I don't know how the conversation got steered to Ole's coaches but I think it's safe to say that the people claiming that it was actually Mike Phelan's genius that was responsible for our great form were full of garbage.
Would you sack or keep Ole? (Poll reopened)
- Thread starter MrSingh2002
- Start date
- Status
Can't wait for this latest shit saga to end.
Ole and coaching staff need to go, have zero faith in any of them being good enough.
Hopefully the owners, Ed and several more players to follow later...
Ole and coaching staff need to go, have zero faith in any of them being good enough.
Hopefully the owners, Ed and several more players to follow later...
I at least expected him to organize our set pieces a bit more efficiently.
Sorry, but this long post has feck all to do with the point that I'm making. For the last time if you aren't willing to read, I'm not saying tactics are on those two. I'm saying organizing training sessions which reflect on the team movement and link are mostly done by assistant coaches. This has nothing to do with tactics implemented on the pitch or if it's offensive or defensive, as just because you are playing defensive football doesn't mean your players should look like strangers with zero movement up front. It has to do with the players not looking like strangers who have just met each time we play. It shows in the team overall movement and them know each other positions and when and where to move. We are crap in all these, which means we are doing feck all on the training pitch and it reflects on the point these 2 are shite in their job. Why will Ole phase them out? A point that has absolutely no evidence on, especially if Ole is inspired by SAF's style who was giving his assistants a big role in coaching the side. Again this has nothing to do with the tactics implemented on the pitch who you spent an entire long post talking about.
Ole tactics are crap and he's devoid of any ideas but of course the non existent of movement of players not linking together at all on the pitch while standing still all the time means the rest of coaching stuff are also crap in their job.
Regarding our academy, yes, it's extremely overrated by our fans, youth players or coaches or anything to be totally honest. That's why these same fans get surprised when these said youth players don't end up where they were predicting them to be, because they were overrated from the start. This isn't just on McKenna only, but it's a general point. Once a youngster gets promoted and plays good basic stuff, some already start to treat him like he's a future main starter.
People were treating McKenna as if he were already a top coach who was going to make our football x10 better, and when this didn't happened let's spread excuses that he's phased out by the manager. Football is still shite after the manager got sacked? Them the next manager is phasing him too. Maybe success with U18 doesn't necessarily you are good enough currently to work with first team players, you know. Very big possibility.
How many managers should they work under for you to start thinking they might not be good enough at this level of football? Because this "phased out" excuse cna be used literally for every manager coming. Or wait! If a manager comes and plays well, will the credit go to McKenna because he was finally unleashed?
Honestly the whole point makes zero sense from the start.This has been a problem since when Fergie was here. All the different coaches and managers failed in this area. I have no idea what kind of trainings they're doing so I can't positively blame McKenna. The fact that you want to automatically blame him based on not knowing what goes on, just shows you to be illogical despite your intent. I would rather blame the managers where the common link is that none of them excelled in attacking football. In the end, they have the most responsibility on the pitch so it makes more sense to blame them rather than coaches who simply take control of trainings, of which we know nothing about. What are the trainings about? Are they to transfer Ole's ideas onto the pitch? Are they to work on the opposition's tactics? It would be a lot easier for me to blame McKenna if someone like Klopp came in and we looked crap despite his ability to get his players to excel in attack. At least then it would be a blip on that manager's career where we can then isolate what changed apart from players.Sorry, but this long post has feck all to do with the point that I'm making. For the last time if you aren't willing to read, I'm not saying tactics are on those two. I'm saying organizing training sessions which reflect on the team movement and link are mostly done by assistant coaches. This has nothing to do with tactics implemented on the pitch or if it's offensive or defensive, as just because you are playing defensive football doesn't mean your players should look like strangers with zero movement up front. It has to do with the players not looking like strangers who have just met each time we play. It shows in the team overall movement and them know each other positions and when and where to move. We are crap in all these, which means we are doing feck all on the training pitch and it reflects on the point these 2 are shite in their job. Why will Ole phase them out? A point that has absolutely no evidence on, especially if Ole is inspired by SAF's style who was giving his assistants a big role in coaching the side. Again this has nothing to do with the tactics implemented on the pitch who you spent an entire long post talking about.
Ole tactics are crap and he's devoid of any ideas but of course the non existent of movement of players not linking together at all on the pitch while standing still all the time means the rest of coaching stuff are also crap in their job.
Regarding our academy, yes, it's extremely overrated by our fans, youth players or coaches or anything to be totally honest. That's why these same fans get surprised when these said youth players don't end up where they were predicting them to be, because they were overrated from the start. This isn't just on McKenna only, but it's a general point. Once a youngster gets promoted and plays good basic stuff, some already start to treat him like he's a future main starter.
