defending but in the builtup and in chance creation.
Is there a chance, that AWB just fitted the published criteria back then? Young, promising, english? It fitted for Sancho and Maguire more or less as well. They were and are the obvious choices. And I wouldn't point a finger to anyone saying the transfers were a mistake, especially since AWB showed some positive trends in terms of comfort on the ball late last season.
But still - we payed 50 million for a young promising RB, after spending 20million on a young and promising RB one (or two) years before. It certainly isn't a mistake but it certainly isn't something to brag about I guess.
 
No need to apologise.

Yes I certainly hope so with regards to Ole. The only people here who don't benefit if Ole is successful are those who are so wedded to the idea of hating him that they won't allow themselves to enjoy it. I've given up hope that this place will ever be somewhere to go for measured and reasonable analysis - (as a general tone. Some great posters here, but their stuff is getting harder to find) - but at least if it gets to being a forum you don't have to avoid for 4 days after a match I'll take that.

The nice thing about the start of the season on this bolded part is not going to surface for at least few games (and that's if we have a horror start which we won't), Sancho debut, Varane debut, there's a lot of good feeling at the moment and we also have a lovely run of games to get us going. There will be posters who are waiting for the first dropped points with baited breath, similar to Raiola with his Pogba tweets loaded for the next good performance, but I think the majority on here whether Ole in/Ole out from previous seasons are just fans for now. Every season is individual, it doesn't matter if you rate or don't rate Ole, everyone is on 0 points and let's pray we get off to a good start.
 
"A few people on here on here voted" so what? What does that mean? Nothing. I was against Mourinho because it was obvious we would have to face a switch in terms of how we play. So some guys on an internet forum put their money on the wrong horse and now? That means it is automatically the right choice to stick with the current horse? That doesn't seem to be rational to me at all. Mind, I am not asking to sack Ole because he did a good job. But if I want to see United be as competitive as possible, a "good job" might not be good enough.

And of course switching managers is a risky thing, again, thats why I am totally behind Ole as there are no obvious alternatives right now. But on the grand scheme of things, you have to do risky stuff to progress. If you know, something isn't working, it would be mad to stick with it because of being afraid that something else could end up not working is, again, irrational. And again - I am not saying that Ole is something that doesn't work. For me personally, I am still sceptical. If you guys aren't, I am happy for you. And I listen to you listing reasons to not be sceptical. But until today, I didn't find these reasons very convincing.

The point being that making a switch for the sake of it might take you backwards as well. Hell, look at Spurs as well. If someone is doing a good job, there's no point sacking the manager because you think xyz manager will do a spectacular job, as there is no guarantee.


I get somewhat tired of the argument about what we were expecting before the season. That doesn't mean anything. We were top of the table and we lost it due to bad performances against relatively weak teams. There is no denying it. What you expected is fine, but it was just theoretical. Practically, we were top of the table.

Or we lost it because we were burnt out by then. Maybe we lacked depth to play 2 games a week every week.

I would like to agree with your logic, but then I'd be saying Southampton, Everton, Leicester lost the title as well.


Maybe you misunderstood me and I made it not precise enough. I put this words in:
" (looking at starting eleven plus players available in context of schedule and meaning of the game) "

That includes dynamic changes that a season brings and looks game by game. If some diesease wipes most of the starting eleven away, a match against Everton will not be a match against worse opposition. A match against Watford in the Cup isn't a match against worse opposition, if we have an important league game coming up and rest most of the first team.

Is it still subjective? Of couse, I didn't say it wouldn't be. But to me, it makes way more sense than to decide on a certain league position or points amount because so many factors are involved in that.

I completely agree with the last para and completely disagree with the 1st.

Looking at the scheduling - I believe our side minus 2-3 players are good enough to beat pretty much every bottom 10 side 9 times out of 10, but football doesn't work that way. FOr example look at the above part of your post. Did you consider that we were jaded towards end of Jan as we had played far too many games? Or how about this, should we miss 3 players in a game vs some mid table team and go on to draw/lose, would you give us a pass, or say that "Ole relies on individual brilliance"? And there you have the root of the problem
 
Is it too early for a ‘Sack watch’ thread?

