Would you sack or keep Ole? (Poll reopened)

Sack or Keep OLE?

  • Sack Ole & appoint new coach ASAP

  • Keep Ole & back him to finish rebuild


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
So Woodward/board got the managerial appointment right according to you. So he is competent in that department. He makes the club a lot of money so he is competent in that department as well.
The only issue you seem to have is not buying players. Is that the case?
Fair enough this squad is unlikely to win the league but it definitely should get 3rd.

Putting words in my mouth.

Ole has been the best managerial appointment since SAF - because he is the only one true to the values of the club. He isnt the best manager. He's given us a glimmer of hope but it's obvious the board are letting him down

The way the club is run will never give us title winning success - that isnt the aim of the owners/board
 
So Woodward/board got the managerial appointment right according to you. So he is competent in that department. He makes the club a lot of money so he is competent in that department as well.
The only issue you seem to have is not buying players. Is that the case?
Fair enough this squad is unlikely to win the league but it definitely should get 3rd.
The biggest issue is not whether he has gotten this managerial appointment right or not, the issue is that we have no coherent strategy & vision in place to build up our football operations. Ole's vision & style is very different to Mourinho's, who's style & vision was very different from LVG. We end up with a bad mix of players who were suited to very different footballing ideas. Even the scouting department is working on different visions, dictated by whoever is in charge of the first team. So in one year they may be looking for players who are oriented towards playing possession based football but the next year they have to start looking at players who have physical, mental & footballing characteristics to play Mourinho ball.
Similarly the players were physically conditioned to Mourinho's low block low intensity football whereas now they have to adapt to a higher intensity conditioning.
If we had bottomless money pit where we could replace the complete first team in one window, this strategy may still work, even though it would be an inefficient way of operating a football club. But with our current financial constraints, it means that any new manager has to get at least 4 transfer windows till they get any semblance of their footballing vision on the pitch. Frankly, neither the current owners nor the fans have the patience to wait for that amount of time for the results to show on the pitch. So we demand for the next manager who will magically transform this side but is saddled with the same problems and the cycle continues.
 
I have said this at least once before, but i think its wort repeating for some context

In 2017 i was on a flight to Manchester and sat next to some guy in his 40's from Molde. He was on his way to Liverpool, but despite that he was a decent bloke and we of course got talking about football. He claimed to be good mates with Daniel Berg Hestad who is a "Molde legend" but also was club captain there for most of his career and of course played under Ole there. Anyways this guy claimed that Ole was not a "handa on coach" at all. He would of course have a plan/vision for how he wanted the team to play, did the team talks and stuff like that, but the training sessions themselves he was very little involved in. Either he was just observing and a lot of the times he was not even present. Now of course this was just some bloke on a plane, but i dont understand why he would lie about it

Anyways, i dont really know if our coaches are good or not and i honestly cant tell if we are badly coached or not. During our winning run post lockdown we looked well drilled and organized and this season we look like we never have even played football. Football is not that mechanical so i dont get how people can be so certain in this whole "coaching is the sole reason we are shite" explanation.
If this is true then Ole should get a better coaching staff if he wants to keep his job. It's obvious we are badly coached or to put it this way - our coaching is not good enough to compete with the best.
 
Putting words in my mouth.

Ole has been the best managerial appointment since SAF - because he is the only one true to the values of the club. He isnt the best manager. He's given us a glimmer of hope but it's obvious the board are letting him down

The way the club is run will never give us title winning success - that isnt the aim of the owners/board
I think Fred the Red meets these requirements too then, if the major requirement for a manager of Manchester United is to be "true to the values of the club" I don't know why we even bother trying, might just give up.
 
If this is true then Ole should get a better coaching staff if he wants to keep his job. It's obvious we are badly coached or to put it this way - our coaching is not good enough to compete with the best.

If that's true and he hasn't been making changes, he doesn't deserve to be the man to appoint a new staff....
 
Ole isn't the problem - he's the best managerial appointment we've had since SAF and deserves more time and credit for what he is trying to do.

