Why
Sir Alex, David Gill and Bryan Robson have been brought in to advise Richard Arnold on a wide range of club matters
- Thread starter Tom Van Persie
- Start date
Why
Yup.
Load of people talking shite about issues they have no familiarity with. Wahey.
Because why does he need to advise Arnold? He never ran Manchester United in a non football capacity. He ran the football side of things which is now run by Murtough and not Arnold.
Furthermore if they need an advisory board then they are not capable of running the club.
What has actually been reported? Early on it sounded like Gill and SAF were just around for Arnold to bounce ideas off of, which I'm sure is fine and appreciated.
The first I heard about this was just after the pre-season tour ended. Ronaldo was at the ground and so was Sir Alex and the press linked the two - incorrectly as it turned out. Sir Alex was there on another matter namely setting up - and the phrase I have most often heard/read is 'think-tank' - comprising himself, Bryan Robson and David Gill. One must assume they are thinking about footballing matters not noodle deals or sponsorship arrangements.
Whatever it is is pretty irrelevant really, the fact is whilst Sir Alex maintains a presence at the club it casts a shadow over his successor(s). He de-railed Ole's project such as it was with the quote that 'you should always play your best players' even though at that time Ronaldo wasn't and now he most certainly isn't.
The most bizarre thing of all of course is that if one club should know the dangers of this type of thing (keeping past legends on board) it should be Manchester United and furthermore, if one person knows how difficult it is to move forward when that occurs it is in fact Sir Alex Ferguson. Why does he do it?
Last edited:
I don't see the problem with having them there for advice. If SAF is going to give quotes to the media about what he thinks the manager should be doing instead of just telling the manager when he's asked then that's probably counterproductive.
This man was our manager for 26 years and some fans still have no clue about him. It's not his style to get involved. He's a firm believer in letting managers do their jobs and he won't be making any comments about ten Hag to the media. The only time I remember him talking about a United manager in the job was early in LvG's reign and he only had good things to say about him.
Also, the SAF conspiracy theories are silly and hold no weight. The Ronaldo theory was debunked by good journalists. SAF only got involved in that after he was made aware that United were interested and he offered his help in landing the player.
Also, the SAF conspiracy theories are silly and hold no weight. The Ronaldo theory was debunked by good journalists. SAF only got involved in that after he was made aware that United were interested and he offered his help in landing the player.
I wonder why that’s come out now
Joke of a club
Embarrassing.
whats embarrassing?
Let’s get new owners and reset. I’m not sure that article shows Arnold in the shining light it’s intended to. Woodwards issue wasn’t that he sidelined the legends, it’s that he was incompetent at his job.
The club
Arnold doing his own PR I see. Fair enough I would too if I wanted to stay on as CEO of Manchester United.
This.
I'm not sure this one makes SAF look good either. The extreme style that made manager sackings at the club incredibly burdensome and difficult was the direct product of his ethos. I know it's says it was more about how it was handled but left to him I'm not even sure Moyes would have been sacked that early. Manager sackings here needed to be more ruthless not more sympathetic. We already give managers the longest rope of all the big clubs.
Was gonna say this, here come the fluff pieces. Means the takeover is near then.
Well think we can all agree. If the club is to become “great again” it won’t be Richard Arnold’s job to make it happen.
He’ll get replaced long before.
He’ll get replaced long before.
we shouldn’t listen to fergie on jobs and sackings. he’s a scotch and a labourer. he doesn’t think people should have jobs in the first place and everyone should get paid to drink cider on park benches. in his world, a kind hearted, most likely conservative, business owner should feel remorse for booting a toddler out into the cold that’s been maimed by the loom. it’s fecked. why still pay it its pittance?
Dickie Arnold PR in overdrive today. I wonder does he feel his job is on the line with the takeover? Surely a new owner will look to replace / upgrade the majority of the executive staff that have failed the club over the past decade or so.
Asking club legends for opinions on signing Martinez might have been interesting to hear; I bet the idea that he was too short came up quite a bit 
What exactly is wrong or embarrassing about that article? 
Seems like a good thing to me.
Seems like a good thing to me.
Arnold is likely to be the first man out the door when JR or Qatar come in. Regardless of who the new owner is, it’s highly likely they want their own CEO in place especially when the club is in the midst of a decade of mediocrity.
Right. Even if he had been doing an undeniably good job, the new owner would still probably want their own person in charge after spending billions acquiring the club.
Disgrace.
Yeah he definitely feels that
Yeah hopefully
I’m not sure about this really. Did you vote for EtH to be sacked if we don’t get Top 4? Quite a few people did. There’s ruthless and then there’s clueless.
Club of a joke.
Isn't this his second puff piece in 6 months or something? I seem to clearly remember there was another one not too long ago.
That isn't a response about ETH. That's such a silly comparison. ETH is nowhere close to failing as United manager or even trending towards. He has a cup and has a clear style of play. Actual progress metrics that the others couldn't sniff without sacrificing the other. ETH will stay because he earned it not because of blind faith.
Last edited:
Concerning.
I find it funny that some of our fans always see our legends getting involved with the club as a bad thing and try to paint it as one of the reasons we have fallen behind. Reality is that among the biggest clubs in the world, we are actually the worst when it comes to actually integrating former players back into the club. We do it worse than Clubs like Madrid, Barca and Bayern. Even AC Milan.
Don’t understand the issue personally.
Club CEO has some ideas and runs it past a few of the people who have been key figures at the club in the past, can’t do any harm can it? They’re not making decisions, just providing a sounding board it sounds like.
Club CEO has some ideas and runs it past a few of the people who have been key figures at the club in the past, can’t do any harm can it? They’re not making decisions, just providing a sounding board it sounds like.
What a toxic place. How can any of what he did be bad? It's like we want to erase any history of united to enter the future.
That difference is usually only evident in hindsight. Were real Madrid useless or clueless when they sacked benitez after 7 months, they were 3rd in the league 4 points off top and had qualified to the last 16 of the champions league, people on here would have said that was harsh, but they won 3 champions leagues in a row as a result, so ruthless or clueless?
Just making the point that loads of people voted that he should be sacked if we don’t get top 4 - check out that thread. It would be ruthless but also stupid. If I understand you correctly, you’re really saying that we haven’t recognised the right time to sack managers in the past. There is no point being ruthless for the sake of it.
Edit: Out of interest, how would you describe our style of play under a EtH? To my eyes it varies a lot (which is one of his strengths imo).
Last edited:
It’s impossible to say what might have happened if managers were kept on instead of being sacked but if you sack someone and your fortunes improve then it’s not really a mistake. Or is it?