The club’s spending means Ole has to win something this season. The league will be much stronger with Chelsea and Liverpool at full strength from the start. We are still way off City.

Nah. Fourth place and he'll be fine. Ole just needs to keep our noses in front of Leicester/Spurs/Arsenal.
 
Says who? That would be nowhere close to acceptable.

As long as we finish at least fourth (and don't get embarrassed too much in the CL) he'll maintain the support of the club and the majority of the fans. I don't think anyone really expects him to win anything - he just needs to keep us "in the mix" and most will be happy.
 
As long as we finish at least fourth (and don't get embarrassed too much in the CL) he'll maintain the support of the club and the majority of the fans. I don't think anyone really expects him to win anything - he just needs to keep us "in the mix" and most will be happy.

I think that was the case last season understandably so. This season I think you'll be in for a big surprise if you think he can do the same with no backlash.
 
I think that was the case last season understandably so. This season I think you'll be in for a big surprise if you think he can do the same with no backlash.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see. In the "predict our final position" thread, fewer than 30% of the Caf have us winning the league, so I don't think expectations are particularly high.
 
I think that was the case last season understandably so. This season I think you'll be in for a big surprise if you think he can do the same with no backlash.
Last season was an over-achievement. No one had us down as 2nd place and EL final at the beginning of the season after the summer of recruitment we had. We've strengthened but so has every body else around us. No one's throwing around unrealistic expectations all of a sudden
 
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. In the "predict our final position" thread, fewer than 30% of the Caf have us winning the league, so I don't think expectations are particularly high.

Oh yeah winning the league is a major stretch especially with City's continued spending on top of already incredible squad depth. I'll commend any manager that can keep up with them. However Ole must win a trophy at least, anything will do after that Europa final. He's got to show he can at least get us over the line for trophies.
 
The point being that making a switch for the sake of it might take you backwards as well. Hell, look at Spurs as well. If someone is doing a good job, there's no point sacking the manager because you think xyz manager will do a spectacular job, as there is no guarantee.
There are no guarantees at all. If you are looking for that, you can just stop playing because that only that will guarantee you something, zero success. But obviously I get your point, don't know why you argumenting against "switch for sake of it" because I said I wouldn't switch but at some point, we maybe should. For every Spurs with Mourinho you might have Flick to Bayern after Kovac, a Tuchel to Chelsea so being taking risks can pay off.

And thats all I am saying. Ole earned the job, he earned this season and I hope he will be successfull because that would earn him even more trust. But if he isn't able to achieve it, we have to look at the reasons. And I, for the life of me, cannot find a reason to stop searching when it comes to the manager. To be honest, I am sure, in a chat about it, Ole would agree with me. Performances have to be evaluated. And that without sentiments. And until now he has proved that he is an alright manager, potentially a really good one man-management-wise, but that is about it. When we start looking at the striker position next year, everybody talks about Haaland. Or Mbappe, noone talks about Patrick Bamford. Or Danny Welbeck. Because "good" is not good enough.

Or we lost it because we were burnt out by then. Maybe we lacked depth to play 2 games a week every week.

I would like to agree with your logic, but then I'd be saying Southampton, Everton, Leicester lost the title as well.
Burnt out after half a year? Being able to play better and pretty successfull a few weeks later? I don't know... What I know about burning out is, that it isn't just a temporary effect unless you do something about it. But we didn't do anything. Our schedule was bad way longer than our bad streak went.

My logic applies to all other teams as well, they all lost out on the title. But we have been the closest ones. Because we were top of the table, in a position where we theoretically needed only the same results as our competitors. Against this city side with the waaay better squad, we have been there - on top of them. Just like Liverpool was repeatedly. So this notion that it is impossible is madness. It is absolutely possible. It is very difficult but that is the magic of the game isn't it.