People were treating McKenna as if he were already a top coach who was going to make our football x10 better, and when this didn't happened let's spread excuses that he's phased out by the manager. Football is still shite after the manager got sacked? Them the next manager is phasing him too. Maybe success with U18 doesn't necessarily you are good enough currently to work with first team players, you know. Very big possibility.
How many managers should they work under for you to start thinking they might not be good enough at this level of football? Because this "phased out" excuse cna be used literally for every manager coming. Or wait! If a manager comes and plays well, will the credit go to McKenna because he was finally unleashed?
Your last rant is bizarre. Particularly that last paragraph. Who are you even arguing with? Who said that stuff? You do realize that not everyone attributes positive play with coaches right? I mean, I clearly gave you an example of my own post where I state the opposite will happen. Maybe you should have ignored that bizarre Phelan thread like I did.
As for the academy, it's overrated based on who you ask. There are some videos on youtube that call one of our academy squad players the next great star. You just have to learn to ignore those types. I think our academy is pretty good, but it's not on the level of Lyon or Ajax. Don't think anyone knowledgeable pretends it is though. I also don't think it's fair to call some posters out based on them hyping up a kid who genuinely stars at youth level. What do you want them to say? That they suck? It is possible for a player to be super talented, and fail to step up. That's the nature of development. It's incredibly hard to predict. It's the reason why you have Michael Keane and Lingard playing for England while Ravel Morrison is trying to get him some playing time for Sheffield United. It's also why you get someone like Tom Thorpe who was Keane's equal at youth level, and yet is playing in India now.
Last edited:
I mean you literally said :
Does that mean any good performance that happened under Ole is due to McKenna and any poor performance later on is thanks to Ole ? I'm a firm Ole out as I said and slaughtered him for as long time as you can imagine but come on ! That's taking it to a new higher level. So if a manager comes and keeps them around while playing well, the credit will go to whom ? To the manager for his training style or for McKenna because since the performance was good he surely had a role ? This point doesn't make any kind of sense.
To not keep going back and forth I'll just ask you how and on which basis are you exactly evaluating assistant coaches having a role in the team or not ? What are the criteria that proves this assistant coach is doing his job or not ?
You did not understand the point I was making. It was not to say that was all McKenna and to give credit to him. It was to say that if you were going by the logic of McKenna being in charge of training therefore he is responsible for the team's demise, why would you not apply that logic to where he had the most input and when Ole had the least amount of input? That's what that line meant. Luckily I don't go by that logic hence why I've been arguing that people trying to blame McKenna based on having no knowledge of the extent of his responsibilities are wrong or clueless. None of us know how he conducts things and what he's supposed to get out of those trainings. I've always thought of it as work that the manager can't be arsed doing.
One of the only examples of where I do feel the coach has a big say is Marco Rose teaming with Rene Maric as it's been documented it's a tag team operation.
Was discussing this exact question with my old man yesterday, who has been supporting United since the 60s.
He said he wouldn't sack Ole because football is cyclical and it will come good again even if we have to wait 30 years. This seems to be the view of most of our older posters here too, any reason why?
He said he wouldn't sack Ole because football is cyclical and it will come good again even if we have to wait 30 years. This seems to be the view of most of our older posters here too, any reason why?
I don't think anyone is blaming McKenna more than Ole. The point people are making is they don't see much of their effect on the team and they look useless. Of course we're not watching training sessions, but the non existent understanding between players and zero movement on the pitch indicates we're not doing any work on the training ground. Whoever of them is particularly responsible for that, no one will know for sure but it means the coaching stuff itself is pretty bad in general and none of them are doing their job, hence my opinion is the entire stuff should be sacked, not Ole only.
For that honeymoon period it was just a new manager syndrome, a prolonged one but it's still new manager syndrome. Nothing to read into it much from any perspective.
So now we're discussing coaches. Do we even know what takes place on the training grounds or who's in charge of what and what their approach might be or is this entire discussion just some experiment in creative thinking?
Just like Woodward - people are bollocking those names they are familiar with.
Well our knowledge on the extent of Woodward's involvements may not be exact but at least they're somewhat public - this however seems like a new level of speculation. These are truly confusing times for anyone invested in this club aren't they?
Last edited:
Well, there were some reports recently of players unsure about the coaching and also questioning some of the personel. McKenna's name resurfaced and here we are...Well our knowledge on the extent of Woodward's involvements may not be exact but at least they're somewhat public - this however seems like a new level of speculation. These are truly confusing times for anyone invested in this club aren't they?
A while ago we had a huge thread on Phelan and what exactly he was doing, so naturally when things aren't going well people start to question everybody.
