Will SAF use this moment to speak up?

[fezzerUTD]

He’s probably funding the protests through the back door everyone calm down.

 

[Tom Van Persie]

It's fair to say that Giggs still has support from key figures at United. Not only did SAF speak as a character witness today but also David Gill gave a statement. Giggs was in the directors box last year for Ronaldo's return.

 

[Red the Bear]

I dunno… I kinda agree, but then would Utd even have these ridiculous ‘owners’ if it wasn’t for Fergie?

If he spoke out, politely, but in favour of the club moving on, it would be incredibly powerful.

He doesn’t need the Glazers’ money, I’m sure he could do it.

I think that's unfair , perhaps that affair contributed to this mess but it's more than likely they would have gotten us anyway.

These things could get messy and I prefer if he like sir Bobby kept quiet, I don't want them to be dragged into this mess.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

I think that's unfair , perhaps that affair contributed to this mess but it's more than likely they would have gotten us anyway.

These things could get messy and I prefer if he like sir Bobby kept quiet, I don't want them to be dragged into this mess.

Why? I mean what would it do other than lend incredible weight to these leaches fecking off?

A quick, polite statement from Fergie would speed the whole thing up and let the Glazers know it’s end game.

It would be no bother for SAF and would help a great club out no end.

 

[NZT-One]

Why? I mean what would it do other than lend incredible weight to these leaches fecking off?

A quick, polite statement from Fergie would speed the whole thing up and let the Glazers know it’s end game.

It would be no bother for SAF and would help a great club out no end.

Would it really? I am not so sure. I think at this point they have accept that they are hated by the majority of the fans anyway. I am sure, Fergie saying something would instigate some protests, but who knows if that is something, the owners even care about? For them it is a fecking profitable business. The level of protests needed would be so much bigger than anything we have seen to this day. And on top of the added intensity, it would have to stay like that for long period of time. I don't think, that this is possible.

 

[wolvored]

I think that's unfair , perhaps that affair contributed to this mess but it's more than likely they would have gotten us anyway.

These things could get messy and I prefer if he like sir Bobby kept quiet, I don't want them to be dragged into this mess.

I dont think so. The Coolmore mafia as they was known, were big Utd fans and maybe they would have bought Utd. Fergies greed was the caatalyst that let the parasites in. Fergie has been in their pay ever since so he will not bite the hand that feeds him.

 

[Red the Bear]

Why? I mean what would it do other than lend incredible weight to these leaches fecking off?

A quick, polite statement from Fergie would speed the whole thing up and let the Glazers know it’s end game.

It would be no bother for SAF and would help a great club out no end.

I rather he doesn't sully his name specially seeing how they're gonna start a smear campaign against him if it gets serious.

I doubt it would lead to much either, they won't sell unless they think it's not profitable and as of now we still are.

(He won'tdo it anyway, he seemsto like them eitherout of greed or for genuinely thinking they did a decent job when he was here)

I dont think so. The Coolmore mafia as they was known, were big Utd fans and maybe they would have bought Utd. Fergies greed was the caatalyst that let the parasites in. Fergie has been in their pay ever since so he will not bite the hand that feeds him.

That may be true but I'm haven't seen any definite proof of it, it always felt like we were there for taking.

Still what Fergie did was shameful but I doubt it would have made much of a difference in the long run.

 

[Posh Red]

He’s too busy speaking up in court

 

[11101]

Disappointing to see him and Gill speaking up in support of Giggs. A 'gentleman' he is anything but and I'm surprised Ferguson would be so tone deaf as to come out in his support.

 

[Red the Bear]

Disappointing to see him and Gill speaking up in support of Giggs. A 'gentleman' he is anything but and I'm surprised Ferguson would be so tone deaf as to come out in his support.

In his documentary he talked a lot about loyalty (if I'm remembering correctly) , gigs was always loyal to him so I guess he's returning the favor.

That's extreme loyalty for ya.

 

[united_99]

Giggs was always loyal to him and United. All his other stuff (so far there is only proof of infidelity) has nothing to do with SAF / doesn’t bother him.
He can say what he thinks of the Giggs he knows and I don’t see an issue with it.

