Ten Hag sacked | Ruud appointed Interim Manager

[Oranges038]

I agree. But the difference with Slot is he has Liverpool at the top of the table and if he wins it in his first season with only signing 1 of his own players then that already beats Klopp.

Klopp left him a good sqaud and he hasn't changed much in terms of play style. Let's see how he does when he has to sign his own players to replace the likes of Salah and VVD.

 

[romufc]

ETH completely lost the plot in terms of his best eleven, the subs he used, when he used them, his tactics and leaving underperforming players on for far too long. If we’d let him go in the summer I’m sure we’d be a good 6-9pts better off at this season.

We dont know that.. the options in the summer were Tuchel or Di Zerbi... neither really are exciting.

It was a matter of shall we change for sake of changing or do we change for a manager we believe in.. they chose the latter. I know who I would rather have if given the choice between Amorim, Di Zerbi and Tuchel.

 

[MadDogg]

We dont know that.. the options in the summer were Tuchel or Di Zerbi... neither really are exciting.

It was a matter of shall we change for sake of changing or do we change for a manager we believe in.. they chose the latter. I know who I would rather have if given the choice between Amorim, Di Zerbi and Tuchel.

Considering Amorim was interviewing for the Liverpool and West Ham jobs, we could easily have got him in the summer if he was the one we wanted. Indeed it's almost certain that we did talk to him and the media just never got a sniff about it (it's become quite obvious the media have no real sources with the new hierarchy).

 

[romufc]

Considering Amorim was interviewing for the Liverpool and West Ham jobs, we could easily have got him in the summer if he was the one we wanted. Indeed it's almost certain that we did talk to him and the media just never got a sniff about it (it's become quite obvious the media have no real sources with the new hierarchy).

We did and he said he wanted to stay.. he rejected those jobs.. well at least West Ham as he wanted to stay.

He decided it was 1 more year, but has left early.

Also, the people at United to make those decisions were in place mid July... once pre season had started.

So Berrada and Ashworth come in, they need time to assess the situation and decide on the style they want to play... then go look for managers in that style.

That takes time, I am sure alot of us were saying lets get a modern structure, so why do most fans want the owners to make football decisions and not the footballing structure?

 

[tjb]

Speaking of Dutch managers, Arnie Slot seems to be a better communicator than ETH. Even his command of the English language is heaps better. I wonder if most of ETH’s failures were because he struggled to actually convey his ideas to the team (the language barrier being one of the challenges) and ended up confusing and demotivating them even more?

I struggle to believe that ETH as a professional manager with CL experience could be that tactically clueless. The worst manager alongside Moyes despite winning 2 trophies.

I think its a mix of both.

I think as a communicator, he's terrible, but as a club, when going for managers, we have a propensity for hiring egotistical managers who like to punish players. Well, to do that effectively, you have to be able to communicate effectively. I also think he struggled to get information across tactically. However, I do think he was inept for this level of football. I think he was a lot more one dimensional than people would like to admit, depending on high amounts of overloads at Ajax. That worked in Holland as the league is much slower and Ajax were technically and physically superior to any other team they encountered. There's a reason that outside of City, top teams don't have as much fluidity throughout the team, because it opens teams up to counters. At Ajax, the weakness of other teams meant that this couldn't be exploited; in England, that wasn't the case.

The problem with a lot of Dutch managers is that they have playing philosophies that they stick squarely to, and due to believing its superiority to other playing styles, don't really learn or adapt to new styles that may be more effective. It's like they're all given this playbook, and follow the same instructions, but where Cruyff could adapt the rules of this, given the situation, alot of them arrogantly stick to these principles and don't learn how to adapt. Slot and Hiddink being the exceptions. We were so bad last season because ETH did not know how to adapt. He couldn't adapt to our injury crisis, he couldn't adapt our tactics to meet the demands of the league and once his plan A couldn't work, he resorted to trying to completely bypass the midfield. He was extremely one note and his in game management shows his flaws in plain sight. He can't recognize issues, he can't adapt to change and quite frankly, I'm not sure he could read the game. What I saw is a manager who could put shapes together, but didn't know why they worked or didn't worked. He just knew in the past, he'd tried it and it had. As a result, when he needed to adapt it, he couldn't. For example, Pep has had multiple formations since he started at Barca. When he arrived at City, despite having a strong squad, his high possession system struggled immensely to deal with counter attacks. Pep understood why this was the case, aging full backs combined with the amount of players committed high up the pitch having to combat the physicality of teams geared with the strength, pace and power to counter. As a response to this, in 17-18, he started inverting his full backs, using Zinchenko and Delph at LB. In 23-24, ETH bought Mason Mount and planned to go into the season with him playing in central midfield. He'd seen City and Arsenal employ Attacking Midfielders as CM's and assumed based on nothing other than hope, that it would work. He copied their system, mixing it with his own. He exposed Casemiro to so much pressure with his 4141, ending his international career and damaging his reputation, as United were slaughtered week to week, with no change in sight. He didn't know how to press, didn't know how to keep the team compact, didn't know how to create build up opportunities, and more than any other flaw, didn't know how to create opportunities for our striker.

