What is the role of a manager? To build a team that gives his club the best possible opportunity to achieve strong results. A large part of that is recruitment. Bruno rightly receives plenty of credit for being an exceptional player. The manager who signed him should also receive plenty of credit for signing him. That's just how its always worked. If signing Bruno has made our team better and led to better results, that's a textbook example of good management.
Its ironic that you use the phrase 'agenda driven' in your post, because its surely incredibly agenda driven to even be talking about this. You're trying to turn a massive positive into a negative for no other reason than because you don't rate Ole and you want to attack him.
I don't think that's solely the role of the manager anymore, at least not in the top European clubs. United's problem is that we are trying to stick to 'tradition' and give our managers full autonomy to build a team in their own vision or likeness. What's the average life of a manager these days? 2-3 years? Is it feasible to hit the reset button every 2-3 years, or are we so naive as a club that we believe the next SAF is just around the corner?
Now I'm not saying that recruitment should be completely autonomous from the manager, of course the manager has to have a say. What I'm saying is that the club should have a vision of the type of football we want to play, the type of players we want to sign, the foundations upon which each team is built. That should to a point remove the need for a manager to come in and instantly have to sell this 4 players, need 3 transfer windows and another 300m to shape the team how the like. You can't go from Moyes, to LVG, to Mourinho to Ole as managers. What does that say about us?
'Oh, we want someone to come in and take a long terms view. Actually that didn't work, LVG just had a pretty good World Cup, and has experience, let's give him a go. Oh no, bad idea! Let's change our outlook completely and go with a guy that will guarantee us sort term success. This really isn't working, let's revert to the 'United way' and give time and money to a completely unproven manager who knows the club.'
Does that sound to you like a club that even has any sort of strategy beyond what the manager themselves believe in? The problem is that there is this belief that no good can come from sacking Ole because we'll have to start again. Why? Why do we have to start again? This club needs an overhaul, from top to bottom. And that includes Ole, because it is the complete ineptitude of the board above him that has resulted in him managing this team for the past two years, but that still does not absolve him of his lack of ability as a manager.
Sorry, I know my reply is a bit off topic in the context of your discussion, but just reading that first line, and hearing people like Keane talking about giving Ole time to get things right has me wondering. I think a club with the resources of Manchester United should he ahead of the curve with regards to the way a modern club is operated, and our philosophy should extend beyond the manager of the club, especially when the average life cycle of a manager is so short these days.
In short, I think we're refusing to pull the trigger on Ole because the people running the club are afraid of looking foolish again, and don't have the ability to set the club on the right track themselves. Look at Bayern. They sacked their manager and won the CL later in the season. Zidane is under pressure at Real, after how many league and CL titles? Imagine if Ole won the league with this team. He'd have a Moyes-like 6 year contract the next morning. We're so juvenile and badly run its sickening. The only thing that separates us from any other poorly run club right now is how much money we have available to spend, and our reputation.