I completely agree with the last para and completely disagree with the 1st.

Looking at the scheduling - I believe our side minus 2-3 players are good enough to beat pretty much every bottom 10 side 9 times out of 10, but football doesn't work that way. FOr example look at the above part of your post. Did you consider that we were jaded towards end of Jan as we had played far too many games? Or how about this, should we miss 3 players in a game vs some mid table team and go on to draw/lose, would you give us a pass, or say that "Ole relies on individual brilliance"? And there you have the root of the problem
What is the root of the problem? I don't get it.

I try to answer: I don't evaluate squad strength before the season - I evaluate it before kickoff and look at each game on his own. If we miss 3 players for example against Everton, it depends on who is missing and how Evertons side will look like. If we miss (last season) Bruno, Rashford and Cavani it is a different outlook than missing Shaw, Lindelof and McTominay. And Everton with DCL and Richarlison isn't the same as with. So yeah I would give Ole a pass if we draw or lose. I would even give him a pass against fecking Sheffield if the game looks like our dreaded semi-final against Portsmouth in 07/08, were we created plenty but couldn't finish and ended the game with penalties having all strikers on the field. Because noone would have said, we didn't try anything we could.

Maybe that is where you misunderstand me: I want to be fair, I acknowledge that there are factors the team and the manager cannot influence. Bad luck finishing, great performance by keeper, harsh VAR or ref decision - whatever. I can live with it. What I have problems with are issues that don't get touched over weeks and months - obvious issues with Rashfords decision making, our dreaded issues with set pieces, sleeping for 45min only to wake up when receiving a goal against, not challenging an opponent enough, not upping the tempo, keeping Bruno high up next to striker when it is obvious that we struggle in builtup, not using the squad players.
I know, the players are human and I am not expecting freak results. But over the course of the season I don't want to feel like we just don't get the lesson. Heck a year ago I would have been fine if we set up for counters all day long against anybody. If we wouldn't have conceded but missed out on points we got 10 goalless draws because we couldn't score I would have accepted it saying "alright, that is the way we want to play and that is what the players are suited for. Have a plan, execute it." But last year after having this group of managers and players together, it should have been a bit more. A more refined plan A, at least somewhat of a plan B. This is what I have my issues with.
 
Last edited:
What is the root of the problem? I don't get it.

The fact that we prefer to let biases define our judgement than context. Have it this way, in 19-20 season, we were missing a lot of our key players in the 1st half to injuries. Did people who are mostly Ole-out say "it's ok as we're missing our only creator, Rashford/Martial and McT/Fred" Similarly last season, in the games we lost where Bruno didn't start, we said that Ole isn't a good manager as he relies on individual brilliance ( case in point the Leicester defeat in FA Cup)
 
Is there some sort of role description published? Or is it just your assumption what the manager should be responsible for and what not? And to what degree? And don't we agree, that Ole might not be included in the numbers negotiations but probably will be contacted, if the outlay for one players dangers potential outlays for other acquisitions?
Directors deal with the money side, head coaches and managers deal with the football side. This is basic knowledge.

I believe both Mourinho and LvG expressed dissatisfaction at the lack of input they had with regards to our transfer business. While the club has clearly been sold on the idea of Ole's project, and look to have taken steps to help bring that project to fruition, I'd be extremely surprised if that includes sending Ole to negotiate transfer fees and contracts. By all accounts, it was only with Murtough and Riggs Fletcher taking up their new roles that final say on transfers was given to him, and that was mere months ago. And while I do believe he's been more involved than both Mou and LvG was, I see no reason to assume he would have had any more input than they would have had during that first summer window.