 

[BluesJr]

I’ve absolutely no doubt Giggs was as good as gold in a footballing sense, so how can SAF say any different? It’s not his issue what he was obviously like in his private life.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Even as I type this the club is in turmoil, much of it caused by Christiano Ronaldo. In pre-season the team impressed, fluent football and reports of harmony and positive team building behind the scenes. Then Ronaldo joined up and it has all gone pear shaped. You say you "will accept things he may have possibly had a hand in...." and Sir Alex Ferguson did have a hand in Ronaldo returning to Old Trafford last August, there is no 'possibly' about it. It is not a secret and it has been detrimental to the club: to Ole, to Rangnick and now to Erik Ten Hag.

I agree that he more than possibly had a hand in it.

However, that doesn't mean he was the driving force behind it. Someone asked him to get involved, speak to Ronaldo personally, etc. Absolutely - that's very likely. That someone could have been anyone from Joel Glazer to Mendes - and, yes, I agree 100% that it was a stupid move to bring Ronaldo back, but I doubt very much that it was Fergie's idea. He agreed to help get the deal done - sure, I can buy that, and ideally he should have said no...but let's be realistic, he's an old man now and clearly not unbiased when it comes to C. Ronaldo.

 

[manutddjw]

Read his book, he loved the Glazers. He’s definitely not speaking out against them. They gave him total autonomy to run the club which is what he wanted. They always gave him money when he wanted a player. People forget we were going to smash our transfer record for Lucas moura which thankfully didn’t happen. The no value in the market was a Sir Alex call not a Glazer one. It’s unfortunate because with how good he was if he got better players he probably adds a couple champions leagues

 

[stw2022]

Read his book, he loved the Glazers. He’s definitely not speaking out against them. They gave him total autonomy to run the club which is what he wanted. They always gave him money when he wanted a player. People forget we were going to smash our transfer record for Lucas moura which thankfully didn’t happen. The no value in the market was a Sir Alex call not a Glazer one. It’s unfortunate because with how good he was if he got better players he probably adds a couple champions leagues

But that also extends years before Glazers arrived. The PLC under Edwards rewarded the Treble by strengthening by way of signing a keeper on a free he didn't even want. I think the narrative that he Glazers did spend money abs the PLC was the land of milk and honey wasn't shared by the man who knew better

 

[RedOrange]

Why? I mean what would it do other than lend incredible weight to these leaches fecking off?

A quick, polite statement from Fergie would speed the whole thing up and let the Glazers know it’s end game.

It would be no bother for SAF and would help a great club out no end.

They would kick him off the board of directors and cancel whatever other cushy jobs he still has at the club.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

They would kick him off the board of directors and cancel whatever other cushy jobs he still has at the club.

And if they did that, how would fans react?

If SAF spoke out, they’d basically be forced to sell a lot more quickly.

He’s a God of football, and they’re literally parasites. He’s well respected and they’re universally loathed.

 

[Tigersam]

They would kick him off the board of directors and cancel whatever other cushy jobs he still has at the club.

I'm not sure they would actually, the fans hate them already, imagine what would happen if they did that! But he still isn't going to speak out as most people seem to agree.

He probably has a sense of loyalty to them after they made sure he was well taken care of since their takeover. There's even a snippet in his book where he mentions that they gave him a clause in his contract that would bump his salary higher than the highest earning player, so he could symbolically be the top earner at the club and maintain that authority over everyone.

Wow, that is pretty amazing if you think about it and convinces me even more that with respect to the OP - he isn't ever going to speak out against the Glazers, not even diplomatically. It also shows how employing Ronaldo on almost half-a-million a week could have thrown a massive spanner into the works - does Christiano think he has 'authority over everyone' because it sometimes looks like that. (#TheKingPlays)

So, are you saying Sir Alex was on more money than Wayne Rooney, who must have been on a pretty decent wedge even 15 years ago? The thing is, we often marvel at the amazing wages modern footballers get, but we know they can only earn these sums for 8-10 years (assuming they get their best contract around age 25) but a manager can do the job up to 65-70 years old, so it is remarkable if you think about it. Well done to Sir Alex and his advisors I say! I bet Pep and Klopp wish they could get a similar deal!

The bottom line as I see it is this though: do Man United fans think his involvement with the club these last ten years has helped or hindered the club's progress? I think from following this thread (and others) many people are beginning to say he was the most amazing Manager between 1986 and 2013, but really, for the good of the club and his own legacy, he might have been better staying in an Ambassador role and not any sort of advisor/consultant & mentor (to Ole) type of position. I anticipate people will come back at me and say it never was that, or it isn't that.... but what about this new Gill/Robson/Sir Alex 'think tank' then? Are they going to meet and discuss and think and then do nothing or are they going to meet and discuss and think and then feedback to the owners and/or Manager? It has to be the second of these, otherwise what is the point? How does this arrangement impact on the Director of Footballers role and most intriguingly, I wonder what ETH thinks about it?

