Richard Arnold leaving United

Probably the best move. But didn’t he get ETH every single signing he wanted? And lowered the price on Mount and Onana
 
DJ_21 said:
Probably the best move. But didn’t he get ETH every single signing he wanted? And lowered the price on Mount and Onana
Click to expand...

Getting a manager every signing they wanted isn't necessarily a good way to run a football club.
 
DJ_21 said:
Probably the best move. But didn’t he get ETH every single signing he wanted? And lowered the price on Mount and Onana
Click to expand...

Was that a good thing though, or did it speak more to a lack of a real plan? For instance, if Ten Hag loses the next 5 games, what's the long-term vision, just hope the next guy can use these players?

Love Casemiro, but did we just fund Bellingham for Madrid in exchange for a player with only six months left in the tank? I hope its not that bad, but it doesn't feel like we've had great leadership. I'm sure Joel Glazer hasn't helped, but time for Arnold to go and let this INEOS lot have a go.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Was that a good thing though, or did it speak more to a lack of a real plan? For instance, if Ten Hag loses the next 5 games, what's the long-term vision, just hope the next guy can use these players?

Love Casemiro, but did we just fund Bellingham for Madrid in exchange for a player with only six months left in the tank? I hope its not that bad, but it doesn't feel like we've had great leadership. I'm sure Joel Glazer hasn't helped, but time for Arnold to go and let this INEOS lot have a go.
Click to expand...
We’ve never had a clear plan to be fair. We’ve always got the players the manager as wanted which is why we’re forever selling and re building when hiring new managers. We’ve never stuck to a style of play and said right this is the way we want to play we need a manager and players that suit this style… that way we can re use players under a new manager who plays a similar way.
 
Alex99 said:
Getting a manager every signing they wanted isn't necessarily a good way to run a football club.
Click to expand...
True. Goes a long way to building relationships though. If we’d of said no to ETH getting the players he wanted then he could have used it as an excuse as to wether he fails or not. Where as now he has his players, we’re backing him, so he has no excuse but to deliver.
 
I am actually surprised that he spent 16 years at United. He has seen how successful Alex was to how bad perform in the last 10 years. I can't understand why he was even promoted. Does it mean that I stay in my company long enough that I would become the COE? Does Glazers knows how to run a company? He must be doing something well enough to be promoted. Blocking noise from media and fans, chauffeuring the bosses when they are in town, telling bosses that his plan is solid, always not his fault.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Why would you sack all the staff before the new lot is even involved? That's not how anything works.
Click to expand...
These people don’t get sacked, they get placed on gardening leave for a set amount of months and are still involved in discussions but they’re removed from their role. He’ll probably be around until the end of the season but in no official capacity other than to be referred to if questions arise.
 
DJ_21 said:
True. Goes a long way to building relationships though. If we’d of said no to ETH getting the players he wanted then he could have used it as an excuse as to wether he fails or not. Where as now he has his players, we’re backing him, so he has no excuse but to deliver.
Click to expand...

There's no point having a scouting department if you're just going to sign players suggested by the manager.

One of the main reasons the club is in this mess is because each manager has been allowed to pick and choose their own signings, leaving us with a mess of a squad.

Letting the manager choose his targets has meant money being repeatedly wasted on high-priced flops (Di Maria, Pogba, Lukaku, Maguire, Sancho, Antony, etc.), which has then left us with little to no money to actually strengthen problem areas, which in turn, has seen us repeatedly resort to low-cost, short-term options to try and plug the gaps (Zlatan, Ighalo, Cavani, Weghorst, Eriksen, Sabitzer, Amrabat, etc.).

Managers aren't scouts. I don't think there are many modern managers going into jobs with the expectation that they'll get to just hand over a shortlist of their own transfer targets.
 
Alex99 said:
Letting the manager choose his targets has meant money being repeatedly wasted on high-priced flops (Di Maria, Pogba, Lukaku, Maguire, Sancho, Antony, etc.), which has then left us with little to no money to actually strengthen problem areas, which in turn, has seen us repeatedly resort to low-cost, short-term options to try and plug the gaps (Zlatan, Ighalo, Cavani, Weghorst, Eriksen, Sabitzer, Amrabat, etc.).
Click to expand...
While I agree with the sentiment, I wouldn't include Pogba and Sancho in that first list. While they were obviously wanted by Mourinho and Ole respectively, it was also clear that the club as a whole had been after them for years.
 
MadDogg said:
While I agree with the sentiment, I wouldn't include Pogba and Sancho in that first list. While they were obviously wanted by Mourinho and Ole respectively, it was also clear that the club as a whole had been after them for years.
Click to expand...

I don't think every player we've signed has been a manager target. In fact, we know they weren't.

The point is that prioritising manager targets and overpaying for "statement" purchases (some of which have been manager targets) has left us in a massive mess, and both are symptoms of having non-football people heading the footballing operations.
 
Most of us have mentioned how our managers got the players they wanted, but did they really? I don’t know the true answer, but don’t we know that the club did not sign quite few players various managers wanted?
 
lex talionis said:
Most of us have mentioned how our managers got the players they wanted, but did they really? I don’t know the true answer, but don’t we know that the club did not sign quite few players various managers wanted?
Click to expand...
I’m pretty certain that many of our signings have been driven by player agents and selling clubs calling Woodward / the manager / Murtough / whoever and telling them that they’ve got just the right player for us.
 
Cantonagotmehere said:
Any shakeup at this point is a great shakeup. Bring on more.
Click to expand...
A full investigation into the scouting department and recruitment should be next . Followed by Murtough out.