Ole has been the best managerial appointment since SAF - because he is the only one true to the values of the club. He isnt the best manager. He's given us a glimmer of hope but it's obvious the board are letting him down

He may be the best we've had since 2013, but if he's not really good, he IS part of the problem. Removing him will hardly solve everything, but it would be part of the steps required.
 
Oles actually the manager who would struggle by far the most under a DOF/Sporting Director if it is to be believed he leaves the coaching to the likes of Carrick and McKenna.

Any director of football would be asking him, what the feck is his role then? Because if we do change structure, transfer activity/squad make up would be under a DOFs remit. If Carrick and McKenna are the guys in charge of the training ground, what is Ole bringing to the picture?

Ole and Jürgen Klopp have essentially identical roles in their respective clubs in terms of player engagement and day to day operation. Liverpool has a sporting director in Michael Edwards.

So yeah, not exactly a problem.

On that note, Ole works finishing with the forwards since that's an actual speciality he has, defending etc is left to respective coaches. Managers aren't necessarily required to be coaches. They are managers. BIG difference.
 
I don’t get how it being in debt helps to be honest? Real Madrid have pretty much been in debt since I’ve known football. I’ve witnessed them win 5 Champions League titles.

I’m going to say that the manager is more important and our chances of finishing higher than City increase I’d we swap managers regardless of debt. I don’t think it matters if we swapped debt positions.
It doesn't.
 
Isn't that obvious? Doesnt warrant a reply IMO

Well it does. But we all know what you are going to say. We don’t back managers in the transfer market. So it’s one identified problem which still doesn’t excuse poor performance especially when you get £80m CB’s and expensive midfielders.
 
That's the right question. But I'm sure there's a different answer. Referring to my previous post, they'll always make money, but being sensible will make them more money.

Will it though? Ed obviously either disagrees or is massively incompetent and blind. Ditto the Glazers. I think the economics of winning aren't as great as we would like them to be.

City have shown that buying success is difficult and very expensive. Ditto PSG. You pay a fortune and there are still no guaentees. Ed isn't going to do that.

The dippers have shown how it can be done right. But you first have to completely reorganise your club to prioritise football over money making. All in the hope of attracting that genius manager. Ed is never going to do that either.

So what are you left with? Buying players for marketing and resale value. Aiming for fourth. Re energising squad by changing manager, not players, because it costs less.
 
Will it though? Ed obviously either disagrees or is massively incompetent and blind. Ditto the Glazers. I think the economics of winning aren't as great as we would like them to be.

City have shown that buying success is difficult and very expensive. Ditto PSG. You pay a fortune and there are still no guaentees. Ed isn't going to do that.

The dippers have shown how it can be done right. But you first have to completely reorganise your club to prioritise football over money making. All in the hope of attracting that genius manager. Ed is never going to do that either.

Yeah it's Liverpool who've shown how to prioritise football over money. The club who spent absolute feck all last summer after getting within a point of a title. The same club who tried to furlough their non-playing staff just 6 months ago.

That's the club who don't care about money.
 
Yeah it's Liverpool who've shown how to prioritise football over money. The club who spent absolute feck all last summer after getting within a point of a title. The same club who tried to furlough their non-playing staff just 6 months ago.

That's the club who don't care about money.
We've also brought in more high profile players in the past 7 years than this current Liverpool.
 
Scholes opinion



"There’s been a lot of money spent but has it been spent on the first choices these managers want? I’m not too sure.

“I think [Louis] van Gaal and [Jose] Mourinho especially had a moan about that. It’s understandable when they aren’t getting the players they want.

“I think Ole’s been supported. I think Maguire at £80million is a lot of money. Fernandes just in January has been an excellent signing and the form was good especially coming from Fernandes in January time you felt that this team was going places.”



Scholes added: “Towards the end of the season it’s a lot easier to win games. It’s a lot easier to go on a run when the pressure’s not really on.

“Okay, you can talk about pressure to get in the top four but that’s not the pressure United want. United want to be winning leagues.