But nevermind, Ole certainly has been included in the decision to get AWB. What should this decision be based on? Scouting, a tad experience to estimate the potential that the player has and fitting financial factors. Proper scouting certainly has revealed, that AWB is pretty limited on the ball, that he isn't very productive going forward. So it must have been the potential because the other factors make for a potential issue in modern football where fullbacks play a significant role not only at defending but in the builtup and in chance creation.
Is there a chance, that AWB just fitted the published criteria back then? Young, promising, english? It fitted for Sancho and Maguire more or less as well. They were and are the obvious choices. And I wouldn't point a finger to anyone saying the transfers were a mistake, especially since AWB showed some positive trends in terms of comfort on the ball late last season.
But still - we payed 50 million for a young promising RB, after spending 20million on a young and promising RB one (or two) years before. It certainly isn't a mistake but it certainly isn't something to brag about I guess.
Yes, he was a target that Ole very likely helped identify, that has never been in question. Maybe he relative lack of offensive contribution is something they felt could be worked on and improved, and that his defensive ability would make up for it in the short term. Or maybe they just really wanted an English RB. Whatever the case, it's a position we were lacking in, Dalot or no Dalot.
 
Trippier was 29, AWB was 21. AWB had just played his first season in the PL and performed better than Trippier, who had only just managed to establish himself as a starter at Tottenham. And do you honestly think Levy would have allowed their starting RB go to a rival for £20m, or even £25m? Of course he wouldn't. He was comfortable letting him go for that kind of money to another league, though. And there's a big difference between not wanting him as a starter, and wanting him as a squad player. Because I don't think he'd ever be intended to replace AWB, just to provide competition and rotate with him. Our interest has reportedly cooled as well, which suggests that he's not that much of a priority anyway.

Was AWB expensive? Yeah, a bit. Is that on Ole? Not really. He's not the one negotiating deals, and he shouldn't have to babysit the people who does to ensure that they don't overspend on any one player. He should be able to trust them to make the necessary judgement calls to ensure that the available budget is spent in a way that ensures that the positions that are deemed a priority are strengthened.

Great post
 
The fact that we prefer to let biases define our judgement than context. Have it this way, in 19-20 season, we were missing a lot of our key players in the 1st half to injuries. Did people who are mostly Ole-out say "it's ok as we're missing our only creator, Rashford/Martial and McT/Fred" Similarly last season, in the games we lost where Bruno didn't start, we said that Ole isn't a good manager as he relies on individual brilliance ( case in point the Leicester defeat in FA Cup)
:)

I am sorry, I still don't get it. I specifically said, that I, and I am just not physically able to do it for anybody else, take context into consideration. Nobody is completely w/o bias but to be aware of certain tendencies gets you a quite a bit.

I take context into consideration but, in case of your 2nd example, when I am without my best creator, then I expect the manager to come up with a way to mitigate that. Be it by setting up deep to counter with space, where a creator is not as essential, or I try to setup with 4-4-2 crossing it into the box or by forcing set pieces either with corner kicks or by drawing fouls. There are so many things, you can do. Just accepting that the other team should be winning because they are about the same as good (which is at least debatable in case of Leicester, squad-wise) and you are missing your creator, isn't good enough. In this scenario, on my checklist, this match would also fall into the category of games against equally as good or better opponents. (Probably). Plus I remember this match as an instance of Leicester throughout the whole match doing more for the game and to, deservedly win it in the end.

On your 1st example: I remember it differently. We weren't great with the set of players under Mourinho but Ole set them free and had them playing pretty well in his caretaker stint. After that, we weren't playing well, not even with the best players available. This is certainly connected with the injuries and the season was saved by the break (bringing back Rashford, giving a rest to Matic) and most importantly getting Bruno in who, in almost unheardly manner hit the ground running.
Can this be biased - of course it is to a certain degree. But it is just as biased as your take on it, that it was mainly due to issues with the squad and specifically not with the manager. There is no true objectivity, from none of us, there are only arguments, some more convincing to some people as others. Some with statistics to back them up.

Also I can't speak for some of the numpties around here. Somebody will always complain and be way over the top with it. But putting everybody who is somewhat not convinced into the same category as the over-the-top-boys will always result in conflict and create deeper trenches.
 