Granted it was Woodward and his crew but refusing to pay £3.5 million for Caicedo because of third party involvement but fast forward a few years and we are willing to piss away 80-90 odd million on a player that uses one foot is mindboggling . And these scouts all approved of Antony .
 
lex talionis said:
Most of us have mentioned how our managers got the players they wanted, but did they really? I don’t know the true answer, but don’t we know that the club did not sign quite few players various managers wanted?
Click to expand...
No manager gets every player that they want (finances aren't unlimited, some clubs just refuse to sell, some players prefer other clubs, etc), but we generally seemed to allow the managers an unreasonable amount of power to choose the targets. Especially early in each managers reign.
 
Red00012 said:
A full investigation into the scouting department and recruitment should be next . Followed by Murtough out.

Granted it was Woodward and his crew but refusing to pay £3.5 million for Caicedo because of third party involvement but fast forward a few years and we are willing to piss away 80-90 odd million on a player that uses one foot is mindboggling . And these scouts all approved of Antony .
Click to expand...
Weren't all the reports saying that the scouts didn't want Antony, but ETH insisted so we went ahead with it?
 
Revaulx said:
I’m pretty certain that many of our signings have been driven by player agents and selling clubs calling Woodward / the manager / Murtough / whoever and telling them that they’ve got just the right player for us.
Click to expand...

That’s what has troubled me. Agents know United management are mugs and we get taken advantage of over and over. A shame we’ve shoveled one billion quid into the furnace.
 
Red00012 said:
A full investigation into the scouting department and recruitment should be next . Followed by Murtough out.

Granted it was Woodward and his crew but refusing to pay £3.5 million for Caicedo because of third party involvement but fast forward a few years and we are willing to piss away 80-90 odd million on a player that uses one foot is mindboggling . And these scouts all approved of Antony .
Click to expand...
Quite the opposite. They warned us not to sign him. The club overruled them because the manager wanted him.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
Quite the opposite. They warned us not to sign him. The club overruled them because the manager wanted him.
Click to expand...

Jobs and reputations are at risk at this point thus expect a ridiculous amount of spin to defend this or that person's arse. I suggest that we rely on old info that details how the structure works. That information came at a time when everyone's job was safe thus they had no reason to cover up for their mistakes. Anyway that information is quite clear. Joel and Arnold must approve the signing from a financial POV while ETH and Murtough have a VETO from a football POV. That means that for a signing to be made every one must give his go ahead.
 
Presumably presages the finalisation of the Ratcliffe arrangement. Stewart obviously just a temporary holdover. The things that are of real significance are yet to come, and that's what all of this should be judged on.

I certainly shed no tears over Arnold's departure, but I don't see how this improves anything in the short term. For the time being it's just more temporariness, drift and unclarity.
 
justsomebloke said:
Presumably presages the finalisation of the Ratcliffe arrangement. Stewart obviously just a temporary holdover. The things that are of real significance are yet to come, and that's what all of this should be judged on.

I certainly shed no tears over Arnold's departure, but I don't see how this improves anything in the short term. For the time being it's just more temporariness, drift and unclarity.
Click to expand...
Antony is going to develop a right foot because of this
 
There are rumors that Richard Arnold worked against the Glazers by voting against INEOS 51% deal. That would explain why he's fired before the INEOS deal has been ratified thus making it a Glazer's call rather then SJR one
 
justsomebloke said:
Interesting - any sources on that?
Click to expand...
I remember it was reported quite a bit, but not sure if they were good sources or the usual rubbish. Some articles, admittedly in poor sources like The Mirror, repeated it just a few days ago when reporting on Marcel Bout (who used to be our head of global scouting) joining Newcastle.

Bruno was the other one who was widely reported to have had mixed reports from the scouting department, with big question marks raised over how often he just gave possession back to the opposition team.
 
devilish said:
Jobs and reputations are at risk at this point thus expect a ridiculous amount of spin to defend this or that person's arse. I suggest that we rely on old info that details how the structure works. That information came at a time when everyone's job was safe thus they had no reason to cover up for their mistakes. Anyway that information is quite clear. Joel and Arnold must approve the signing from a financial POV while ETH and Murtough have a VETO from a football POV. That means that for a signing to be made every one must give his go ahead.
Click to expand...

What specific persons arse? You're trying to blame nameless people who don't have a public voice.
 
Skills said:
What specific persons arse? You're trying to blame nameless people who don't have a public voice.
Click to expand...

There's a big change going on, people will be fighting for their job and for their reputation. So its normal for everyone to go out swinging rather then just sit there and allow years of incompetence to be pinned to them. We had a similar situation when the previous restructuring was done (ie when Murtough became DOF and started changing things around). I think it was Lawlor who came out with a set of names and said that he recommended those players and that the club shot his suggestions down. The same happened with all managers so far. Ole, Moyes, Rangnick and Mou had all come out at one point to defend their corner.

The reality is simple and had been so for years. Both Murtough and the manager have a veto on whom we sign or whom we not. Once they both agree on the target then the names go to the money people specifically the CEO. If United agreed to a deal then it must be signed by the Glazers to go through. Woodward used to mess at a previous stage (ie the football side).
 
lex talionis said:
That’s what has troubled me. Agents know United management are mugs and we get taken advantage of over and over. A shame we’ve shoveled one billion quid into the furnace.
Click to expand...
Glad it isn’t just me!

It did look like things might have changed post-Woodward. One might not rate the ETH-era signings, but at least they have all addressed obvious gaps in the squad, however inadequately. The Mount signing has a very Woodwardish vibe to it though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.