“You felt at the end of last season he would have got more support in the transfer market to go on again to that next level. But he’s not been given that.

“It’s quite clear the players he wanted have not come.”
 
Yeah it's Liverpool who've shown how to prioritise football over money. The club who spent absolute feck all last summer after getting within a point of a title. The same club who tried to furlough their non-playing staff just 6 months ago.

That's the club who don't care about money.
Surely this can't be true. Guess they'll now be justified if they finish bottom half this year because spending significant money on all the manager's first choice targets year on year is the only way to foster minimum expectations

Sarcasm aside this moneybags style of management we have here is bizarre. And it's not like we didn't even spend this summer. We spent. There's a thread on the frontpage asking why we always get fleeced and this mindset is why. Everyone knows these targets are overpriced buy want us to get bent over and pay the money. Fast forward 12 months and club officials are being called incompetent for paying the money
 
"There’s been a lot of money spent but has it been spent on the first choices these managers want? I’m not too sure.

“I think [Louis] van Gaal and [Jose] Mourinho especially had a moan about that. It’s understandable when they aren’t getting the players they want.

“It’s quite clear the players he wanted have not come.”

I think this is one of the biggest problems at this club - we care far too much about what the manager wants or needs. What the manager wants or even needs should be an after thought in the clubs transfer strategy.

Good players rarely become available. They're a rare commodity especially for the right price. If the right player becomes available for the right price the club should be trying to buy them irrespective of if the manager wants him - then you don't end up spending the best part of £130m on players who are just "better than what we have".

If it turns out you've now got a squad of players who this manager doesn't suit, it's cheap to sack him and get one who does. Unless you've got Klopp or Pep, a manager is essentially worthless compared to a squad which cost the best part of £1bn to assemble.

Players are expensive and extremely valuable commodities. Managers are cheap and there's an abundance of them. There are more good managers in football than there are top jobs available. It's why Poch and Allegri are unemployed and the likes of Ancelotti, Nagelsman and Rose are at middling clubs.
 
Last edited:
There is too much made on transfers right now in my opinion.

A valid argument is that Ole has not got the players he wanted this summer, but a more important point is that most of his targets were not attainable or over priced, and he has to make do with the talent he has at his disposal. A top manager works with what he has and, provided he isn't massively short changed, there should be reasonable expectations placed upon him.

Right now Ole has a vast array of talent. Maguire is effective in an organized defence, so is Lindelof. Wan Bissaka didn't turn shit overnight, he was a top right back not long ago, and Telles is a strong LB option.

Bruno is pure output even when underperforming, VDB has bags of potential and you have Rashford on top. For the next games even without Martial and Cavani, Ole has no excuse and no legs to stand on for further poor performances. He's gotten a truck load wrong of late and he has to start getting it right.
 
Well it does. But we all know what you are going to say. We don’t back managers in the transfer market. So it’s one identified problem which still doesn’t excuse poor performance especially when you get £80m CB’s and expensive midfielders.

Thats because the problem is not about managers not being backed but what they do with the money.
 
I think this is one of the biggest problems at this club - we care far too much about what the manager wants or needs. What the manager wants or even needs should be an after thought in the clubs transfer strategy.

Good players rarely become available. They're a rare commodity especially for the right price. If the right player becomes available for the right price the club should be trying to buy them irrespective of if the manager wants him - then you don't end up spending the best part of £130m on players who are just "better than what we have".

If it turns out you've now got a squad of players who this manager doesn't suit, it's cheap to sack him and get one who does. Unless you've got Klopp or Pep, a manager is essentially worthless compared to a squad which cost the best part of £1bn to assemble.

Players are expensive and extremely valuable commodities. Managers are cheap and there's an abundance of them. There are more good managers in football than there are top jobs available. It's why Poch and Allegri are unemployed and the likes of Nagelsman and Rose are at middling clubs.
Yes. By all means get the Glazers and Woodward out of the club so we can have an extra 100m a year on transfers, but even that shouldn't mean we should free up those funds to continue the inflated spending that's being described. Don't back the manager, back common sense and wise club administration. Maguire for 80m for example should have been vetoed but we just had to back whoever was in charge
 
But what stopped us getting our transfer targets this Summer?