 

[Borys]

I think its a mix of both.

I think as a communicator, he's terrible, but as a club, when going for managers, we have a propensity for hiring egotistical managers who like to punish players. Well, to do that effectively, you have to be able to communicate effectively. I also think he struggled to get information across tactically. However, I do think he was inept for this level of football. I think he was a lot more one dimensional than people would like to admit, depending on high amounts of overloads at Ajax. That worked in Holland as the league is much slower and Ajax were technically and physically superior to any other team they encountered. There's a reason that outside of City, top teams don't have as much fluidity throughout the team, because it opens teams up to counters. At Ajax, the weakness of other teams meant that this couldn't be exploited; in England, that wasn't the case.

The problem with a lot of Dutch managers is that they have playing philosophies that they stick squarely to, and due to believing its superiority to other playing styles, don't really learn or adapt to new styles that may be more effective. It's like they're all given this playbook, and follow the same instructions, but where Cruyff could adapt the rules of this, given the situation, alot of them arrogantly stick to these principles and don't learn how to adapt. Slot and Hiddink being the exceptions. We were so bad last season because ETH did not know how to adapt. He couldn't adapt to our injury crisis, he couldn't adapt our tactics to meet the demands of the league and once his plan A couldn't work, he resorted to trying to completely bypass the midfield. He was extremely one note and his in game management shows his flaws in plain sight. He can't recognize issues, he can't adapt to change and quite frankly, I'm not sure he could read the game. What I saw is a manager who could put shapes together, but didn't know why they worked or didn't worked. He just knew in the past, he'd tried it and it had. As a result, when he needed to adapt it, he couldn't. For example, Pep has had multiple formations since he started at Barca. When he arrived at City, despite having a strong squad, his high possession system struggled immensely to deal with counter attacks. Pep understood why this was the case, aging full backs combined with the amount of players committed high up the pitch having to combat the physicality of teams geared with the strength, pace and power to counter. As a response to this, in 17-18, he started inverting his full backs, using Zinchenko and Delph at LB. In 23-24, ETH bought Mason Mount and planned to go into the season with him playing in central midfield. He'd seen City and Arsenal employ Attacking Midfielders as CM's and assumed based on nothing other than hope, that it would work. He copied their system, mixing it with his own. He exposed Casemiro to so much pressure with his 4141, ending his international career and damaging his reputation, as United were slaughtered week to week, with no change in sight. He didn't know how to press, didn't know how to keep the team compact, didn't know how to create build up opportunities, and more than any other flaw, didn't know how to create opportunities for our striker.

Those bolded bits are quite interesting. Why would you come to that conclusion?

 

[romufc]

Those bolded bits are quite interesting. Why would you come to that conclusion?

It is interesting right? Claiming a manager cant communicate or get his tactics across?

When alot of players he has coached before and managed to communicate with and get his tactics across then?

Antony, Licha, Eriksen, De Ligt, Mazroui have all worked with him but some will say he could communicate to them in Ajax but at United he was not allowed to speak to them in the language they spoke with each other in Netherlands.

 

[Borys]

It is interesting right? Claiming a manager cant communicate or get his tactics across?

When alot of players he has coached before and managed to communicate with and get his tactics across then?

Antony, Licha, Eriksen, De Ligt, Mazroui have all worked with him but some will say he could communicate to them in Ajax but at United he was not allowed to speak to them in the language they spoke with each other in Netherlands.

That is exactly my point.

It seems to me people didn't believe ETH lost his mind, or had such stupid tactical ideas, so came up with a theory that it can't be the tactics, there must be a communication problem. I find it hard to believe, one reason why you just provided, second one is how long he was trying to make this work.