Directors deal with the money side, head coaches and managers deal with the football side. This is basic knowledge.

I believe both Mourinho and LvG expressed dissatisfaction at the lack of input they had with regards to our transfer business. While the club has clearly been sold on the idea of Ole's project, and look to have taken steps to help bring that project to fruition, I'd be extremely surprised if that includes sending Ole to negotiate transfer fees and contracts. By all accounts, it was only with Murtough and Riggs Fletcher taking up their new roles that final say on transfers was given to him, and that was mere months ago. And while I do believe he's been more involved than both Mou and LvG was, I see no reason to assume he would have had any more input than they would have had during that first summer window.
You didn't answered the question: which is where you get your information from. Or, to be more precise, the confidence in being right about them.
All you say is based on your perception. But Football clubs run differently. Especially in England, especially in a period where sporting directors are mostly the norm in continental football and get more and more prominent in the PL as well. Especially in football where I am pretty sure are no rigid processes in place like in a corporate. Noone has a clue how we dealt with transfers back then, I am not even sure, how it works today. So saying his job was this or that or wasn't this or that has limited substance.

I didn't suggest, it would be Ole to negotiate the final amounts, but of course, he had to be involved or had a veto. Therefor would he have said "guys, come on, for 50 million get me an alright rightback for 20 mio or a reliable and good loanee (which would have been an improvement at this point) and let me spend that the rest money on a RW because 50 for this kid is pretty much" it would have meant something. I am sure, he could have done it but he didn't. Therefor he is also accountable for the decisions being made. Just to make sure, I don't want point fingers because I don't consider AWB transfer as a mistake. But taking Ole out only of the negative aspects of the story is bs from my point of view. Ole should be credited for being brave to put his trust into a young player, but he also should be accountable when questions are asked if we got a good ROI from that 130 million investment for Maguire and AWB or not.

Yes, he was a target that Ole very likely helped identify, that has never been in question. Maybe he relative lack of offensive contribution is something they felt could be worked on and improved, and that his defensive ability would make up for it in the short term. Or maybe they just really wanted an English RB. Whatever the case, it's a position we were lacking in, Dalot or no Dalot.
Granted. But I am sure you agree, there would have been other possibilities than to splash 50 million on a kid. There is a loan market, players out of contract, cheap but reliable punts for 10-20 mio from Italy, Portugal or France. Ole wasn't forced to go for AWB. It was the most obvious solution because he just had a good season in a position we had issues with. It wouldn't be unheard of to label the transfer somewhat of "flavour of the month" style. A style, that isn't the most popular one (which does not mean they cant pay off)
 
See my reply to the other guy.
Even if we scratch the entirety of his first season, which probably consist of close to 50 games, it still doesn't change the fact that it took him 3 full seasons to win a major trophy(or any trophy for that matter). I know that the Caf has a massive hard-on for finishing 2nd in the CL(see the Pochettino thread for reference), but it doesn't result in a major trophy.

Apologies for the late reply, I couldn't respond yesterday due to reaching my post limit.

You claimed that Ole has done no worse then Klopp at the same point in time, this is a silly claim since Klopp had already reached a CL final by now.

We got knocked out of a group that we should have progressed through. Our group wasn't as hard as people make out. It had one top team in it, one very bad team, and a leipzig team who finished a long way behind the leaders in germany and were easily disposed of by Liverpool in the next round 4-0 on aggregate despite Liverpool being in terrible form at the time. We should have got through that group, no question about it. It is very fair to say that Klopp did better than Ole, since one went to the final while the other failed to get out of the group and then also failed to win the europa league.

Your attempts at making a favourable comparison between Ole's time at United, and Klopps time at Liverpool will very likely be rendered null and void beyond all reasonable doubt this season anyway. Klopp won the CL and finished on 97 points in his third full season. This is Ole's third full season.

Ole doesn't decide the price. AWB is very similar to Shaw in terms of profile(promising young English fullback from a midtable PL team), yet he cost roughly twice as much. Why? Because the market went inside somewhere between 2017 and 2018. It's not "natural inflation" either. Players have been stupidly expensive for the last 3 years.