A.) The Manager

Or

B.) Financial restrictions

Both. We aren’t the only club with financial restrictions that’s life. We can’t buy 5 £50m signings in one summer regardless of what people want to believe.

I mention the manager because their(noticed I said their) persistence to go for targets that have a lower return success rate also hinders them.

I mean LVG was moaning the other day that he wanted Sergio Ramos and Mat Hummels. If Ramos was so easy to pull off why didn’t no other club do it when he was playing clubs to get a new contract. Mat Hummels had his sites clearly set on Bayern Munich too. But it all sounds good when they name drop.
 
Scholes opinion



"There’s been a lot of money spent but has it been spent on the first choices these managers want? I’m not too sure.

“I think [Louis] van Gaal and [Jose] Mourinho especially had a moan about that. It’s understandable when they aren’t getting the players they want.

“I think Ole’s been supported. I think Maguire at £80million is a lot of money. Fernandes just in January has been an excellent signing and the form was good especially coming from Fernandes in January time you felt that this team was going places.”



Scholes added: “Towards the end of the season it’s a lot easier to win games. It’s a lot easier to go on a run when the pressure’s not really on.

“Okay, you can talk about pressure to get in the top four but that’s not the pressure United want. United want to be winning leagues.

“You felt at the end of last season he would have got more support in the transfer market to go on again to that next level. But he’s not been given that.

“It’s quite clear the players he wanted have not come.”

Your still not identify the problem Scholes. SAF wanted Patrick Kluivert it didn’t stop him winning a treble with Dwight Yorke.
 
Yes. By all means get the Glazers and Woodward out of the club so we can have an extra 100m a year on transfers, but even that shouldn't mean we should free up those funds to continue the inflated spending that's being described. Don't back the manager, back common sense and wise club administration. Maguire for 80m for example should have been vetoed but we just had to back whoever was in charge

Nailed it.
 
Yes. By all means get the Glazers and Woodward out of the club so we can have an extra 100m a year on transfers, but even that shouldn't mean we should free up those funds to continue the inflated spending that's being described. Don't back the manager, back common sense and wise club administration. Maguire for 80m for example should have been vetoed but we just had to back whoever was in charge

Exactly and that’s where the board fail in my opinion. But they do try occasionally but it never last because you have us fans screwing that we didn’t pay £60m for Harry Maguire the year before as it would have solved Mourinho’s problems. Now we need another CB to solve Harry Maguire.
 
Just out of my head we have in EPL
Record signing in defence
Record signing in Midfield
Record Signing in Strikers

Only GK we do not have a record signing that is because of DDG

Money has never been the problem, but how we use it. I was happy we did not sign Sancho. That could have been another record signing and all the 3 record signing (on top here) have not set OT in fire.

PROBLEM - Who sanctions all these signings? That's where our problem lies

Let OLE take us through the trenches but eventually we will be out of the woods. I believe
 
The others are arguable but Rodgers is undoubtably a level above Ole. (And the Pulisic point could easily apply for Bruno)
Rodgers is way ahead of Ole.

Swop them around and we'll be way closer to city while Leicester will be struggling to finish in the top half.
Lampard, Moyes and Arteta I agree at this moment in time. But Arteta is starting his career. Rodgers at Leicester had half a team as good as ours. So the players he had has to be taken into consideration. He is a better coach than Ole for sure.

Have I missed something? Rodgers is miles ahead. I don't see it. Serial bottler, remember he was 5 points clear with 3 games to play with Liverpool. Joined a Celtic team on the back of 4 consecutive titles...and won the league. I don't think he would turn this team around.

We have had two world class managers come to the club in the last 6 years. Manager who have won everything, and they couldn't get the team back to winning. There is something fundamentally wrong and we can't keep pointing the finger at the manager.
 