 

[Ollie Derbyshire]

We dont know that.. the options in the summer were Tuchel or Di Zerbi... neither really are exciting.

It was a matter of shall we change for sake of changing or do we change for a manager we believe in.. they chose the latter. I know who I would rather have if given the choice between Amorim, Di Zerbi and Tuchel.

I’m sure we could have pushed for Amorim in the summer, but I think ETH tied himself up in so many knots anyone would have gained more points before he left than he did.

 

[romufc]

That is exactly my point.

It seems to me people didn't believe ETH lost his mind, or had such stupid tactical ideas, so came up with a theory that it can't be the tactics, there must be a communication problem. I find it hard to believe, one reason why you just provided, second one is how long he was trying to make this work.

I know hindsight is a great thing but the one thing I noticed is that his Ajax team struggles with the same things.

Its just that in that league, they didnt face the level of opposition like he did in the PL.

He clearly didnt back himself, threw his ideas out after Brentford then wanted to play a high press but low line, probably confused himself as to the brand he wanted to play.

 

[Pughnichi]

I think he did see his quality - hence why he started him 8 games to start the season.

FALSE

he started the first 2
Was then dropped for Liverpool
Brought back vs Southampton
Dropped again v Barnsley
Brought back v palace
Dropped again for the next 2

50% right

 

[stevoc]

Speaking of Dutch managers, Arnie Slot seems to be a better communicator than ETH. Even his command of the English language is heaps better. I wonder if most of ETH’s failures were because he struggled to actually convey his ideas to the team (the language barrier being one of the challenges) and ended up confusing and demotivating them even more?

I struggle to believe that ETH as a professional manager with CL experience could be that tactically clueless. The worst manager alongside Moyes despite winning 2 trophies.

His grasp of English was decent when he started but it didn't seem to improve. And if that was something that was holding him back then there's really no excuses. He was living and working in England for 2+ years, he should have hired a coach and been doing daily lessons to improve his English.

 

[stevoc]

Struggle to agree with people ‘going early’ on Slot compared to Ten Hag given we went from 7th to 3rd plus a trophy in his first season. It only started to fall apart a year or so later.

Slot has done a near perfect job thus far but a lot can change as we saw with our own bald Dutchman.

We finished 6th and the seasons before that 2nd and 3rd. So he wasn't exactly performing miracles that season, it was a good season though.

 

[Jam]

Speaking of Dutch managers, Arnie Slot seems to be a better communicator than ETH. Even his command of the English language is heaps better. I wonder if most of ETH’s failures were because he struggled to actually convey his ideas to the team (the language barrier being one of the challenges) and ended up confusing and demotivating them even more?

I struggle to believe that ETH as a professional manager with CL experience could be that tactically clueless. The worst manager alongside Moyes despite winning 2 trophies.

Oh shit. You’ve cracked it.

He was talking to McLaren in Dutch -> McLaren then tried to translate it to the team in English, with a Dutch accent for authenticity, and butchered the entire thing.

Hire him back with an interpreter and we’ll be playing total football in days!

 

[DRJosh]

Oh shit. You’ve cracked it.

He was talking to McLaren in Dutch -> McLaren then tried to translate it to the team in English, with a Dutch accent for authenticity, and butchered the entire thing.

Hire him back with an interpreter and we’ll be playing total football in days!

I’m not saying it was the sole reason. But for a typically poor and uninspiring communicator like ETH, language adds an additional barrier.

 

[Jam]

I’m not saying it was the sole reason. But for a typically poor and uninspiring communicator like ETH, language adds an additional barrier.

I think if it was a legitimate reason it would have been addressed.

Multiple fluent speakers, and access to professional interpreters.

I’m not saying his method of communication might not have been poor but language absolutely should not have been an issue - he was here for multiple years and suspect anything “lost in translation” (rather than ignored, explained poorly, or just bad advice) would have been covered.

 

[Pogba's Barber]

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/sto...-united-line-transfers-players-ronaldo-sancho

To @NotChatGPT who claimed communication was not a massive contributor to ten Hag's failings, and any suggestion of this was 'making things up'..

After beginning his reign with defeats to Brighton and Brentford in August 2022, sources told ESPN there were early complaints from some players that Ten Hag struggled to communicate, and concerns that instructions were being lost in translation leading to confusion on the pitch. Following the 4-0 defeat to Brentford, one player told close friends that Ten Hag didn't know how to motivate, with players often finding him difficult to read..