Finally, those saying he stays involved just for the money, I don't think it is that - he really must love the club and probably hoped Ronaldo would help get MUFC back to the top (with Varane and Sancho), but it just hasn't worked out like that. But you would think that perhaps after the Moyes error 10 years ago and the Ronaldo error 12 months ago, someone might have said (when the idea of this think tank was first suggested) "....actually Sir Alex, please just enjoy your retirement, we've got this". I guess his stature and history means nobody feels they can do that.

Alternatively, maybe the Glazers like to have Sir Alex and Bryan Robson involved, because these legends act as a buffer between them and the fans.

 

[Maticmaker]

I cannot see any value whatsoever in SAF talking about the Glazers, what would people expect him to say? "That they are not doing a good job of running the club"... Wow, hold the front pages!

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

I'm not sure they would actually, the fans hate them already, imagine what would happen if they did that! But he still isn't going to speak out as most people seem to agree.



Wow, that is pretty amazing if you think about it and convinces me even more that with respect to the OP - he isn't ever going to speak out against the Glazers, not even diplomatically. It also shows how employing Ronaldo on almost half-a-million a week could have thrown a massive spanner into the works - does Christiano think he has 'authority over everyone' because it sometimes looks like that. (#TheKingPlays)

So, are you saying Sir Alex was on more money than Wayne Rooney, who must have been on a pretty decent wedge even 15 years ago? The thing is, we often marvel at the amazing wages modern footballers get, but we know they can only earn these sums for 8-10 years (assuming they get their best contract around age 25) but a manager can do the job up to 65-70 years old, so it is remarkable if you think about it. Well done to Sir Alex and his advisors I say! I bet Pep and Klopp wish they could get a similar deal!

The bottom line as I see it is this though: do Man United fans think his involvement with the club these last ten years has helped or hindered the club's progress? I think from following this thread (and others) many people are beginning to say he was the most amazing Manager between 1986 and 2013, but really, for the good of the club and his own legacy, he might have been better staying in an Ambassador role and not any sort of advisor/consultant & mentor (to Ole) type of position. I anticipate people will come back at me and say it never was that, or it isn't that.... but what about this new Gill/Robson/Sir Alex 'think tank' then? Are they going to meet and discuss and think and then do nothing or are they going to meet and discuss and think and then feedback to the owners and/or Manager? It has to be the second of these, otherwise what is the point? How does this arrangement impact on the Director of Footballers role and most intriguingly, I wonder what ETH thinks about it?

Finally, those saying he stays involved just for the money, I don't think it is that - he really must love the club and probably hoped Ronaldo would help get MUFC back to the top (with Varane and Sancho), but it just hasn't worked out like that. But you would think that perhaps after the Moyes error 10 years ago and the Ronaldo error 12 months ago, someone might have said (when the idea of this think tank was first suggested) "....actually Sir Alex, please just enjoy your retirement, we've got this". I guess his stature and history means nobody feels they can do that.

Alternatively, maybe the Glazers like to have Sir Alex and Bryan Robson involved, because these legends act as a buffer between them and the fans.

yeah this was written in the context of Rooney’s 2012 transfer request. Ferguson posed it as him doing what was best for the club in trying to move Rooney on instead of increasing his salary, which was already one of the highest in the premier league and definitely the highest at United. Rooney’s pay rise would automatically be a pay rise for Ferguson but he thought it was harmful to the club to indulge a player on his way down.

 

[manutddjw]

But that also extends years before Glazers arrived. The PLC under Edwards rewarded the Treble by strengthening by way of signing a keeper on a free he didn't even want. I think the narrative that he Glazers did spend money abs the PLC was the land of milk and honey wasn't shared by the man who knew better

Yeah I agree with you on that. The PLC structure we had was even worse then these leeches we have now. I’m 100% convinced we sold Stam because we needed the money after signing Veron which was a catastrophic error that we didn’t rectify until 2006.