I think Ole is on borrowed time now, and Poch will take over the reins very soon if results don't pick up.
 
I think Ole is on borrowed time now, and Poch will take over the reins very soon if results don't pick up.

Well if results don't pick up then he'll obviously be gone.

Why do so many seem so sure results and performances won't pick up?

Take a look at the league table. It's all over the place. Things will settle down after the international break and the teams who had the shortest pre-season Wolves, United, City and to some extent Liverpool (who haven't been brilliant regardless of picking up wins) will likely see an improvement in performances.

While it's been a terrible start should be careful to draw conclusions after 3 or 4 games, especially given all the mitigating factors and that there seems to be a pattern here which is affecting other clubs too.

I can't see too many more 5-2, 6-1 or 7-2 drubbings for the likes of Liverpool, City or United and I don't see City, Wolves or United being in the bottom half of the table for long.

The squad and coaching staff haven't all gone to the dogs in the off-season and the likes of Aston Villa aren't going to stay in the top 4.
 
I really hope that Giggs doesn't get the gig even if Ole is sacked. Now some people are pushing that line in the newspapers.
That would be stupid but then knowing how weird this board is it wouldn't be a surprise.
 
Realistically I see us getting:
3 points vs Newcastle.
0pts vs PSG
1pt vs Leipzig
1-2 points over Chelsea + Arsenal

That's not terrible but it's certainly not an upswing. It'll be enough to keep him in the job I bet.
 
Well if results don't pick up then he'll obviously be gone. Why do so many seem so sure results and performances won't pick up?

Results may pick up slightly, however I can't even remember the last convincing performance we've had. Our players are caught in what seems like an infinite slump and all at once too.
 
Well if results don't pick up then he'll obviously be gone.

Why do so many seem so sure results and performances won't pick up?

Take a look at the league table. It's all over the place. Things will settle down after the international break and the teams who had the shortest pre-season Wolves, United, City and to some extent Liverpool (who haven't been brilliant regardless of picking up wins) will likely see an improvement in performances.

While it's been a terrible start should be careful to draw conclusions after 3 or 4 games, especially given all the mitigating factors and that there seems to be a pattern here which is affecting other clubs too.

I can't see too many more 5-2, 6-1 or 7-2 drubbings for the likes of Liverpool, City or United and I don't see City, Wolves or United being in the bottom half of the table for long.

The squad and coaching staff haven't all gone to the dogs in the off-season and the likes of Aston Villa aren't going to stay in the top 4.
Yes, I do agree, but it's the dressing room bust up at half time in Spurs game that concerns me most. I just hope that Ole can control this getting out of hand like last season. Lukaku labeled us as being clanish.
 
Yes, I do agree, but it's the dressing room bust up at half time in Spurs game that concerns me most. I just hope that Ole can control this getting out of hand like last season. Lukaku labeled us as being clanish.

We don't even know if that story is true though do we?

Even if it is, aren't we always told that rows like that are part of football and every team has them, especially after a bad performance?
 
We don't even know if that story is true though do we?

Even if it is, aren't we always told that rows like that are part of football and every team has them, especially after a bad performance?
Yes, but it went on far too long stemming from Mourinho's time here, and as we know the story "one bad apple". I just hope that Ole can manage this.
 
Yeah it's Liverpool who've shown how to prioritise football over money. The club who spent absolute feck all last summer after getting within a point of a title. The same club who tried to furlough their non-playing staff just 6 months ago.

That's the club who don't care about money.

Well they are still trying to make money too. It's a different business model is all. I wonder who made bigger profits between the two of us last year? Almost certainly us.
 
Last edited:
There is too much made on transfers right now in my opinion.

A valid argument is that Ole has not got the players he wanted this summer, but a more important point is that most of his targets were not attainable or over priced, and he has to make do with the talent he has at his disposal. A top manager works with what he has and, provided he isn't massively short changed, there should be reasonable expectations placed upon him.

Right now Ole has a vast array of talent. Maguire is effective in an organized defence, so is Lindelof. Wan Bissaka didn't turn shit overnight, he was a top right back not long ago, and Telles is a strong LB option.