 

[NotChatGPT]

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/sto...-united-line-transfers-players-ronaldo-sancho

To @NotChatGPT who claimed communication was not a massive contributor to ten Hag's failings, and any suggestion of this was 'making things up'..

Can you quote me on that

 

[Marwood]

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/sto...-united-line-transfers-players-ronaldo-sancho

To @NotChatGPT who claimed communication was not a massive contributor to ten Hag's failings, and any suggestion of this was 'making things up'..

How can you need a manager to motivate you 2nd game of the season?

 

[golden_blunder]

I think if it was a legitimate reason it would have been addressed.

Multiple fluent speakers, and access to professional interpreters.

I’m not saying his method of communication might not have been poor but language absolutely should not have been an issue - he was here for multiple years and suspect anything “lost in translation” (rather than ignored, explained poorly, or just bad advice) would have been covered.

Spurs didn’t offer to him because they were concerned about his communication skills. That’s a known fact.

From watching ETH, he always seemed ‘awkward’ for want of a better phrase. For comparison Amorim seems to be relaxed and oozing charisma. I think the players will enjoy playing for him.

 

[Pogba's Barber]

Can you quote me on that

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/rub...-sporting-release-clause.485329/post-32577153

 

[NotChatGPT]

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/rub...-sporting-release-clause.485329/post-32577153

Thanks.

Not sure i understand the problem.

1: It’s a shit article

2: It’s a shit article that doesn’t claim communication was a massive contributor to Ten Hag being sacked.

 

[Pogba's Barber]

Thanks.

Not sure i understand the problem.

1: It’s a shit article

2: It’s a shit article that doesn’t claim communication was a massive contributor to Ten Hag being sacked.

There is no problem, I just a shared a viewpoint which you dismissed and insignificant, and I feel it deserves more credit.

1. Thanks for your opinion on the article, can you elaborate?

2. Thanks again. Nevertheless, the article mentions that the players struggled to understand ten Hag's instructions due to shortfalls in communication. It's reasonable to suggest that poorly communicated instructions and tactics could have effected team performance and results, and therefore contributed the manager's sacking.

there were early complaints from some players that Ten Hag struggled to communicate, and concerns that instructions were being lost in translation leading to confusion on the pitch

I just think it's difficult to properly asses the quality and competency of ten Hag's tactical gameplans, in game instructions and overall team management when it's quite clear that there was a gap in understanding and communication with the players.

 

[Jam]

Spurs didn’t offer to him because they were concerned about his communication skills. That’s a known fact.

From watching ETH, he always seemed ‘awkward’ for want of a better phrase. For comparison Amorim seems to be relaxed and oozing charisma. I think the players will enjoy playing for him.

But “communication” and “language” aren’t exactly the same.

You can criticise his communication skills in how he addresses the team etc. but I don’t think that’s purely a language barrier and moreso his own skillset and how he addresses people or issues.

There are communication issues in single language businesses.

I don’t think his, or his team’s, grasp of the English language is even 0.1% of the reason for why the rails came off.

His communication ability? Different conversation.

 

[JoseM4]

We dont know that.. the options in the summer were Tuchel or Di Zerbi... neither really are exciting.

It was a matter of shall we change for sake of changing or do we change for a manager we believe in.. they chose the latter. I know who I would rather have if given the choice between Amorim, Di Zerbi and Tuchel.

Won’t make top 4 this season because INEOS extended ETH’s contract.

 

[NotChatGPT]

There is no problem, I just a shared a viewpoint which you dismissed and insignificant, and I feel it deserves more credit.

1. Thanks for your opinion on the article, can you elaborate?

2. Thanks again. Nevertheless, the article mentions that the players struggled to understand ten Hag's instructions due to shortfalls in communication. It's reasonable to suggest that poorly communicated instructions and tactics could have effected team performance and results, and therefore contributed the manager's sacking.

I just think it's difficult to properly asses the quality and competency of ten Hag's tactical gameplans, in game instructions and overall team management when it's quite clear that there was a gap in understanding and communication with the players.

2: Not really. They were his first matches in the premier league. It’s hardly a surprise that it’s a big difference to previous experiences and something you need to adjust for. To use the very first matches as an example and extrapolate that for the rest of his 2 year + period seems a bit odd.

1:It’s comparable to the papers we had to hand in at uni, where the people without a slightest clue about the subject tried to put in as many words as humanly possible to make it look more intelligent than it is. I mean, the story is supposedly «Why Ten Hag Failed», but it’s mostly irrelevant shit.