 

[jimmyb2000]

In answer to the OP, as long as he's on the payroll then no

 

[Amanda Hugginkiss]

Deliberately or not Sir Alex has mirrored his post-managerial role at United on Sir Bobby. He's kept his thoughts on what's happening on the pitch, in the dressing room and most importantly behind the scenes away from the press.

 

[Reditus]

I cannot see any value whatsoever in SAF talking about the Glazers, what would people expect him to say? "That they are not doing a good job of running the club"... Wow, hold the front pages!

As far as I’m concerned Ferguson can do what he likes and I won’t hold it against him

But can you not see how significant it would be if he came out against the owners? He could force them out single handily. It would absolutely be front page news

 

[Big Ben Foster]

Disappointing to see him and Gill speaking up in support of Giggs. A 'gentleman' he is anything but and I'm surprised Ferguson would be so tone deaf as to come out in his support.

Do you believe people accused of a crime have a right to a defense?

 

[united_99]

I'm not sure they would actually, the fans hate them already, imagine what would happen if they did that! But he still isn't going to speak out as most people seem to agree.



Wow, that is pretty amazing if you think about it and convinces me even more that with respect to the OP - he isn't ever going to speak out against the Glazers, not even diplomatically. It also shows how employing Ronaldo on almost half-a-million a week could have thrown a massive spanner into the works - does Christiano think he has 'authority over everyone' because it sometimes looks like that. (#TheKingPlays)

So, are you saying Sir Alex was on more money than Wayne Rooney, who must have been on a pretty decent wedge even 15 years ago? The thing is, we often marvel at the amazing wages modern footballers get, but we know they can only earn these sums for 8-10 years (assuming they get their best contract around age 25) but a manager can do the job up to 65-70 years old, so it is remarkable if you think about it. Well done to Sir Alex and his advisors I say! I bet Pep and Klopp wish they could get a similar deal!

The bottom line as I see it is this though: do Man United fans think his involvement with the club these last ten years has helped or hindered the club's progress? I think from following this thread (and others) many people are beginning to say he was the most amazing Manager between 1986 and 2013, but really, for the good of the club and his own legacy, he might have been better staying in an Ambassador role and not any sort of advisor/consultant & mentor (to Ole) type of position. I anticipate people will come back at me and say it never was that, or it isn't that.... but what about this new Gill/Robson/Sir Alex 'think tank' then? Are they going to meet and discuss and think and then do nothing or are they going to meet and discuss and think and then feedback to the owners and/or Manager? It has to be the second of these, otherwise what is the point? How does this arrangement impact on the Director of Footballers role and most intriguingly, I wonder what ETH thinks about it?

Finally, those saying he stays involved just for the money, I don't think it is that - he really must love the club and probably hoped Ronaldo would help get MUFC back to the top (with Varane and Sancho), but it just hasn't worked out like that. But you would think that perhaps after the Moyes error 10 years ago and the Ronaldo error 12 months ago, someone might have said (when the idea of this think tank was first suggested) "....actually Sir Alex, please just enjoy your retirement, we've got this". I guess his stature and history means nobody feels they can do that.

Alternatively, maybe the Glazers like to have Sir Alex and Bryan Robson involved, because these legends act as a buffer between them and the fans.

Rooney’s salary when SAF was still managing United was nothing which SAF himself would not deserve. It was a completely fair salary for such a successful manager.
Now something else for you. When United were winning regularly in the 90’s he had to ask your manager back then to send him his contract, as he was earning much more than SAF. SAF then showed it to the PLC and only then got a respectable increase.

 

[Sviken]

SAF will never speak out against the Glazers. For all their faults, they basically granted dictatorship status over the club and them taking over control of the club was a blessing for him given his disputes over the Rock of Gibraltar. And tbf, this isn't SAF's fight. There's nothing he can do or say now that would tip the balance of the situation. The fans hate the Glazers and the Glazers know that but still won't sell. In a sense, SAF speaking out wouldn't change one goddamn thing. At the end of the day, this is purely a financial aspect. Glazers will sell only when they are convinced that they have taken everything that there is to take from the club before selling it and nobody can change that unless they get a ridiculous type of offer and that's very unlikely to happen

 

[micmac]

SAF won’t go against the Glazers. He actually facilitated the events that led to them being in charge!

 

[Tigersam]

Rooney’s salary when SAF was still managing United was nothing which SAF himself would not deserve. It was a completely fair salary for such a successful manager.
Now something else for you. When United were winning regularly in the 90’s he had to ask your manager back then to send him his contract, as he was earning much more than SAF. SAF then showed it to the PLC and only then got a respectable increase.