It doesn't matter that Ole doesn't decide the price, every manager knows that spending a big amount on one player significantly impacts your ability to spend elsewhere. Everyone knew how much palace were demanding from us, it was in the papers for weeks and dragged on and on, so Ole knew also.

Ole could have moved on to a different target but he insisted on the overpriced AWB, whose flaws were very obvious at palace before we signed him. That is Ole's decision and he has to own it. The only reason we are talking about AWB is because you raised his name and tried to use his cost as a reason to give Ole extra sympathy and leeway, as if Ole had no alternative but to spend £50 million on a right back of questionable quality.


They exist because people keep saying:

"If he isn't as good as Pep or Klopp, then why should we keep him, we need someone as good as them to compete" while then disregarding that there currently isn't anyone else considered on the same level as them. The natural next step is some comparing how Klopp got to the point of being considered one of the best in the world.

Klopp was already considered one of the best in the world before he went to Liverpool, that's why he had other giant clubs like Real Madrid and United after him.
 
He should be judged based on the time he's had and the money he has spent.
Based on the above, a reasonable title challenge, a trophy and quality football is the bench mark.
It's time we begin holding him to standard required of a united manager.
 
You didn't answered the question: which is where you get your information from. Or, to be more precise, the confidence in being right about them.
All you say is based on your perception. But Football clubs run differently. Especially in England, especially in a period where sporting directors are mostly the norm in continental football and get more and more prominent in the PL as well. Especially in football where I am pretty sure are no rigid processes in place like in a corporate. Noone has a clue how we dealt with transfers back then, I am not even sure, how it works today. So saying his job was this or that or wasn't this or that has limited substance.

I didn't suggest, it would be Ole to negotiate the final amounts, but of course, he had to be involved or had a veto. Therefor would he have said "guys, come on, for 50 million get me an alright rightback for 20 mio or a reliable and good loanee (which would have been an improvement at this point) and let me spend that the rest money on a RW because 50 for this kid is pretty much" it would have meant something. I am sure, he could have done it but he didn't. Therefor he is also accountable for the decisions being made. Just to make sure, I don't want point fingers because I don't consider AWB transfer as a mistake. But taking Ole out only of the negative aspects of the story is bs from my point of view. Ole should be credited for being brave to put his trust into a young player, but he also should be accountable when questions are asked if we got a good ROI from that 130 million investment for Maguire and AWB or not.
It's a picture that has evolved over years reading about United. We have both LvG and Mourinho complaining about lack of input on transfers, about not getting players they wanted and getting players they didn't want, it's been a few months since it was reported that Ole would get final say on transfers (implying that he didn't have it before), it's been reported that Ole was very unhappy about the drawn out transfer sagas surrounding both Maguire and Bruno (and probably Sancho last year as well.) It all points to a system wherein the manager's role in transfers was advisory.

If Ole, Lawlor, Court, Murtough et al. saw AWB as the number one target for a priority position, and signing him wouldn't impact our ability to bring in players elsewhere, why would he try to stop the signing? Because that's what your whole argument hinges on; that signing Wan-Bissaka would have us unable to afford players in other positions. Otherwise, what would the reason be?

And what are the negative aspects? That we signed Aaron Wan-Bissaka? So far, the only negative aspect I'm seeing is that we paid too much, and frankly, who cares? If it didn't keep us strengthening elsewhere, what's the issue?

I also like how you go "you're just basing it on your perception" (which yes, yes I am) only to go and draw conclusions based on your own speculation. Nice bit of hypocrisy there.
 
Apologies for the late reply, I couldn't respond yesterday due to reaching my post limit.

You claimed that Ole has done no worse then Klopp at the same point in time, this is a silly claim since Klopp had already reached a CL final by now.