Bruno is pure output even when underperforming, VDB has bags of potential and you have Rashford on top. For the next games even without Martial and Cavani, Ole has no excuse and no legs to stand on for further poor performances. He's gotten a truck load wrong of late and he has to start getting it right.

I agree with this, so many posters think signing a good player makes an immediate difference despite the issues we've had with recent transfers. All the following were excellent for their clubs pre United transfer: Lukaku, Schneiderlin, Alexis, ADM, Depay, Maguire, AWB, Bruno, Pogba.... only Bruno you can argue has actually been (so far) a success here. We've signed players with the same mindset as if we're playing FIFA and not like a professional football club in that we don't think how they fit into a system, this trend has continued with Ole - for example why buy AWB but then expect him to be attacking or set a transfer record for Maguire and play a high line that exposes his immobility? You can blame the scouting team to an extent with maybe overrating players but some things are just basics that the average Joe could point out.

You also have to factor in that is was probably easier to recruit players for a manager like Mou who has a certain pull/track record (Ibra for example signed because he was here) whereas to players in their 20's Ole is a bit of an unknown unless you're Norwegian (even then Haaland chose Dortmund) or a huge United fan & he doesn't have a track record worth speaking of at the highest level. .
 
Questions to the Ole Out people:

After Ole was allowed to make a couple of signings in mid 2019, his results have generally been good when he can field his first XI(or something close to it). The exception has been the beginning of this season.

What do you make of this? And do you think our bench is strong enough for our results to remain good even when key players are missing? EDIT: strong enough before we signed all the players near the end of the latest transfer window.

Ole has been criticized for lacking tactically nous. In fact, this is the most common complaint. However, his record against strong opponents is actually brilliant, even when he lacks key players. What do you think is a better indicator of tactical nous: beating tough opponents, or breaking down weaker opponents?
 
Last edited:
I believe Ole has actually gotten the best out of the material he has available. A shitty start, that's obvious (Currently trailing Pool by 3 and City by 1), but looking at the last 6 months instead of 3 games:

Martial: Elevated after Solskjær
Rashford: Elevated after Solskjær
Greenwood: Elevated after Solskjær
Bruno: Elevated after Solskjær
Shaw: Elevated after Solskjær
Pogba: Handled the situation in a balanced way, so he hasn't created a big stir causing even more unrest at United than he did under Mourinho.
Matic: Elevated after Solskjær (he's even old)

AWB: Unpopular opinion, as he's made the new scapegoat/ashley young, but I think he's done an alright job, from what skills we knew he did and did not have.

Then there is the questions about the players who cost us dearly / or players who have not reached their potential:
Lindelöf: Can he get better than this? (I don't think so)
Maguire: Can he be better than this? (Probably - Seems unfocused after the Greece incident. Ole has some influence here to take action)
Bailly: Can he be better than this? (Probably, but no manager has made him tick, and he's always cost us by being very rash/overly risky in his decisions)
De Gea: Unfocused, not consistent class anymore. Right decision to give him competition. This could go both ways, but with Henderson, at least we have a decent backup if De Gea fails. Good decision from Ole.

+ He has the backing of the players, which cannot be said of other
+ He has made Manchester United fans more understanding about patience. We clearly need to have patience, when we can't buy our way to succes (Sancho, Grealish, etc)
+ He's made us playing attacking football again. What moany periods of football Van Gaal and Jose were.

So all in all, what would Poch have done better with this material? I'm not a 100% pro-Ole. I just don't see why going for Poch would be that different.
The levels Ole has taken these players, to me, seems like about the same level Poch would have taken them to. Ole doesn't get the players he wants, so why should Poch and what would it change?
 
I think Fred the Red meets these requirements too then, if the major requirement for a manager of Manchester United is to be "true to the values of the club" I don't know why we even bother trying, might just give up.

What a silly childlike comment to make.

Absolute pathetic
 
Status
Not open for further replies.