Oh, I didn't know that. I stand corrected.

As far as I’m concerned Ferguson can do what he likes and I won’t hold it against him

But can you not see how significant it would be if he came out against the owners? He could force them out single handily. It would absolutely be front page news.

Yes! But the headline would be: "Sir Alex Ferguson: what a hypocrite!" it wouldn't force out the Glazers either. Which is why it won't ever happen.

One thing does come into my mind though: were he in better fitness I could see Sir Alex heading a consortium maybe with Jim Radcliffe, Christiano Ronaldo and David Beckham and taking back control of the club from the Americans that way and after its done he could then say he regretted what he did. But while the status quo is maintained, no way.

 

[stw2022]

SAF won’t go against the Glazers. He actually facilitated the events that led to them being in charge!

People don't decide to buy football clubs because strangers fall out over a horse.

Do you think all the other shareholders who also sold their shares bought a horse and fell out with various members of the staff over it beforehand?

 

[Rightnr]

People don't decide to buy football clubs because strangers fall out over a horse.

Do you think all the other shareholders who also sold their shares bought a horse and fell out with various members of the staff over it beforehand?

You clearly have no idea how these things work and yet you preach? Talk about clueless.

 

[11101]

Do you believe people accused of a crime have a right to a defense?

That's got nothing to do with it.

 

[Champ]

Are people really against Sir Alex giving what's called a 'character reference' essentially for a person he has been a leadership figure for, for many many years?

 

[RedDevilQuebecois]

Deliberately or not Sir Alex has mirrored his post-managerial role at United on Sir Bobby. He's kept his thoughts on what's happening on the pitch, in the dressing room and most importantly behind the scenes away from the press.

Then SAF should have taken more inspiration from Sir Matt Busby. If Sir Matt saw that someone or something was detrimental for the club, the axe would fall rather abruptly and rightfully so. Tommy Docherty (RIP) may have been salty after United for the rest of his life, but he brought his own demise upon himself. Going the Sir Bobby route is not the right way to move any needle forward and has never been.

SAF may have loved being around Malcolm, but Uday and Qusay (Avram and Joel Glazer) are just utter pricks who are not worthy of his support.

 

[Reditus]

Are people really against Sir Alex giving what's called a 'character reference' essentially for a person he has been a leadership figure for, for many many years?

I would call it ill advised

Ferguson should steer clear of the case. He is not forced to give a character reference

 

[stw2022]

You clearly have no idea how these things work and yet you preach? Talk about clueless.

I've every idea how these things work. I think the Glazers, whose core business model is sports team ownership bought a small stake in club with a view to slowly building up their stake to launch a leveraged buyout. Something that takes many years to plan, arrange an execute and happened long before there was a hint of dissatisfaction about anything on four legs.

Presumably you think they sat at home and thought they'd buy a small share in Manchester United on the opportunistic off chance someone would one a day fall out over a horse and then couldn't believe their fecking luck a couple of years of later.

It's fecking ridiculous. This isn't EastEnders. Coolmore were investors who had no intention of buying the club despite increasing their stake. They sold as they would to any offer that gave them best return on their investment. Just like every other investor did to get Glazers from 3 to 15% in short order before anyone who had an equine dispute even came into the equation

 

[9 Stone Elvis]

I thought people wanted SAF as far away from involvement with the club as possible? Now they want him speaking out?

Whatever he was, he is now an 80 year old man who suffered a near death medical issue. Just leave him alone.

 

[Kag]

Why? He’s done nothing other than prop them up for years, in spite of the fact the squad became progressively worse towards the end of his tenure.

Also, he is eighty. He should be relaxing and enjoying himself, not getting into club-related squabbles.

 

[duffer]

He's "team Glazier". You don't want him speaking up if you want them gone.

 

[RedDevilQuebecois]

For the record, Sir Matt Busby remained solidly involved with club affairs until his death. He was never shy of letting the axe fall upon whoever or whatever was going wrong at the club.

It's easy for some people to say that SAF should stay aside, but going the silent Sir Bobby Charlton way has never helped anybody. Those leeches - Uday and Qusay (Joel and Avram Glazer) are opportunists at every single moment of silence or diverted attention they will get. Someone has to be giving the last kiss of death to the Glazers; better be SAF.