Otherwise they simply don't care
Well I’m 62 and certainly don’t think like that at all. I can’t say I know any of my contemporaries who do either.
I think older fans are generally more patient and less trigger happy, but that’s not the same as being totally deluded. The “football is cyclical” thing is bollocks as well. “Let’s not bother to maintain standards. Let’s not bother to improve. Let’s just sit on our hands in the full knowledge that things will get better again.” No they won’t.
Plus I’ll be dead or gaga in 30 years’ time and can’t afford to wait that long
Pretty much what I said to himPlus I’ll be dead or gaga in 30 years’ time and can’t afford to wait that long
Pretty much what I said to him
Don't forget that us real oldies remember the good times we had when O'Farrell, Sexton and Atkinson were sacked. Docherty was a tragedy (sacked for non-footballing reasons), and the fanbase was split over Wilf (now he REALLY wasn't backed by the board). So we recognise all this "United aren't a sacking club" as a load of bollocks as well. It seems to be the people who became fans in the late 80s and early 90s who suffer the most from all this nostalgic sentimentality.
Yep, which is the mindset Neville has and falls into that category, and is influencing certain fans to think the same.
Because United struggled after Sir Matt left. But we also changed so many managers till we found a successful one.
But we appointed many who have been sacked for not delivering. But you have to say that most of them were successful British managers in their right and not someone like Ole who has never managed any big club anywhere.
Hmmm....
If he can't motivate this bunch to play liverpool then he's got to go.
About as trustworthy as Trump's Rasmussen polling results.
The options there are a bit more loaded than a simple YES/NO but I do believe the poll on here is overly negative - as usual the matchgoers tend to be more patient
Negative in what sense? I think it’s negative anyone wanting this awful manager & awful football to stay.
Do you even watch our matches every week? He's been here 10 months now. What positives are there to take from Solskjaer's management that we see on the pitch?
I've never been on this site. Is this TopRed.com?
Why the hmm? I voted in that thread, and it is populated by matchgoers. Not surprised at all that the ones who actually matter, and the ones who actually put in the hard yards following the club, think that the manager who hasn't been backed to a significant degree at all, deserves more time...
Apathetic, disinterested or self-destructive more like. If Moyes was anything to go by.
That's because the forum is behind a paywall and actively doesn't court publicity or numbers. Mitten has said plenty of times that UWS will never sell out, and the reason why he has the forum behind a paywall (because he doesn't need the money) is because he actively doesn't want to attract, and I'm paraphrasing here, "the idiots who go on Redcafe and Twitter"
I question what it is they are objectively basing it on. They're obviously not making their decision based on what they see on the pitch that's for sure. He's been here 10 months now and i can't think of a single positive that i can see on the pitch in that time.
There's literally nothing. Existing players going backwards, no collective organisation to any of our play, clueless attacking. It's all stagnant. I cannot see how 'just more time' will magically fix itself.
Are we going to replace all the existing players that have gone backwards under his coaching forever?
Last edited:
They're also part of the problem if they think we're going anywhere under this manager. What are the match going fans seeing that everyone else is failing to see on the pitch, some imaginary progress?
So it is www.TopRed.com. The results make sense then.
Your entitled, arrogant attitude is getting very tiresome. Not all of us live in Manchester or England so I'm not sure what we are supposed to do about that or why that makes us less important or less entitled to an opinion than someone who does.
In public. In private, not at all.
I'm in your camp actually . I just posted to show Ole does have support elsewhere too.
So in year 2019, people pay money to post on a forum are wiser than rest of us!
Serious fans, may be yes... but wiser?
So his voting percentage means nothing.
What concerns me about sacking Ole now is the kind of signals we send, both to the players and to any future manager.
Basically we tell the players that "you are not to blame at all", even though many of them clearly are not good enough and i imo many of them have poor attitudes. And to whoever we hire in Ole's place we basically tell them that "you need to deliver the goods from day 1, or you will get sacked and have your reputation dragged through the mud"
All the names that gets thrown around: Ten Haag, Nagelsman, Poch, Allegri etc....would they want the job?
Basically we tell the players that "you are not to blame at all", even though many of them clearly are not good enough and i imo many of them have poor attitudes. And to whoever we hire in Ole's place we basically tell them that "you need to deliver the goods from day 1, or you will get sacked and have your reputation dragged through the mud"
All the names that gets thrown around: Ten Haag, Nagelsman, Poch, Allegri etc....would they want the job?
They would because they would see Ole being sacked for having worse results than Newcastle in the last 17 games. Any manager on that form would now its expected to be sacked. Or do we have a worse squad than Newcastle?
- Status