We got knocked out of a group that we should have progressed through. Our group wasn't as hard as people make out. It had one top team in it, one very bad team, and a leipzig team who finished a long way behind the leaders in germany and were easily disposed of by Liverpool in the next round 4-0 on aggregate despite Liverpool being in terrible form at the time. We should have got through that group, no question about it. It is very fair to say that Klopp did better than Ole, since one went to the final while the other failed to get out of the group and then also failed to win the europa league.

Your attempts at making a favourable comparison between Ole's time at United, and Klopps time at Liverpool will very likely be rendered null and void beyond all reasonable doubt this season anyway. Klopp won the CL and finished on 97 points in his third full season. This is Ole's third full season.



It doesn't matter that Ole doesn't decide the price, every manager knows that spending a big amount on one player significantly impacts your ability to spend elsewhere. Everyone knew how much palace were demanding from us, it was in the papers for weeks and dragged on and on, so Ole knew also.

Ole could have moved on to a different target but he insisted on the overpriced AWB, whose flaws were very obvious at palace before we signed him. That is Ole's decision and he has to own it. The only reason we are talking about AWB is because you raised his name and tried to use his cost as a reason to give Ole extra sympathy and leeway, as if Ole had no alternative but to spend £50 million on a right back of questionable quality.




Klopp was already considered one of the best in the world before he went to Liverpool, that's why he had other giant clubs like Real Madrid and United after him.

Great post mate.
 
It doesn't matter that Ole doesn't decide the price, every manager knows that spending a big amount on one player significantly impacts your ability to spend elsewhere. Everyone knew how much palace were demanding from us, it was in the papers for weeks and dragged on and on, so Ole knew also.

Ole could have moved on to a different target but he insisted on the overpriced AWB, whose flaws were very obvious at palace before we signed him. That is Ole's decision and he has to own it. The only reason we are talking about AWB is because you raised his name and tried to use his cost as a reason to give Ole extra sympathy and leeway, as if Ole had no alternative but to spend £50 million on a right back of questionable quality.
Did spending £50m on AWB "significantly impact" our ability to spend elsewhere? Did he "insist on him", or were our's and Palace's valuation of him close enough that it was felt a deal could be made at an acceptable price? Reports at the time had our opening bid at anywhere from £35m+addons for a total of £50m, to £40m up front, with Palace reportedly asking for £60m. So clearly then, the club didn't feel that £50m for AWB was expensive or an issue.

And what's this decision he has to own? That he identified a target that the club then went on to sign? Has he indicated that he's unwilling to own that?
 
They exist because the Ole-in crew have always used the comparison to say that it took Klopp 3 years to really get Liverpool purring. So this is essentially the season things are now expected of Ole - well going by those comparisons anyway - and people are rightfully bringing it up. I'm sure the goalposts will shift again though.

:lol:

100% they will. It could be any of the following:

1) He wasn't given the right 'tools' to succeed

2) He wasn't given a DM which squad is in dire need of

3) We got injuries... Liverpool were injury free throughout the season

4) We went from Smalling to Varane, that's progre....

Pick your poison. I hope this season is a rousing success under Ole but any semblance of having a rational debate when it comes to him is not happening on this board.
 
Brilliant start. massive difference from last year. If Sancho , Rashfordand Pogba can perform with Bruno then we have the best attacking midfield in the world potentially.
I guess PSG got better if they keep Mbappe.

I doubt Ole, but a few more of these performances and I think we can do it. It is clear he man manage it well and can fire us up for games. Just if he got the guts and tactical abilities to match the big teams in CL when it matters the most.
 
Enjoyed the football today. Kept things simple with quick, direct passing, and out worked them.
 
Fabulous stuff. Felt we would have a great day and we did. The confidence around the place is bubbling away and I'm buzzing for the season ahead. Finally, it feels as though we are ready for a real title challenge.

Well done to Ole and the boys for a fantastic afternoon. Plenty more to come this season :drool:
 
More of this please. That was ton of fun to watch. The passes, intensity, urgency and dynamics between players were all top notch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.