I mean:

Ten Hag did it his way, accommodated by the club at almost every turn, but still couldn't make it work. On a preseason trip to Oslo in the summer of 2023, he complained to club staff that the grass at the Ullevaal Stadion was longer than had been agreed. He was told that rain in the Norwegian capital overnight led to unexpected growth, and it was just one of those things; Ten Hag replied that it wasn't good enough.

What’s the overall relevance to «Why Ten Hag failed»? He obviously didn’t fail because he was unhappy with the grass length at Ullevaal. What’s the relevance to being accommodated by the club? Our managers are generally accommodated at every turn, until they aren’t and they get sacked. What would be the fecking point of hiring a manager and not trying to accommodate them at every turn? Also, what would be the problem with complaining that the grass was longer than agreed for a pre-season match? The vast majority of the article is pretty much irrelevant and overall full of nonsense, generic stuff that goes for every manager we’ve had, rather than being anything specifically problematic under Ten Hag. It’s fecking funny that in one segment it’s problematic that players taking conflicts public had consequences, and in the next segment it’s somehow problematic that the manager tried to shield his players from public scrutiny.

Or this one

Ruud van Nistelrooy and Rene Hake also arrived in a summer revamp of Ten Hag's coaching staff. Ten Hag had a previous relationship with Hake, but not with Van Nistelrooy, and it prompted some players to speculate that the former Netherlands international, who spent a year in charge of PSV Eindhoven between 2022 and 2023, would be a ready-made replacement if Ten Hag was sacked; exactly what ended up happening when Van Nistelrooy was appointed as caretaker manager on Monday

Prompted what now? I mean, by definition the assistant manager is going to be the interim/caretaker/whatnot until the club has settled on a solution. Ruud not having a previous working relationship with Ten Hag is fairly meaningless, but his history with the club combined with his experience as a manager made him a more suitable choice compared to Hake. Just like Carrick for a short period was interim before Ole was brought in, he was the interim after Ole got sacked, Di Matteo at Chelsea, . It’s not as if Ruud was forced upon Ten Hag in the summer as some sort of planning by the club thinking that it would go balls up shortly. It’s not as if the club insisted on Ten Hag getting a new set of assistants because they had no faith in the other ones, simply undermining him. It’s a nonsensical claim. Like giving the impression that Sancho was tearing things up for Dortmund on loan. Oh, Dortmund weren’t interested in bringing him back, oh we were only able to get rid of him by accepting a loan + obligation to buy for feck all. The Ronaldo and Sancho situations aren’t black and white, but overall the manager, no matter who he is, can’t back down in situations like that because it’s going to completely undermine his position.

In terms of the recruitment policy, even under the new structure the manager, whoever he is, will still have a lot to say about who we sign. Ashworth has highlighted how daft it would be to sign someone the manager opposes, and always insisted it’s a collaboration. There’s obviously going to be a lot of differences in terms of identifying potential signings, but there’s an insane amount of nonsense regarding the ability to veto a transfer, which very much still exists under our current structure and which also applies to Amorim, if he opposes a signing then we’re not signing that player.

 

[UnofficialDevil]

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/sto...-united-line-transfers-players-ronaldo-sancho

`" It was his decision to hand Mason Mount the No. 7 shirt rather than to Garnacho "
What a twat.
Also comes out as a terribly stubborn man, in that article, very unlickable too.

 

[criticalanalysis]

`" It was his decision to hand Mason Mount the No. 7 shirt rather than to Garnacho "
What a twat.
Also comes out as a terribly stubborn man, in that article, very unlickable too.

I've not read the article so unsure of the full context but that is not necessarily a bad thing. Buying Mount and giving him the no. 7 is bad on its own but if by default it meant not giving that prestigious number with the weight of expectations and the hype to an extremely raw youth player, that's fine with me. ETH indulged Garnacho massively during his whole stay here anyways so adding the 7 shirt would have made things worse.

 

[stevoc]

Prompted what now? I mean, by definition the assistant manager is going to be the interim/caretaker/whatnot until the club has settled on a solution. Ruud not having a previous working relationship with Ten Hag is fairly meaningless, but his history with the club combined with his experience as a manager made him a more suitable choice compared to Hake. Just like Carrick for a short period was interim before Ole was brought in, he was the interim after Ole got sacked, Di Matteo at Chelsea, . It’s not as if Ruud was forced upon Ten Hag in the summer as some sort of planning by the club thinking that it would go balls up shortly. It’s not as if the club insisted on Ten Hag getting a new set of assistants because they had no faith in the other ones, simply undermining him. It’s a nonsensical claim. Like giving the impression that Sancho was tearing things up for Dortmund on loan. Oh, Dortmund weren’t interested in bringing him back, oh we were only able to get rid of him by accepting a loan + obligation to buy for feck all. The Ronaldo and Sancho situations aren’t black and white, but overall the manager, no matter who he is, can’t back down in situations like that because it’s going to completely undermine his position.

Do you think Ten Hag decided himself that his assistants weren't upto scratch?

In terms of the recruitment policy, even under the new structure the manager, whoever he is, will still have a lot to say about who we sign. Ashworth has highlighted how daft it would be to sign someone the manager opposes, and always insisted it’s a collaboration. There’s obviously going to be a lot of differences in terms of identifying potential signings, but there’s an insane amount of nonsense regarding the ability to veto a transfer, which very much still exists under our current structure and which also applies to Amorim, if he opposes a signing then we’re not signing that player.

While I don't disagree I suspect the managers going forward will have a lot less power in idenifying targets and who the clubs signs than they had under the Glazers.

 

[Grande]

`" It was his decision to hand Mason Mount the No. 7 shirt rather than to Garnacho "
What a twat.
Also comes out as a terribly stubborn man, in that article, very unlickable too.

Is it the taste, or the texture?

 

[NotChatGPT]

Do you think Ten Hag decided himself that his assistants weren't upto scratch?

Shtheve McClaren was offered the gig as head coach for the Jamaican national team and accepted it. Maybe he saw the writing on the wall and figured it made good sense as a retirement package, but he certainly wasn’t pushed out the door.

While I don't disagree I suspect the managers going forward will have a lot less power in idenifying targets and who the clubs signs than they had under the Glazers.

Oh, they will clearly have a lot less power when it comes to identifying them, but the manager will be involved in deciding which one of the alternatives we go for, and he can still block a signing if he’s completely against it. It’s not as binary as people make it out to be, it’s essentially a collaboration.

 

[NotChatGPT]

I've not read the article so unsure of the full context but that is not necessarily a bad thing. Buying Mount and giving him the no. 7 is bad on its own but if by default it meant not giving that prestigious number with the weight of expectations and the hype to an extremely raw youth player, that's fine with me. ETH indulged Garnacho massively during his whole stay here anyways so adding the 7 shirt would have made things worse.

There’s no context, they just state he handed the no 7 to Mount instead of Garnacho. Don’t really see the problem. Garnacho was 19 at the time and had just about become a first team alternative, no need to be in a rush to hand him the number 7. No need to give someone that young the feeling that they’ve properly made it rather than giving them something to reach for and earn by performing at a higher level over time.

 

[Red Comet]

`" It was his decision to hand Mason Mount the No. 7 shirt rather than to Garnacho "
What a twat.
Also comes out as a terribly stubborn man, in that article, very unlickable too.

I love Sir Alex, but I ain't going to lick him. You do you.

 

[Shark]

`" It was his decision to hand Mason Mount the No. 7 shirt rather than to Garnacho "
What a twat.
Also comes out as a terribly stubborn man, in that article, very unlickable too.

Of course it was his decision. None of this surprises me whatsoever. The part about communication and motivation also, is pretty damning. Not sure how or why the club let this drag on for so long.

 

[CG1010]

`" It was his decision to hand Mason Mount the No. 7 shirt rather than to Garnacho "
What a twat.
Also comes out as a terribly stubborn man, in that article, very unlickable too.

Yeah, I like my managers like my ice cream.

 

[Rojofiam]

I think its a mix of both.

I think as a communicator, he's terrible, but as a club, when going for managers, we have a propensity for hiring egotistical managers who like to punish players. Well, to do that effectively, you have to be able to communicate effectively. I also think he struggled to get information across tactically. However, I do think he was inept for this level of football. I think he was a lot more one dimensional than people would like to admit, depending on high amounts of overloads at Ajax. That worked in Holland as the league is much slower and Ajax were technically and physically superior to any other team they encountered. There's a reason that outside of City, top teams don't have as much fluidity throughout the team, because it opens teams up to counters. At Ajax, the weakness of other teams meant that this couldn't be exploited; in England, that wasn't the case.

The problem with a lot of Dutch managers is that they have playing philosophies that they stick squarely to, and due to believing its superiority to other playing styles, don't really learn or adapt to new styles that may be more effective. It's like they're all given this playbook, and follow the same instructions, but where Cruyff could adapt the rules of this, given the situation, alot of them arrogantly stick to these principles and don't learn how to adapt. Slot and Hiddink being the exceptions. We were so bad last season because ETH did not know how to adapt. He couldn't adapt to our injury crisis, he couldn't adapt our tactics to meet the demands of the league and once his plan A couldn't work, he resorted to trying to completely bypass the midfield. He was extremely one note and his in game management shows his flaws in plain sight. He can't recognize issues, he can't adapt to change and quite frankly, I'm not sure he could read the game. What I saw is a manager who could put shapes together, but didn't know why they worked or didn't worked. He just knew in the past, he'd tried it and it had. As a result, when he needed to adapt it, he couldn't. For example, Pep has had multiple formations since he started at Barca. When he arrived at City, despite having a strong squad, his high possession system struggled immensely to deal with counter attacks. Pep understood why this was the case, aging full backs combined with the amount of players committed high up the pitch having to combat the physicality of teams geared with the strength, pace and power to counter. As a response to this, in 17-18, he started inverting his full backs, using Zinchenko and Delph at LB. In 23-24, ETH bought Mason Mount and planned to go into the season with him playing in central midfield. He'd seen City and Arsenal employ Attacking Midfielders as CM's and assumed based on nothing other than hope, that it would work. He copied their system, mixing it with his own. He exposed Casemiro to so much pressure with his 4141, ending his international career and damaging his reputation, as United were slaughtered week to week, with no change in sight. He didn't know how to press, didn't know how to keep the team compact, didn't know how to create build up opportunities, and more than any other flaw, didn't know how to create opportunities for our striker.

ETH did adapt, though, in his first season, after the two opening losses vs Brighton and Brentford. He went against some of his own principles as well, like playing with one of the deepest defensive lines across the league. How would you explain that, then?

 

[stevoc]

Shtheve McClaren was offered the gig as head coach for the Jamaican national team and accepted it. Maybe he saw the writing on the wall and figured it made good sense as a retirement package, but he certainly wasn’t pushed out the door.



Oh, they will clearly have a lot less power when it comes to identifying them, but the manager will be involved in deciding which one of the alternatives we go for, and he can still block a signing if he’s completely against it. It’s not as binary as people make it out to be, it’s essentially a collaboration.

I'm fine with that, I'll just be glad to see the end of the days of a new manager coming in and wanting to take a machete to the squad because he wants a new set of players. This has arguably been our biggest problem post SAF and the reason we've wasted so much money.

 

[Rainy nights in Stoke]

But “communication” and “language” aren’t exactly the same.

You can criticise his communication skills in how he addresses the team etc. but I don’t think that’s purely a language barrier and moreso his own skillset and how he addresses people or issues.

There are communication issues in single language businesses.

I don’t think his, or his team’s, grasp of the English language is even 0.1% of the reason for why the rails came off.

His communication ability? Different conversation.

Good post, fully agree! You need some degree of communication ability to motivate people, and make them believe in your ideas. A player might outwardly say “yes, let’s try your tactical ideas”, but when they look around and see a room of uninspired or doubtful teammates they may not buy fully in. Which would lead to less commitment to the tactical vision, less effort to understand it, different ideas seeping in etc, which can completely undermine the manager and his tactical vision.

That’s a matter of communication, charisma and emotional intelligence on the part of the manager more than anything.

This kind of thing can be masked quite well by success I think, and strong voices in the dressing room that support the manager and his vision. With “seasoned stars” on their nth manager like we have, I think they really need to believe in the manager for it the to work. Will be interested to see how this plays out with Amorim and his team, he’s certainly got some of the communications tool-kit ETH was sadly lacking

 

[Borys]

Why is there so much talk about Eric's issues with communication? Is there any evidence suggesting that was the issue? To me it just seems he had shit ideas, and those fail even if communicated by the most charismatic leader.

 

[Who's Kissing Cameras?]

ETH did adapt, though, in his first season, after the two opening losses vs Brighton and Brentford. He went against some of his own principles as well, like playing with one of the deepest defensive lines across the league. How would you explain that, then?

So he reverted back to what the squad knew best, Ole-ball.

He couldn’t adapt at all in the second season when he had mostly his own players.